On a street in South London this morning ...

Ian Dunt had been played. Brexit clearly broke a lot of people’s brains, and some probably never had one. It’s not journalisms it’s fantasy and conspiracy nonsense

AGAIN, the idea there 2 interpretations about what Labour are saying is insane. The people holding back discussion are the liberals who clearly haven’t understood what happened and is happening now

The reality is Starmer does EVERYTHING that he is saying he will do if in power.

Even the anti Brexit and anti Corbyn groups have been in the news a lot lately because some of them from this supposedly spontaneously youth group are now working for..... Sunak as advisors and other pro brexit roles

A lot of the remain campaigns had 2 aims stop a Corbyn Government and stop brexit (which they disastrously pushed with a second referendum)

Course in 2019 MPs rejected a SM/CU compromise. See the innuendo tinge group. Or was it all about stopping Corbyn 🤔

you guys won!

Dunt knows his stuff. Moreover he has some behind the scenes knowledge when it comes to Europe, so he knows about many of the conversations Labour have been having and what the range of EU attitudes are.

You might be right that Dunt and others are exhibiting wishful thinking. Equally you and the Starmer detractors on the Left and Right also bring their own biases to this.

Time will tell. The proof of the pudding is in the eating. It's what they do, not what they say.

I can see many parallels with the People's Vote issue and how Starmer threaded his way through that.
 
Dunt has literally just been on TV today nodding along to someone claiming Corbyn left labour with no money.
Corbyn left Labour with millions in the bank. A lie so easy to fact check that it makes you wonder who they're trying to deceive the viewers or themselves?

They’re so entwined in their own lies they don’t know the truth from reality

And what an irony that I said earlier these chancers were as much about stopping Corbyn and pretending to be anti Brexit and a few hours later hey ho, they’re lying again about Corbyn

And the idea that liberal/centrist journalists think there’s a secret plan to lie to the public to rejoin the EU is an incredible omission given Dunt is pretending totally fine with it

This is poor journalists thinking they’re witnessing 5D chess when they've been played but can’t admit it because they personally have contributed to making the subject so utterly toxic not even the Liberal Democrat’s will put rejoining in their manifesto
How many times you cannot have rejoin on a manifesto. It's undeliverable.
 
I'm sorry Laughing but what you're saying is absurd. Starmer is saying the UK's future is outside the EU. You can interpret that as him saying he will take the UK back in by stealth over time, but at some point in the next decade you're going to have to accept you've been played

Seriously how many times has it been said Corbyn offered a soft Brexit which respected the referendum

But Starmer decided to ignore democracy and announced a second referendum policy which literally gave us a Tory Government 🤦‍♂️
You must know politicians rejected a customs union and single market compromise in 2019????

I'm going to repeat it but alot of the second referendum groups were as much about undermining Corbyn as they were supporting a second referendum. So much so they didn't take the CU/SM deal when parliament voted on it

The remainers were played. Sorry you don't like that but it's the truth
I was and am a remainer. I was played by no one.
 
The remainers were played. Sorry you don't like that but it's the truth
We were all played.

Putting "rejoin" on a manifesto is pointless. It could not be delivered and would likely put a big cross-hair on the rest of the manifesto. So, sadly at least for now, our future IS outside the EU.

Corbyn lost, badly but it's never the fault of his inept leadership or his inability to define his manifesto or control the parliamentary Labour Party. He lost a vote of confidence after the 2016 GE and should have resigned at that point.
 
We were all played.

Putting "rejoin" on a manifesto is pointless. It could not be delivered and would likely put a big cross-hair on the rest of the manifesto. So, sadly at least for now, our future IS outside the EU.

Corbyn lost, badly but it's never the fault of his inept leadership or his inability to define his manifesto or control the parliamentary Labour Party. He lost a vote of confidence after the 2016 GE and should have resigned at that point.
I have gotten bored with saying the same thing to folks who are blinded by their dislike of starmer
 
I'm sorry Laughing but what you're saying is absurd. Starmer is saying the UK's future is outside the EU. You can interpret that as him saying he will take the UK back in by stealth over time, but at some point in the next decade you're going to have to accept you've been played

Seriously how many times has it been said Corbyn offered a soft Brexit which respected the referendum

But Starmer decided to ignore democracy and announced a second referendum policy which literally gave us a Tory Government 🤦‍♂️
You must know politicians rejected a customs union and single market compromise in 2019????

I'm going to repeat it but alot of the second referendum groups were as much about undermining Corbyn as they were supporting a second referendum. So much so they didn't take the CU/SM deal when parliament voted on it

The remainers were played. Sorry you don't like that but it's the truth

I don't know if it is a lack of knowledge at the time, a lack of research since, simple misremembering or judgement clouded by bias, but this is a very bad analysis and understanding of what happened. Which does explain why you do not give appropriate weight to the counter argument suggested here regarding Starmer and Labour's strategy and aims now.
 
I don’t know what you mean. Maybe my experience is different as I was in Labour and naively thought what you saw on the surface was what was happening behind the scenes. I look back and think it was nothing like what it seemed with what we now know with everything that has come out

Just as a bit of knowledge last week the papers ran an article that pretty much claimed the our future our choice youth anti Brexit Andy anti Corbyn campaign group now has formed members working for Sunak and other pro Brexit institutions. There’s always been questions how this supposedly spontaneous organisation immediately had offices in an area of London where rents are tens of thousands.

That as we’ll as other similar stories are constantly being exposed and if you want knowledge you have to look at things like that as much as you might not want to hear it
Eh?

Honestly that is just word salad. Has ChatGPT been at the vodka again?
 
I don’t know what you mean. Maybe my experience is different as I was in Labour and naively thought what you saw on the surface was what was happening behind the scenes. I look back and think it was nothing like what it seemed with what we now know with everything that has come out

Just as a bit of knowledge last week the papers ran an article that pretty much claimed the our future our choice youth anti Brexit Andy anti Corbyn campaign group now has formed members working for Sunak and other pro Brexit institutions. There’s always been questions how this supposedly spontaneous organisation immediately had offices in an area of London where rents are tens of thousands.

That as we’ll as other similar stories are constantly being exposed and if you want knowledge you have to look at things like that as much as you might not want to hear it

I was asking about your knowledge of Brexit and particularly what you understood about Starmer and Labours Brexit ‘journey’. If you actually knew that then I don’t think you’d be so dismissive of the views of some of us here. Maybe.

Anyway, here is a more in depth explanation about the plausibility of what some of us say from the consistently excellent (on Brexit) Chris Grey. Hopefully you have the time, patience and capacity to digest it.

 
I've read it and It just confirms to me that there are some people who are just going round in circles. Even academics, and I know my fair share of those types from Oxford. People who are completely protected and detached from places like the North East and pretty much the rest of the country outside the South East. People who have probably never experienced a political challenge to what they believe and are scrambling around for to make sense and just, but just plucking out data and statistics to tell themselves they were right.
There's also a financial market for people who haven't moved on from 2016. Or for people who are making money pretending Labour will rejoin the EU in a secret plan. The sad thing is people are buying it.

I actually think it's very poor analysis.

Instead of picking data for confirmation bias and go round in circles

First, Labour have been very clear and consistently they will not enter the CU/SM/CU. Repeatedly and this happened within months of Starner becoming leader.

Second if your professor thinks some sectors of the economy need cheap labour they will allow people in from other countries. And high wages from the EU are still allowed. That's the answer and it's very simple.

And Labour have said they will train people I'm the UK. A incredibly import omission from your article. If you're going to discuss Labours position why ignore their policies?

And what are they saying - Labour want to make agreements for traders only and investment and research. That can clearly be done outside the EU.

Anyone who touches Brexit knows it will destroy them. Cameron, May for example. I don't agree with Starmer but he is actually correct politically on his current stance.

I also think Brexit is more likely to push people to people like Farage and give people like that a platform.

Green are pro EU. I'm going to vote for them at the next general election.
You really need to proof read before you post, particularly when writing of academic analysis.
 
I've read it and It just confirms to me that there are some people who are just going round in circles. Even academics, and I know my fair share of those types from Oxford. People who are completely protected and detached from places like the North East and pretty much the rest of the country outside the South East. People who have probably never experienced a political challenge to what they believe and are scrambling around for to make sense and just, but just plucking out data and statistics to tell themselves they were right.
There's also a financial market for people who haven't moved on from 2016. Or for people who are making money pretending Labour will rejoin the EU in a secret plan. The sad thing is people are buying it.

I actually think it's very poor analysis.

Instead of picking data for confirmation bias and go round in circles

First, Labour have been very clear and consistently they will not enter the CU/SM/CU. Repeatedly and this happened within months of Starner becoming leader.

Second if your professor thinks some sectors of the economy need cheap labour they will allow people in from other countries. And high wages from the EU are still allowed. That's the answer and it's very simple.

And Labour have said they will train people I'm the UK. A incredibly import omission from your article. If you're going to discuss Labours position why ignore their policies?

And what are they saying - Labour want to make agreements for traders only and investment and research. That can clearly be done outside the EU.

Anyone who touches Brexit knows it will destroy them. Cameron, May for example. I don't agree with Starmer but he is actually correct politically on his current stance.

I also think Brexit is more likely to push people to people like Farage and give people like that a platform.

Green are pro EU. I'm going to vote for them at the next general election.

Chris Grey has been consistently excellent on this subject. Excellent.

His article gives a balanced view.

The problem is you really do not have as much appreciation of Brexit past and future as many others. You clearly are quite ignorant of Starmers evolution through 2016 to 2019 or would be far less dismissive of these arguments. That is not to say the end result won't be as you say, it's a possibility without doubt, as both Dunt and Grey accept, but you give too much weight to some things that are said, not to others and not enough weight to what they are going to do. This is your confirmation bias. Your lack of knowledge about Starmer and Labour's journey in the past also affects your prediction. The direction of travel of the consequences of Brexit is apparent, the direction of travel of public opinion on Brexit quite clearly is connected to the consequences.

So we know were the Politics appear to lead, but this is politics and Starmer is aware that we are currently in a different position now than where we most likely will be. He knows that there is no chance the EU will let us back in without a number of things that must happen, all of which take time. So it is pointless promising something that is not achievable. It is also his priority to get into Government, then he can start to rebuild the relationship with the EU. This can be done in a hundred small steps that in the end leave us effectively aligned with the EU on standards and on tariffs. The key is not allowing the die hard Brexit ultras in charge of the Conservative Party a rallying call. He is being smart. The Tories are floundering trying to find something better to rally behind than anti woke transphobia, he is not going to give them a present.

His current position allows him to pivot/evolve his position, depending on events, just as he did on Brexit and the People's vote.
 

He is absolutely right, it was never offered. It is incumbent on the winners to offer an olive branch of compromise to the losing one, especially in so narrow a margin in such dubious circumstances. Where was this plan from the Brexit government? It never ever happened. We had red lines galore and a government in hock to the loons at the fringe. It was a hard Brexit or a no deal Brexit. There was never an offer from the Brexiters of staying in the Customs Union or the Single Market. There was never the offer of a confirmatory vote just to check what was being delivered was what was promised and that a majority wanted. Because Brexit would have been rejected. There wasn't a single poll for 18 months prior to the 2019 election that had a lead for Brexit. People didn't want what we got but it was railroaded through.

'Get over it, you lost', remember.

Then it was 'get behind it'

Then 'er, can you help us?'

Then 'turns out this is a lot more complicated than we said. Can the intelligent ones who actually understood this sort it out for us? I know warned us, voted against it, we insulted you and sacked you, but can you please help us sort our sh1tshow'

People to blame for this Brexit farce.

1. Those who advocated it.
2. Those who voted for it.
3. Those who didn't vote for it at all.
4. Those who implemented it.
5. Those who didn't try to reverse it.

People not to blame

1. Those who didn't advocate for it, didn't vote for it, didn't implement it.
2. Those who voted for Brexit or didn't vote at all, but then changed their mind as the realised the truth AND did tried to put it right.
 
@exiledinboro

I'll get to it. Probably.

I quickly posted #71 and #72 the other day and started on a point by point reply to your #68, but unfortunately someone close who has been poorly took a sudden turn for the worse and has been put on an end of life plan, so I left it unfinished while we made a dash to see them. Now I have more to points to respond to.

I deleted that unfinished response to type this. My time is preoccupied with more important things, so I'm now sat weighing up whether it is worth it. It is likely to be very time consuming for me to do it right and show you every respect, but

a) I'm not sure if you are going to be worth such effort. You might be a knob head.

b) When Brexit was a live issue and could be stopped I gave any amount of time to it. Brexit is done now, so I'm trying to work out the value of revisiting what happened. There is some value, but is it enough?

Persuade me.
 
@exiledinboro

I'll get to it. Probably.

I quickly posted #71 and #72 the other day and started on a point by point reply to your #68, but unfortunately someone close who has been poorly took a sudden turn for the worse and has been put on an end of life plan, so I left it unfinished while we made a dash to see them. Now I have more to points to respond to.

I deleted that unfinished response to type this. My time is preoccupied with more important things, so I'm now sat weighing up whether it is worth it. It is likely to be very time consuming for me to do it right and show you every respect, but

a) I'm not sure if you are going to be worth such effort. You might be a knob head.

b) When Brexit was a live issue and could be stopped I gave any amount of time to it. Brexit is done now, so I'm trying to work out the value of revisiting what happened. There is some value, but is it enough?

Persuade me.
Sorry to read your sad news. Hope you are ok and coping. Such circular arguments are definitely not worth your time in these circumstances. Take care mate.
 
Back
Top