Alefroth wrote: ↑Wed Oct 09, 2019 2:41 am
I mentioned Brexit to a co-worker today and she had never heard the term. I wonder how common it is to have absolutely zero interest in the world at large.
A quote that I recently saw from a woman who doesn't pay attention to politics clarified this for me. To her, politics is like a sport that she isn't interested in. As someone who is keenly interested in politics, but pays zero attention to any form of sportsball, I understood that. Sure it's a false equivalence; politics ultimately affect everyone's life, whereas sportsball affects nothing -- but in terms of perception, sports is immediate and clear and thrilling and easy to follow, while politics is long-term and opaque and boring and complicated.
Anyway, seeing those two things equated gave me an inkling how somebody can be as oblivious to politics as I'm oblivious to sportsball.
Politics is also incredibly full of lies and fraud, and the internet has made that problem worse with the ways to spread FUD and misinformation from anonymous sources, which then leak into official statements, even massively wacko conspiracy theories are now openly discussed and given credence in the public discourse (and then used to perpetrate massive fraud on a global scale now).
As to the friend who doesn't pay attention. IMHO, Brexit has the possibility of being a catalyst to crash the Global Economy (again), especially a no-deal hard Brexit, so while the details are very difficult to figure out, knowing the general direction and potential impacts is important if you can do any sort of personal risk management on it.
E.G.: I saw an article the other day where LIBOR, because it is London-based will be obsolete in the event of a no-deal Brexit, and that impacts Banking on a Global scale. We also saw a huge, 150 year old British Travel Co. recently declare bankruptcy in part due to the Brexit uncertainty and strand all of their customers abroad.
Black Lives definitely Matter Lorini!
Also: There are three ways to not tell the truth: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
Alefroth wrote: ↑Wed Oct 09, 2019 2:41 am
I mentioned Brexit to a co-worker today and she had never heard the term. I wonder how common it is to have absolutely zero interest in the world at large.
A quote that I recently saw from a woman who doesn't pay attention to politics clarified this for me. To her, politics is like a sport that she isn't interested in. As someone who is keenly interested in politics, but pays zero attention to any form of sportsball, I understood that. Sure it's a false equivalence; politics ultimately affect everyone's life, whereas sportsball affects nothing -- but in terms of perception, sports is immediate and clear and thrilling and easy to follow, while politics is long-term and opaque and boring and complicated.
Anyway, seeing those two things equated gave me an inkling how somebody can be as oblivious to politics as I'm oblivious to sportsball.
I can see the parallels and I'm nearly as apathetic about sports, yet I still can't avoid seeing the big stories while I consume other news. I can't imagine the sort of media isolation needed to never have heard of Brexit until now.
That is extreme, but to continue the sports analogy, I couldn't tell you who Minnesota's baseball team is (assuming they have one).
Alefroth wrote: ↑Wed Oct 09, 2019 2:41 am
I mentioned Brexit to a co-worker today and she had never heard the term. I wonder how common it is to have absolutely zero interest in the world at large.
A quote that I recently saw from a woman who doesn't pay attention to politics clarified this for me. To her, politics is like a sport that she isn't interested in. As someone who is keenly interested in politics, but pays zero attention to any form of sportsball, I understood that. Sure it's a false equivalence; politics ultimately affect everyone's life, whereas sportsball affects nothing -- but in terms of perception, sports is immediate and clear and thrilling and easy to follow, while politics is long-term and opaque and boring and complicated.
Anyway, seeing those two things equated gave me an inkling how somebody can be as oblivious to politics as I'm oblivious to sportsball.
I can see the parallels and I'm nearly as apathetic about sports, yet I still can't avoid seeing the big stories while I consume other news. I can't imagine the sort of media isolation needed to never have heard of Brexit until now.
That is extreme, but to continue the sports analogy, I couldn't tell you who Minnesota's baseball team is (assuming they have one).
The British pound rose sharply on Thursday after positive comments on Brexit from the leaders of the Republic of Ireland and the U.K.
U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson met with his Irish counterpart Leo Varadkar for further Brexit talks Thursday afternoon, with subsequent comments causing traders to buy the British pound.
There is a "narrow path" to a Brexit deal this week, but the two sides have to agree the details by the end of Tuesday, the EU's negotiator has said.
Michel Barnier said it was "time to turn good intentions into legal text" if EU leaders were to back the terms of the UK's exit at a summit on Thursday.
As talks intensify, Boris Johnson has spoken to France's Emmanuel Macron.
The BBC understands the two men agreed there was "positive momentum" but there were "many hurdles" left to overcome.
Our political editor, Laura Kuenssberg, said she understood the two leaders had agreed on the need to avoid any further delays if possible.
But Brussels correspondent Adam Fleming said the widely-held view there was that the UK was unlikely to be leaving on 31 October, and the question was whether an extension could be short in order to iron out some small issues, or had to be much longer to deal with bigger problems.
Boris Johnson announced a new deal and it is already looking like it will face significant challenges. The DUP hasn't signed on and Johnson needs them to get to a majority. The deal appears to be pretty bad for NI so this isn't a shock. Instead of an Irish backstop the new alternative is to throw up a customs border between NI and the mainland across the Irish sea. Additionally he is already facing headlines like this...
The Democratic Unionist party is threatening to scupper the Brexit deal that Boris Johnson is on the brink of agreeing with the EU.
On the morning of a crucial EU summit in Brussels, a joint statement from the DUP’s leader, Arlene Foster, and her deputy, Nigel Dodds, explicitly says the party cannot support the deal that is close to being finalised.
...
The backing of the 10 DUP MPs is crucial for the success of that vote because many Conservative Brexiters have indicated they will not back a deal that is opposed by unionists.
'Super Saturday' for Brexit has been running in Parliament and it looks like a decision is to avoid the meaningful vote as below is going to happen. The vote for the Letwin amendment delays the vote on Johnson's deal. It is happening now and it sounds like it has a majority but is going to be a tight vote.
The Guardian wrote:The big decision could be delayed again. A potentially key amendment tabled by Oliver Letwin, Hilary Benn and others would withhold full approval for the Brexit deal until all the associated legislation was passed.
This would seem likely to require another extension, and would delay the real moment of truth for MPs. One reason for this amendment would be to prevent the possibility of hardline Brexit Conservatives approving the deal – thus removing the conditions of the Benn act – but then voting down the subsequent withdrawal agreement bill, which implements the legally binding treaty, and so forcing no deal anyway.
Labour is understood to be likely to back this amendment, and former Tory MPs including Amber Rudd and David Gauke have said they would vote for it.
The Letwin amendment passes 322-306. It means that Boris loses again and the government will likely withdraw the vote on his deal. This was another huge setback for Johnson. Johnson just announced he will ignore the law that says he must apply for a delay tonight, he will not allow a delay, and they will leave on 10/31. Most pundits are saying this isn't possible with the timeline available and it is almost certain there will be an emergency court session. So far the UK seems to be ahead of us on complete dysfunction.
Edit: It was just announced that Boris potentially intends to bring the amendment back around again on Monday. Essentially since it was so close he is now going back to twist arms.
malchior wrote: ↑Sat Oct 19, 2019 9:53 am
So far the UK seems to be ahead of us on complete dysfunction.
The unlikely vote to Brexit paved the way for the impossibe vote for Trump.
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General "No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton MYT
Johnson obeyed the letter of the law and sent the Benn Act letter...unsigned. He also wrote a separate letter to Donald Tusk saying delay was bad for everyone. In the end, most pundits think the EU will extend Brexit again despite Johnson's shenanigans.
So. Given the difficulties of exrocating from the EU, combined with the fact that the narrow majority who support Brexit seems to have disappeared; Why. Not. Call. Another. Referendum? A re vote seems to have popular support. Why not just do it?
The main reason is that most the hard line Brexiteers probably reckon they are going to lose a second referendum. Another problem is they are trapped by the politics. It is an interesting dynamic since the Conservatives have the numbers to keep a majority assuming the exiled Conservative seats and DUP are counted.
However there is not enough support for a no deal Brexit. And they haven't as yet had the numbers to get either the May or Johnson deal through because they need DUP votes to get there. And the DUP is against the Johnson deal so despite Johnson lackeys saying they have the votes...that seems very dubious.
The government will abandon its Brexit bill if MPs vote down its three-day timetable to get it through Parliament.
Boris Johnson told MPs if the programme was rejected and the EU confirmed a delay to the 31 October exit, he would instead push for a general election.
The PM said Parliament had been "caught in a deadlock of its own making", and he would "in no way allow months more of this".
But opposition MPs called the threat to pull the bill "childish blackmail".
The Withdrawal Agreement Bill was published on Monday night and MPs are now debating it in the Commons.
They will vote at around 19:00 BST on the proposed timetable.
...
The decision to curtail the scrutiny of the bill to three days has sparked anger from opposition MPs.
Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn said his party would vote against the timetable, calling it "an abuse of Parliament and a disgraceful attempt to dodge accountability, scrutiny and any kind of proper debate".
This vote today is going to be another squeaker. FWIW it seems like sound politics. Threatening a snap election makes sense despite the turmoil. The downside is he will be following the same plan as May who actually lost her majority and thus Brexit. Will he get a big enough bump to carry Brexit forward? It is hard to say but if he is stuck it is his only option.
The upside and interesting part is it might work because of Corbyn. He is believed to have less support than Johnson. So much so that a little over a month ago a poll showed voters supported a 'no deal' Brexit over Corbyn as PM. Oof. Like the United States they have offsetting leadership that no one likes. It reflects a division in the populace but also the politicians themselves who are uncompromising in their positions and prior to Boris Johnson lacked political imagination.
MPs have rejected a proposal to examine Boris Johnson's Brexit bill in the Commons in three days.
The Commons supported the Withdrawal Agreement Bill earlier, but have now voted against the short timetable.
Earlier, the PM warned he would seek an election if MPs dismissed the plan and the EU granted an extension to 31 October Brexit deadline.
After the vote, he told the Commons he would "pause" the legislation until he had spoken to EU leaders.
...
Mr Johnson told MPs he was "disappointed" they had "voted for delay", and said the UK "now faced further uncertainty".
But he said his policy remained that Brexit would go ahead at the end of the month, adding: "One way or another, we will leave the EU with this deal to which this House has just given its assent."
...
MPs did approve the bill on its first hurdle through the Commons - called the second reading - by 329 votes to 299.
But in a vote straight after, they rejected the so-called programme motion by 322 votes to 308 after a number of MPs criticised the pace of the legislation.
Interesting note - the 'Johnson deal' made it through one hurdle and Johnson was saying it was the first time that Parliament agreed with a Brexit approach. It is further than anyone has gotten, sure, but it was a tight vote and it is far from certain he'd get it across the finish line. It is even possible some voted to allow it to pass so that they could vote against the time table later. Either way, they are still in limbo. And with the EU just announcing the recommendation of an extension there is going to be little pressure to push this through.
France delays EU decision on extension.It gives Johnson a needed rescue line. For context, France has made noise in this general direction in the past and it seems Macron's patience with this is at an end. He is likely applying pressure to try to get them to make a goddamn decision. Brave but potentially risky of Macron. Some will inevitably see it as an indication that France maybe estimated that the damage will be containable to within the UK.
The EU will delay its decision on the length of the Brexit extension until next Monday or Tuesday after France piled pressure on MPs ahead of a vote on Boris Johnson’s demand for a pre-Christmas general election.
During a meeting of EU diplomats, the French ambassador stood alone in arguing that it was not the right time to agree a three-month delay, in a move that will be welcomed in Downing Street.
Only after the vote on Monday should the EU decide to “go short, to push for ratification, or long to accommodate a general election”, the ambassador told the other member states, according to a diplomatic note.
Sources close to the French president, Emmanuel Macron, later claimed an extension was “not a given” and needed to be justified. “But we have nothing of the sort so far”, the source said. “Pressure must be maintained.”
The prevarication in Brussels, and Macron’s swing behind Johnson’s strategy for getting a deal passed, will leave the issue of an extension in doubt with as little as 48 hours to go before the UK is due to leave.
With no forward movement the EU has given them an extension and next up is *another* general election most likely. The near miss with a 'no deal' has exposed some fault lines such as one in the campaign for the "People's Vote".
British lawmakers blocked Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s plan for an early election, but a national ballot this year remained in the cards as opposition parties sought an alternative route to end the Brexit stalemate.
Mr. Johnson needed a two-thirds majority in Parliament to call an election, which he had proposed for Dec. 12, but with Labour Party members abstaining from the vote, the motion drew only 299 votes in favor and 70 against, falling far short of the 434 votes it needed.
...
However, as that door to an early election closed, another one opened.
In recent days, two smaller anti-Brexit parties, the Liberal Democrats and the Scottish National Party, have said they would team up with Mr. Johnson to propose a law to hold an election on Dec. 9. Passing such a law would require the support of a simple majority of lawmakers, making its chance of success significantly higher. The smaller parties hope a new Parliament would be more inclined to back a second Brexit referendum.
...
Both the Liberal Democrats and Scottish National Party oppose Brexit, and want an election before Brexit is resolved. Both support calling a second referendum to try to reverse Brexit. Parliament has rejected this idea on previous occasions, but the SNP and the Liberal Democrats hope an election could bring more anti-Brexit lawmakers into the legislature.
BREAKING NEWS: Britain has set a December date for a general election in which Brexit will dominate.
The House of Commons on Tuesday voted, 438 to 20, to hold elections on Dec. 12. Prime Minister Boris Johnson, who was selected in a party leadership vote in July, wants a mandate to “get Brexit done.” Opposition parties want to keep close ties to the European Union or stay in the bloc.
...
The Conservative Party under Johnson will run as the 100 percent for Brexit party, under the banner, “Let’s get it done.”
“There is only one way to get Brexit done in the face of this unrelenting parliamentary obstructionism, this endless willful fingers crossed ‘not me, guv’ refusal to deliver on the mandate of the people,” Johnson said on Tuesday, “and that is to refresh this Parliament.”
The new Brexit Party, led by talk show host Nigel Farage, will be 200 percent for Brexit, arguing: Why even talk to the Europeans anymore? Let’s crash out.
Last edited by Isgrimnur on Fri Nov 29, 2019 10:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Weird. Not for me. Are you on a phone? I can't speak to how phones see things. It's a full png using the big image tag. But it is also hotlinked from facebook.
It was a joke. In other news, the Conservatives have a commanding lead in the polls. And believe it or not it doesn't appear to have anything to do with the party's Brexit policies because...neither has a core Brexit policy that their MPs stick to. Instead the polling is indicating the difference is between the popularity between the major candidates. Boris and Corbyn are both unpopular with Corbyn showing as massively unpopular at -43%. Johnson fares better at about 4% net presently but he bobs from negative to about even. Call it about even for now. That has translated to the big lead between parties that has appeared in the polls.
What could be the outcome? If this holds up it'll probably but not certainly turn into a sizable Tory majority. Maybe that gets Johnson's deal through but some pundits think it still could be a 'no deal'. Within all this, Remain now polls strongly at 54-55% consistently but as mentioned none of the parties actually represent a clear policy. Corbyn put forward another messy Brexit policy and said he was 'neutral' while pretty much everyone knows he is a 'Leave' supporter. It led to voters literally laughing at him in derision when he claimed that his Brexit policy was clear during the last televised debate. What a mess.
If you want to see something wacky, check out the chart in the link above. They polled voters apparent belief about the effectiveness of current and historical leaders. Corbyn comes in dead last...a couple spots behind *Donald Trump*. I'd hate to be a Labour MP in a tight race right now. It can't be fun knowing you are being sunk because the leader of your party is a complete flop with the voters.
malchior wrote: ↑Sat Nov 23, 2019 10:42 pm
It was a joke. In other news, the Conservatives have a commanding lead in the polls. And believe it or not it doesn't appear to have anything to do with the party's Brexit policies because...neither has a core Brexit policy that their MPs stick to. Instead the polling is indicating the difference is between the popularity between the major candidates. Boris and Corbyn are both unpopular with Corbyn showing as massively unpopular at -43%. Johnson fares better at about 4% net presently but he bobs from negative to about even. Call it about even for now. That has translated to the big lead between parties that has appeared in the polls.
What could be the outcome? If this holds up it'll probably but not certainly turn into a sizable Tory majority. Maybe that gets Johnson's deal through but some pundits think it still could be a 'no deal'. Within all this, Remain now polls strongly at 54-55% consistently but as mentioned none of the parties actually represent a clear policy. Corbyn put forward another messy Brexit policy and said he was 'neutral' while pretty much everyone knows he is a 'Leave' supporter. It led to voters literally laughing at him in derision when he claimed that his Brexit policy was clear during the last televised debate. What a mess.
If you want to see something wacky, check out the chart in the link above. They polled voters apparent belief about the effectiveness of current and historical leaders. Corbyn comes in dead last...a couple spots behind *Donald Trump*. I'd hate to be a Labour MP in a tight race right now. It can't be fun knowing you are being sunk because the leader of your party is a complete flop with the voters.
This is my ignorance showing, but why can't labor kick Corbyn to the curb if he is that hated?
This is my ignorance showing, but why can't labor kick Corbyn to the curb if he is that hated?
I was gunna say that, from what I remember, a lot of Labour supporters left Labour because of Corbyn (so there would be less anti-Corbyn voters than there was previously, like we have with Trump in the Republican party), but there was a poll a month or two ago that showed that just among *Labour voters*, the Lib Dem leader was more popular than Corbyn, so he's not all that popular with those that remain. So I dunno.
This is my ignorance showing, but why can't labor kick Corbyn to the curb if he is that hated?
I was gunna say that, from what I remember, a lot of Labour supporters left Labour because of Corbyn (so there would be less anti-Corbyn voters than there was previously, like we have with Trump in the Republican party), but there was a poll a month or two ago that showed that just among *Labour voters*, the Lib Dem leader was more popular than Corbyn, so he's not all that popular with those that remain. So I dunno.
My understanding is that the reason he got elected Labour leader in the first place is that the party had an election process in place that allowed committed activists to wield disproportionate influence. It's not like he needs to face the electorate in order to become Labour leader, it's just that he needs to win over people who are willing to join the party and attend party meetings. I tend to assume that the same reason makes it difficult for the party to eject him as leader.
It just sucks because if Labour had even a mediocre leader right now willing to listen to what the majority of voters want, I think there would be a pretty decent chance of stopping Brexit and restoring some sanity.
El Guapo wrote: ↑Sat Nov 23, 2019 11:26 pmMy understanding is that the reason he got elected Labour leader in the first place is that the party had an election process in place that allowed committed activists to wield disproportionate influence. It's not like he needs to face the electorate in order to become Labour leader, it's just that he needs to win over people who are willing to join the party and attend party meetings. I tend to assume that the same reason makes it difficult for the party to eject him as leader.
Yup - they have anti-super delegates in a way. It is like the Bernie Bros took over their party.
It just sucks because if Labour had even a mediocre leader right now willing to listen to what the majority of voters want, I think there would be a pretty decent chance of stopping Brexit and restoring some sanity.
It is an almost anyone else at this point. Their policies aren't even all that unpopular. Corbyn is. Almost solely. The last debate was the UK version of a town hall and it had pretty well informed people basically heckling Johnson and Corbyn about:
*Both their problems with racism
*Johnson's problem with telling the truth
*Russian interference in Brexit (Johnson just literally buried a report about it)
*A bunch of UK wonky issues
Meanwhile they have their own media issues. This is a subtle edit but...there is no real reason to edit out the 2 seconds of the audience laughing at him. The headline is a bit overblown...I guess...but it does merit questions.
That interview was as horrible as advertised. I don't know how Labour sticks with him. The interview was a bit of a hit job but even in that context Corbyn couldn't defend himself. The charges of antisemitism just stick to him and his position on Brexit is nonsensical. Not the interview disaster you want when you have ~2 weeks until the general.
Boris Johnson has refused to say whether he will take part in a BBC interview with presenter Andrew Neil.
The leaders of Labour, the SNP, the Lib Dems and the Brexit Party have all agreed to be questioned for 30 minutes by the journalist.
But when asked several times by the BBC's Ben Wright if he would appear, the prime minister would not confirm it, saying he would have "all sorts of interviews with all sorts of people".
"What? What?What?" -- The 14th Doctor
It's not enough to be a good player... you also have to play well. -- Siegbert Tarrasch
Boris Johnson has refused to say whether he will take part in a BBC interview with presenter Andrew Neil.
The leaders of Labour, the SNP, the Lib Dems and the Brexit Party have all agreed to be questioned for 30 minutes by the journalist.
But when asked several times by the BBC's Ben Wright if he would appear, the prime minister would not confirm it, saying he would have "all sorts of interviews with all sorts of people".
This is smart. Cowardly but smart. His opponent just got torn to shreds. He is already PM so he doesn't have to prove he should get the job. He just has to keep it.
