Support NeoGAF

[CyclopsRock]

Tbh it's not that complicated. If people need help beyond their own means, there are two sources for that help - the government or "society" coming together, in the form of charity or otherwise (like how working men's clubs etc are run not for profit to provide a cheap place for old piss heads to booze it up.) For someone on the right, who doesn't fetishize the groping hand of the state rubbing at your crotch whilst sticking a cheeky finger up your arse, it's not immediately obvious that those who are able to, giving their time and means voluntarily is a worse solution than the state taking from everyone without heed to a desire to give. Those who balk at the idea of increased food bank usage would typically not give a shit if temporary, emergency benefits were increased (and their use tends to be for emergencies, not habitual) to perform effectively the same function. Which seems weird to some right wingers.

I'm being a bit facetious/drunk but only a bit.

 

[Mr Git]

Oh, god. If no one else is willing to say what we're all thinking, I'll do it and risk catching the perma.

Here:

HIGNFY hasn't been funny since Angus Deayton left. YUP.

Some episodes have been good, but yeah largely flat. Merton just looks like he can't be arsed. I'll still watch it but I'm rarely in a rush to, or remember on a Friday.

 

[Audioboxer]

This is a pretty common view in the Tories and I mean it makes sense from his ideological point of view. If you are a Christian that believes in charity, conventionally you might assume that state sponsored charity in the form of welfare is the Christian thing to do.

However, for many Christians, having the state involved in charity is wrong and indeed for small government tories is entirely the wrong path. Then it becomes obvious that the real answer from that perspective is that the haves are morally obligated to donate money to charity privately.

The spin there is that more foodbanks indicate an uptick in private donations which from that perspective is the way things should be. One might argue that foodbanks show the good and charitable nature of the British public and indeed the UK's social cohesion.

It's entirely the wrong way to do this from my perspective of course as I think that being in government very much gives one the power to nip the problem in the bud and wishing people suffer to fit one's moral high-ground is an awful way to govern, minding that it is in most cases the only way to govern. (there will always be an affected group in any policy)

I mean, I get it. It's positive that people from the society volunteer at food banks and donate. An underlying issue though is the party Rees-Mogg represents are vicious at the Governmental level.

 

[*Splinter]

Those who balk at the idea of increased food bank usage would typically not give a shit if temporary, emergency benefits were increased (and their use tends to be for emergencies, not habitual) to perform effectively the same function.

I imagine we'd applaud the emergency measures while criticising whichever policies led to the need for those measures. Much like we do for food banks.

You just don't hear much "charity is good" because, uh, no shit. "Nurses shouldn't need food banks" is a more pressing concern.

 

[Uzzy]

So Boris has finally laid out his challenge to May. His Brexit article in the Telegraph today is pretty much an ultimatum to the rest of the cabinet saying 'do it my way or else'

Here we go.

 

[Maledict]

Gods he is such an awful, awful human being. He knows this is ludicrous, he knows the damage it will cause, yet he doesn't care if he gets him the leadership. All politicians possess an ego and belief they are the best person for the job, it's part of who they are, but Boris Johnson is almost sociopathic in his ability to do and say anything to get the leaderships

Obviously the telegraph and mail will absolutely lap it up, but the article is nothing but repeated lies and garbage of the highest order. And the idea that we should be looking forward to becoming a low tax / low regulation haven, and the EU will do nothing about that, is so fucking insanely stupid it's embarrassing.

If May had any power at all she would kick him from cabinet - cabinet ministers don't get to go against cabinet policy like this. But she doesn't have any power, and he's sticking the knife in just in time for conference under the guise of patriotism and Brexit. Piece of shit.

 

[Jackpot]

In his passionately patriotic article he insists that Britain can be “the greatest country on earth” and rounds on so-called Remoaners “who think we are going to bottle it”.

He deploys soaring rhetoric in the tub-thumping article to insist that Britain “will succeed in our new national enterprise, and will succeed mightily” while slapping down opponents of Brexit who are “woefully underestimating this country” and who think Brexit “isn’t going to happen”.

Telegraph continues to be garbage.

 

[tomtom94]

Wow. Remarkably quick work from the Telegraph to get all these articles written about Boris's totally unexpected and uncoordinated gambit.

If only we could work out who's backing Boris for this leadership bid. Ach, I guess we'll never know.

I'm imagining Hunt getting a promotion and all the options fill me with horror.

 

[cabot]

I'd be surprised if he became leader, though it amuses me that the tories continue to think of themselves in their own bubble.

 

[D4Danger]

Boris making his move then. I just hope there's another GE so we're not stuck with this wiffle waffle cunt destroying Brexit.

 

[Beefy]

Boris chatting shit about the £350m again.

 

[Maledict]

Gods I feel nauseous reading that stuff.

So, if Boris does challenge her, she's out is my feeling. No matter who wins, there's no chance it would be her and he wouldn't be willing to go ahead with this unless he was confident of at least some backing from the party.

Will be interesting to hear about all of the reasons why they don't want a general election after the new leader takes over of course.

 

[DarthMasta]

Have you guys accepted that it's going to be hard Brexit? Because the way things are going just as the UK finally decides on who it wants to actually negotiate Brexit, oops mate, sorry, we're actually closed, you had until 2019 to do this, too late now...

 

[*Splinter]

Boris making his move then. I just hope there's another GE so we're not suck with this wiffle waffle cunt destroying Brexit.

I think you'd need the tiniest shred of integrity to call a GE as the PM.

Boris doesn't seem the type.

 

[PJV3]

Boris just wants to cross the PM thing off his list, he wouldn't care if it was only for 2 months.

 

[cabot]

Have you guys accepted that it's going to be hard Brexit? Because the way things are going just as the UK finally decides on who it wants to actually negotiate Brexit, oops mate, sorry, we're actually closed, you had until 2019 to do this, too late now...

I'm adjusting to it now, I'm still bitterly frustrated we have one of the biggest diplomatic events in decades and the tories are happy just playing party politics instead of trying to solve it.

 

[Jackpot]

Have you guys accepted that it's going to be hard Brexit? Because the way things are going just as the UK finally decides on who it wants to actually negotiate Brexit, oops mate, sorry, we're actually closed, you had until 2019 to do this, too late now...

Unfortunately it's out of our hands. The Tories have talked themselves into a corner with the "all the benefits, none of the costs or binding agreements" deal, which is impossible so they only do pointless grandstanding instead of engaging in negotiations.

It's completely unsustainable so I don't know who they're going to focus the blame on when time runs out in a year.

 

[tomtom94]

I think you'd need the tiniest shred of integrity to call a GE as the PM.

Boris doesn't seem the type.

Any Conservative leader would do the same as May - cling on, hope that Labour self-destruct, then call a snap election when the numbers look favorable. Probably the same time as last year, actually. (With the possible exception of the Hard Brexit wing, who probably actually enjoy governing with the DUP more than their softer colleagues)

To be honest, I think Boris as leader would be a real threat to Labour. Particularly if he could get Farage and Banks behind him. But especially the fact that he shrugs off mistakes in a way that May or even Cameron could never manage, combined with the fact that personality-wise he would make Corbyn seem like a proper wet blanket.

(That said I'm not convinced anyone outside the Telegraph actually wants Boris as leader)

 

[CyclopsRock]

I don't think there's ever been a chance of a soft Brexit. Even if May fell on her sword tomorrow, Boris became leader, immediately called a snap and Corbyn got a majority - it'd still be hard Brexit. So I don't see why anyone would think there's a route to a soft Brexit.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

So, election next year then lads?

 

[Beefy]

I don't think there's ever been a chance of a soft Brexit. Even if May fell on her sword tomorrow, Boris became leader, immediately called a snap and Corbyn got a majority - it'd still be hard Brexit. So I don't see why anyone would think there's a route to a soft Brexit.

Who ever is in charge that leads us to hard brexit is fucked.

 

[cabot]

I don't think there's ever been a chance of a soft Brexit. Even if May fell on her sword tomorrow, Boris became leader, immediately called a snap and Corbyn got a majority - it'd still be hard Brexit. So I don't see why anyone would think there's a route to a soft Brexit.

the minority want a hard brexit, I think a solid case can be made for a EEA type deal.

The countries that voted remain, for instance. They'd like a non-hard solution (oo-er).

 

[CyclopsRock]

the minority want a hard brexit, I think a solid case can be made for a EEA type deal.

The countries that voted remain, for instance. They'd like a non-hard solution (oo-er).

The "minority" want everything, though. There's no solution that has more than minority support. Whatever option we end up taking will have more people opposing it than supporting it. So literally whether we somehow remain, soft Brexit or hard Brexit, we're going to end up with a majority disliking the route. That's the exciting situation we find ourselves in. And of those, I can't see how - politically - either of the first two will occur. So hard Brexit it is.

 

[cabot]

The "minority" want everything, though. There's no solution that has more than minority support. Whatever option we end up taking will have more people opposing it than supporting it. So literally whether we somehow remain, soft Brexit or hard Brexit, we're going to end up with a majority disliking the route. That's the exciting situation we find ourselves in. And of those, I can't see how - politically - either of the first two will occur. So hard Brexit it is.

Maybe, but the government haven't even tried for compromise or the least offensive option.

Theresa May stuck on the hard right and never changed. 2 out of 4 countries in the union voted remain, and they've been effectively ignored during the entire process.


Scotland had independence, Ireland has the Good Friday agreement. Neither are being considered seriously by the UKGov.

 

[Uzzy]

So, election next year then lads?

I'm down for a November election myself.

 

[CyclopsRock]

Maybe, but the government haven't even tried for compromise or the least offensive option.

Theresa May stuck on the hard right and never changed. 2 out of 4 countries in the union voted remain, and they've been effectively ignored during the entire process.


Scotland had independence, Ireland has the Good Friday agreement. Neither are being considered seriously by the UKGov.

I've never been especially convinced by the "2 of the 4 nations" argument. I mean, the UK is a member of the EU, not Scotland, England etc. And that's how we vote. London voted remain, and London's leaving. I voted to remain, I'm leaving. Scotland's voted remain, it's leaving. That's just how it works, and the fact that Scotland as an independent country 300 years ago - and was given the option to return to that state just a few years ago and declined - is an interesting quirk but not worthy of any serious impact on Brexit, IMO. Good Friday is different but ultimately I can't see how it can be reconciled with the result.

As for not "trying" compromise, I don't know what that looks like. The reason why this whole this is so tricky is that the four pillars are something of a package deal. You can't stay a member of the single market without free movement of people, etc. So the only alternative to hard Brexit is soft Brexit which, for most people I think, is basically not Brexit at all because all the things they don't like about being a member of the EU are still there.

 

[cabot]

I've never been especially convinced by the "2 of the 4 nations" argument. I mean, the UK is a member of the EU, not Scotland, England etc. And that's how we vote. London voted remain, and London's leaving. I voted to remain, I'm leaving. Scotland's voted remain, it's leaving. That's just how it works, and the fact that Scotland as an independent country 300 years ago - and was given the option to return to that state just a few years ago and declined - is an interesting quirk but not worthy of any serious impact on Brexit, IMO. Good Friday is different but ultimately I can't see how it can be reconciled with the result.

As for not "trying" compromise, I don't know what that looks like. The reason why this whole this is so tricky is that the four pillars are something of a package deal. You can't stay a member of the single market without free movement of people, etc. So the only alternative to hard Brexit is soft Brexit which, for most people I think, is basically not Brexit at all because all the things they don't like about being a member of the EU are still there.

Well I can understand your lack of care for that argument, since you live in the country that voted leave the most.

I do not, however, and frankly I thought at the very least the UK Gov would approach the remain voting places and try to be open to suggestions or any sort of discussion.

That absolutely hasn't happened. Just because 52% voted for brexit doesn't mean the remainder should lie down and accept it.

the second part of your post is true, but the government continue to pretend that we can get the benefits of the single market without the drawbacks aka the four freedoms. That's on the government for not being honest to the voters.

The government should've considered such delicate topics as Good Friday and Scotland just having a relatively close fought independence referendum.


It's alright though, Davey C was confident remain would win.



While you may believe that its impossible to have anything other than a hard brexit, the result of 48 vs 52 means we should look for the best compromise possible, which is likely not hard brexit.

Now the polls say voters want single market access without freedom of movement. That's nice. it's also stupid, because it's a key part of the agreement. Should we ignore sensibility just because the majority don't like it?

This is why I dislike referendums. the small print is ignored and emotional arguments are made instead.

 

[CyclopsRock]

Well I can understand your lack of care for that argument, since you live in the country that voted leave the most.

I do not, however, and frankly I thought at the very least the UK Gov would approach the remain voting places and try to be open to suggestions or any sort of discussion.

That absolutely hasn't happened. Just because 52% voted for brexit doesn't mean the remainder should lie down and accept it.

the second part of your post is true, but the government continue to pretend that we can get the benefits of the single market without the drawbacks aka the four freedoms. That's on the government for not being honest to the voters.

The government should've considered such delicate topics as Good Friday and Scotland just having a relatively close fought independence referendum.


It's alright though, Davey C was confident remain would win.



While you may believe that its impossible to have anything other than a hard brexit, the result of 48 vs 52 means we should look for the best compromise possible, which is likely not hard brexit.

Now the polls say voters want single market access without freedom of movement. That's nice. it's also stupid, because it's a key part of the agreement. Should we ignore sensibility just because the majority don't like it?

This is why I dislike referendums. the small print is ignored and emotional arguments are made instead.

As you say, it's stupid. It's not an option that's available to us, so what's to "compromise" there? As far as I can tell, there's no compromise possible - the possible exception here being to retain membership of the customs union, but that's very much still a hard Brexit it comes without all the other stuff. You say that the 4% margin between the two options suggests we should find a compromise that's not hard Brexit, but I don't know what that looks like.

 

[JonathanEx]

I mean the lesson is that you shouldn't ask us big, broad questions without care or recognition of specifics, and it'll only go wrong otherwise.


Ahhh we're fucked.

 

[Roberto Larcos]

I don't think there's ever been a chance of a soft Brexit. Even if May fell on her sword tomorrow, Boris became leader, immediately called a snap and Corbyn got a majority - it'd still be hard Brexit. So I don't see why anyone would think there's a route to a soft Brexit.

There's one route to soft Brexit that I can see...

Starring:
Theresa May as Margaret Thatcher;
Boris Johnson as Michael Heseltine, and;
Philip Hammond as John Major.

 

[tomtom94]

Boris Johnson has been accused of being a Brexit "back-seat driver" by the home secretary.

Amber Rudd said it was fine for Mr Johnson to show his enthusiasm but he was not "driving the car" after he set out his vision for the UK post-Brexit on Saturday.

Something something driving the car off the cliff something something.

Also, it's been confirmed that Boris will be keeping his job:

Lib Dem leader Vince Cable urged the prime minister to "fire this guy on Monday morning", warning that if she did not act her authority would be "reduced to zero".

 

[Huw_Dawson]

I remember writing a little while ago how important May's Brexit speech soon is going to be and how it's going to make or break her. Boris appears to have attempted deliberate scuttling. It's actually probably the cleverest thing he could have done in this circumstance.

She has to get through to her speech then get past CPC with her own foreign secretary now visibly holding a gun to her back. She can't go down Boris' route without scuttling her badly weakened support structure (Hammond/Green et al) and if she doesn't go down Boris' route she presumably has to fire him, or her authority is demonstrated to be nil. If she fires Boris there's civil war, if she doesn't she is then under somewhat impossible pressure for her speech and then CPC.

I wouldn't bet on her going but certainly it seems more likely now than any time since election night. And to echo Crab's comment I think we're looking at an election next year if she does go. I cannot see this government able to navigate a route out of this mess when their margins are so slim in the Commons.

Gotta admit I'd love Boris as PM though just for the advantage it gives my lot in all our Tory-facing seats and marginals. He wouldn't get the job in the post-resignation melee though.

 

[Beefy]

I remember writing a little while ago how important May's Brexit speech soon is going to be and how it's going to make or break her. Boris appears to have attempted deliberate scuttling. It's actually probably the cleverest thing he could have done in this circumstance.

She has to get through to her speech then get past CPC with her own foreign secretary now visibly holding a gun to her back. She can't go down Boris' route without scuttling her badly weakened support structure (Hammond/Green et al) and if she doesn't go down Boris' route she presumably has to fire him, or her authority is demonstrated to be nil. If she fires Boris there's civil war, if she doesn't she is then under somewhat impossible pressure for her speech and then CPC.

I wouldn't bet on her going but certainly it seems more likely now than any time since election night. And to echo Crab's comment I think we're looking at an election next year if she does go. I cannot see this government able to navigate a route out of this mess when their margins are so slim in the Commons.

Gotta admit I'd love Boris as PM though just for the advantage it gives my lot in all our Tory-facing seats and marginals. He wouldn't get the job in the post-resignation melee though.

Boris as PM would kill the country

 

[ss1]

Boris as PM would kill the country

And we will have more useless anti-riot vehicles.

 

[Jackpot]

I remember writing a little while ago how important May's Brexit speech soon is going to be and how it's going to make or break her. Boris appears to have attempted deliberate scuttling. It's actually probably the cleverest thing he could have done in this circumstance.

I don't know, it feels a little unsubtle as political manoeuvres go. There's a difference between dropping your rival in it or exposing their flaws and actively tanking your party's progress just to weaken the leader. All the Tory MPs who aren't in Boris's camp hate him for it.

edit: Boris got slapped, doubled down, got slapped again

Boris Johnson has been slapped down by the head of the UK Statistics Authority for restating the controversial claim that Britain will claw back £350m a week after leaving the EU.

Sir David Norgrove said he was ”surprised and disappointed" by the foreign secretary's decision to repeat the figure in a 4,000-word article outlining his vision for Brexit.

”This confuses gross and net contributions," he wrote in a letter addressed to Johnson. ”It also assumes that payments currently made to the UK by the EU, including, for example, for the support of agriculture and scientific research, will not be paid by the UK government when we leave.

”It is a clear misuse of official statistics."

A spokesman for Johnson said: ”Boris has spoken to Norgrove and he has made clear that he was complaining about the headlines and not Boris's piece and, in fact, admitted that Boris's wording in the piece was absolutely fine."

A spokeswoman for the UK statistics authority said: ”Sir David Norgrove does not believe the issues lie solely with the headlines. He has not changed the conclusion set out in his letter to the foreign secretary."

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...down-statistics-chief-fresh-350m-brexit-claim

 

[CyclopsRock]

Next year seems like a pretty awful time for an election though, being as it'll be right in the middle of the negotiations. Too early to be a public referendum on the governments handling of Brexit, too late to be an opportunity to switch tact.

 

[*Splinter]

It's actually probably the cleverest thing he could have done in this circumstance.

I think it's the most obvious move and, as Jackpot said, poorly performed.

 

[Linkstrikesback]

Boris as PM would kill the country

Arguably Boris ham fisted attempts to become PM are already killing the country, depending on whether you believe his support of brexit made a difference.

 

[Coriolanus]

So genuinely happy that BoJo is getting the knives out. Was depressed with the slow pace of ukpol news as of late.

 

[Theonik]

Next year seems like a pretty awful time for an election though, being as it'll be right in the middle of the negotiations. Too early to be a public referendum on the governments handling of Brexit, too late to be an opportunity to switch tact.

Nothing about this situation thus far has been thought out or good for the country. It's all been stupid posturing on all sides.

 

[sohois]

Boris as PM would kill the country

Doubt it would have any lasting impacts. The Tories are already reliant on the DUP for their majority and the civil war that would occur in the Tory party would render them unable to pass anything. They'd limp on for one or two months and then an election would occur, most likely removing Johnson

 

[CyclopsRock]

Since we're talking about elections...

http://opinium.co.uk/political-polling-12th-september-2017/

The Conservatives and Labour are neck and neck for the first time since the general election.

The Tories have risen by one point since last month, while Labour has dropped two points, to put both parties on 41%.

Leader Approval Ratings

Theresa May’s personal ratings continue to slowly improve while Jeremy Corbyn’s steadily decline. Theresa May’s approval rating may still be in negative territory (-11%), but it has improved by six points since last month when she was on -17%. Conversely, Jeremy Corbyn’s net ratings have slipped from -5 to -7%.

Brexit

The pattern remains steady in the wake of the general election, with 34% trusting the Conservatives most to lead the negotiations with the European Union, with Labour lagging on 23%.

Public approval of how Theresa May is handling Brexit has improved over the past month, with her net rating improving from -19% to -12%. Now 30% approve of the way she is handling Brexit and 42% disapprove.

The division remains starkly along EU Referendum lines with 44% of Leavers approving of the way she is handling Brexit and 58% of Remainers disapproving of the way she is handling it.

 

[SuperEpicMan]

Since we're talking about elections...

http://opinium.co.uk/political-polling-12th-september-2017/

In the event of an election, I think Corbyn would do very well starting where he is now. That being said, it really depends on who he is up against. Personally I would be pretty worried if Boris Johnson gets the tory leadership as I think he has potential to pull some younger voters away from Corbyn.

If Rees-Mogg runs, I think he will probably do worse than May. I just can't see him being able to connect with voters. I mean he just looks like the embodiment of the political elite. At least May had the whole Thatcher 2.0 thing to use, at least at the start.

 

[CyclopsRock]

In the event of an election, I think Corbyn would do very well starting where he is now. That being said, it really depends on who he is up against. Personally I would be pretty worried if Boris Johnson gets the tory leadership as I think he has potential to pull some younger voters away from Corbyn.

If Rees-Mogg runs, I think he will probably do worse than May. I just can't see him being able to connect with voters. I mean he just looks like the embodiment of the political elite. At least May had the whole Thatcher 2.0 thing to use, at least at the start.

I maintain that the biggest problem with the Conservatives last campaign was their awful manifesto. *If* whoever is at the helm has a decent'ish one, I don't see why anyone would do better than May, even with the baggage she's managed to collect in the last half a year.

 

[JonnyDBrit]

Grenfell death toll 'may be below 80'

Scotland Yard, in a briefing, said it may consider individual as well as corporate manslaughter charges.

The police have seized 31 million documents and identified 336 companies of interest in its investigation.

Metropolitan Police Commander Stuart Cundy said some 60 of the estimated 80 people killed have been formally identified, but the figure "may come down a little bit" due to the recoveries made from the tower, the number of identifications made and video evidence from the night.

 

[Huw_Dawson]

I think it's the most obvious move and, as Jackpot said, poorly performed.

I disagree. Getting insults thrown his way is fine, it demonstrates the divisions in the Tory camp. I don't think Boris is weakened - it establishes a narrative and demonstrates which reality the Tories are living in, where an openly hostile Foreign Secretary is not dismissable by this PM.

Granted we're talking about Tory party politics and Boris Johnson here, so it's not as if these are the easiest tea leaves to read.

 

[Beefy]

Grenfell death toll 'may be below 80'

Only 3 permanently re-housed as well. The whole thing is disgusting.

 

[tomtom94]

Boris is privately considering resigning if May picks a softer Brexit

 

[*Splinter]

I disagree. Getting insults thrown his way is fine, it demonstrates the divisions in the Tory camp. I don't think Boris is weakened - it establishes a narrative and demonstrates which reality the Tories are living in, where an openly hostile Foreign Secretary is not dismissable by this PM.

Granted we're talking about Tory party politics and Boris Johnson here, so it's not as if these are the easiest tea leaves to read.

But what has he achieved? If his aim is to become leader of the Tory party, has this move made that more likely?

 

[Coriolanus]

Sometimes the right kind of "news" simply manages to brighten a person's day.

Piers Morgan says Jeremy Corbyn started speaking Spanish to Arsenal star Hector Bellerin to 'shut him out of the conversation'

According to Mr Morgan's Daily Mail column, he had been seated at the same table as Mr Bellerin, and earlier in the evening had been talking to him about Arsenal's recent run of poor form.

He wrote: ”Later, fellow Arsenal fan Jeremy Corbyn came over to speak to him. When I tried to interrupt, the Labour leader – whose wife is Mexican – promptly switched to fluent Spanish to shut me out of the conversation."

According to Mr Morgan, he then asked the Labour leader what he'd said to the footballer.

He wrote: ”Corbyn smirked. ‘I told him to please send Arsène Wenger my very best and assure him he continues to have my full support, even if he's lost yours, Piers. In fact, particularly because he's lost yours...'"

According to Mr Morgan's account of the interaction, he then replied to Mr Corbyn: ”He's lost mine because we keep losing. You and Wenger are the only losers in football and politics to keep their job... no wonder you love him."

Despite saying he had called the Labour leader a ”loser" to his face, in the next paragraph Mr Morgan writes: ”Corbyn got a huge cheer when he presented an award. His extraordinary popularity shows no sign of abating."