Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 41 to 72 of 72

Thread: UK General Election

  1. #41
    There is also plenty of motivation for them not to.

  2. #42
    ^^vv<><>BASTART
    Posts
    8,980
    It was a stupid joke that got taken too seriously. But in any case we shouldn't derail the thread with American politics.

  3. #43
    The notion of the two biggest companies in a small sector of the economy merging with dystopian reality ensuing has been taken seriously before.

  4. #44
    Admiral of Awesome
    Posts
    18,423
    Quote Originally Posted by Reid View Post
    Are any running?
    I... uh, I don't know.

    Marxist accelerationists seek to destroy capitalism by encouraging further capitalism. I don't know who in power today, if anybody, is one. It's pretty much impossible to tell a destructive accelerationist from any ordinary neoliberal unless they tell you, and strictly speaking, the people doing this would be too smart to admit to it.

    For all I know, Charles Koch is a secret Marxist.

    (Edit: For the record, the only thing accelerationism causes is fascism. As should be plainly evident now.)
    Last edited by Jon`C; 04-28-2017 at 01:15 AM.

  5. #45
    ^^vv<><>BASTART
    Posts
    8,980
    Quote Originally Posted by Jon`C View Post
    Does anybody even pretend that Clinton isn't a pro-corporate extremist, though?
    Btw, yes these people do exist:
    https://mobile.twitter.com/kristenblush?lang=en

    Maybe not in large numbers. But they are real

  6. #46
    ^^vv<><>BASTART
    Posts
    8,980
    Quote Originally Posted by Jon`C View Post
    I... uh, I don't know.

    Marxist accelerationists seek to destroy capitalism by encouraging further capitalism. I don't know who in power today, if anybody, is one. It's pretty much impossible to tell a destructive accelerationist from any ordinary neoliberal unless they tell you, and strictly speaking, the people doing this would be too smart to admit to it.

    For all I know, Charles Koch is a secret Marxist.

    (Edit: For the record, the only thing accelerationism causes is fascism. As should be plainly evident now.)
    Oh, that's what you were talking about. It would be comforting to think the Koch brothers despise who they appear to be.

  7. #47
    Prefered by 80% of Doctors
    Posts
    1,477
    In other BritPol news our Prime Minister (Theresa May) and her Minister for Brexit (David Davis) had a dinner with the president of the European Commission (Juncker). This wasn't officially for negotiations but it was always going to establishing positions on Brexit.

    Inevitably the conversation was leaked out/relayed to the press outside of the UK and then we only get to hear about what happened second-hand and in translation on twitter. And it's depressing as ****:



    Quote Originally Posted by https://twitter.com/JeremyCliffe
    1) May had said she wanted to talk not just Brexit but also world problems; but in practice it fell to Juncker to propose one to discuss.

    2) May has made clear to the Commission that she fully expects to be reelected as PM.

    3) It is thought [in the Commission] that May wants to frustrate the daily business of the EU27, to improve her own negotiating position.

    4) May seemed pissed off at Davis for regaling her dinner guests of his ECJ case against her data retention measures - three times.

    5) EU side were astonished at May's suggestion that EU/UK expats issue could be sorted at EU Council meeting at the end of June.

    6) Juncker objected to this timetable as way too optimistic given complexities, eg on rights to health care.

    7) Juncker pulled two piles of paper from his bag: Croatia's EU entry deal, Canada's free trade deal. His point: Brexit will be v v complex.

    8) May wanted to work through the Brexit talks in monthly, 4-day blocks; all confidential until the end of the process.

    9) Commission said impossible to reconcile this with need to square off member states & European Parliament, so documents must be published.

    10) EU side felt May was seeing whole thing through rose-tinted-glasses. "Let us make Brexit a success" she told them.

    11) Juncker countered that Britain will now be a third state, not even (like Turkey) in the customs union: "Brexit cannot be a success".

    12) May seemed surprised by this and seemed to the EU side not to have been fully briefed.

    13) She cited her own JHA opt-out negotiations as home sec as a model: a mutually useful agreement meaning lots on paper, little in reality.

    14) May's reference to the JHA (justice and home affairs) opt-outs set off alarm signals for the EU side. This was what they had feared.

    15) ie as home sec May opted out of EU measures (playing to UK audience) then opted back in, and wrongly thinks she can do same with Brexit

    16) "The more I hear, the more sceptical I become" said Juncker (this was only half way through the dinner)

    17) May then insisted to Juncker et al that UK owes EU no money because there is nothing to that effect in the treaties.

    18) Her guests then informed her that the EU is not a golf club

    19) Davis then objected that EU could not force a post-Brexit, post-ECJ UK to pay the bill. OK, said Juncker, then no trade deal.

    20) ...leaving EU27 with UK's unpaid bills will involve national parliaments in process (a point that Berlin had made *repeatedly* before).

    21) "I leave Downing St ten times as sceptical as I was before" Juncker told May as he left

    22) Next morning at c7am Juncker called Merkel on her mobile, said May living in another galaxy & totally deluding herself

    23) Merkel quickly reworked her speech to Bundestag to include her now-famous "some in Britain still have illusions" comment

    24) FAZ concludes: May in election mode & playing to crowd, but what use is a big majority won by nurturing delusions of Brexit hardliners?

    25) Juncker's team now think it more likely than not that Brexit talks will collapse & hope Brits wake up to harsh realities in time.

    26) What to make of it all? Obviously this leak is a highly tactical move by Commission. But contents deeply worrying for UK nonetheless.

    27) The report points to major communications/briefing problems. Important messages from Berlin & Brussels seem not to be getting through.

    28) Presumably as a result, May seems to be labouring under some really rather fundamental misconceptions about Brexit & the EU27.

    29) Also clear that (as some of us have been warning for a while...) No 10 should expect every detail of the Brexit talks to leak.

  8. #48
    Admiral of Awesome
    Posts
    18,423
    This thread is about the French election, right?

    The centrist beat the Nazi, 66.5% to 34.5%.

  9. #49
    Unwitting troll accomplice
    Posts
    8,244
    Quote Originally Posted by Jon`C View Post
    (Edit: For the record, the only thing accelerationism causes is fascism. As should be plainly evident now.)
    This is why you have to go straight to Posadism.
    If you think the waiters are rude, you should see the manager.

  10. #50
    ^^vv<><>BASTART
    Posts
    8,980
    Quote Originally Posted by Jon`C View Post
    This thread is about the French election, right?

    The centrist beat the Nazi, 66.5% to 34.5%.
    Assuming the email leaks were Russia this time too, then the playbook was a little obvious.

  11. #51
    Admiral of Awesome
    Posts
    18,423
    Quote Originally Posted by Reid View Post
    Assuming the email leaks were Russia this time too, then the playbook was a little obvious.
    r/the_putins_d response: "It couldn't have been Russia, if it were Russia they would have released it a week before the election to cause more damage"

    Except the e-mail leak revealed nothing, it was mixed with obfuscatory garbage, and the release was clearly timed so nobody could fully analyze it until after the polls closed. Basically trying to generate fear through uncertainty. Yep, definitely not something Russia would do.

  12. #52
    Will *somebody* please vote in a populist neo-nationalist already? Jeez.

    Joking aside, the triumphalist response I'm seeing on my Twitter feed is so misguided. Obviously it's preferable that Macron won. But I'm unconvinced he's the guy who's going to peel back the economic and social conditions that are giving rise to all these populist movements in France.

  13. #53
    Make no mistake, this victory will result in people doubling down on the rhetoric which fuels populist movements.
    Epstein didn't kill himself.

  14. #54
    Admiral of Awesome
    Posts
    18,423
    Which will drive them further underground. Most people are not impressed by extremism.

  15. #55
    Yeah you don't want them there because then they can contaminate the aquifer.
    Epstein didn't kill himself.

  16. #56
    ALL GLORY TO THE CONTEST WINNER

    Posts
    17,935
    Well, Labour had made a 7 point gain nationally as of yesterday and I was feeling slightly more optimistic despite still expecting a Tory majority.

    Now though, in a few days time I fully expect them to exploit the Manchester thing to hammer Corbyn on security.

  17. #57
    Admiral of Awesome
    Posts
    18,423
    But weren't the Tories the ones who failed to stop it?

  18. #58
    ALL GLORY TO THE CONTEST WINNER

    Posts
    17,935
    I suppose, and they've also presided over a 20k drop in the number of police personnel, but the majority of papers here are right wing and have attempted to smear Corbyn in the past over his pacifism and his and McDonnell's support in the past for a unified Ireland [which they've spun as support for the IRA].

    It doesn't help when there's photos of him meeting with Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness.

  19. #59
    Admiral of Awesome
    Posts
    18,423
    Well ya know what they say.

    Vote against the Tories, you'll be paying lots of income tax.

    Vote for the Tories, you won't have any income.

  20. #60
    This thread does not deliver.

  21. #61
    No UKIP in the parliament, eh?

    I'm still gonna retain Nikumurights to refer to Brits as "Farage's Bi***boys", though. sry.

  22. #62
    ^^vv<><>BASTART
    Posts
    8,980
    So, from what I understand, everbody (conservatives and neoliberal left) **** on Jeremy Corbyn for being unelectable, and he proceeded to go on and lead Labour to a massive victory?

    Is this one of those situations where people's wants and desires got in the way of good old fashioned top down politics?

  23. #63
    ALL GLORY TO THE CONTEST WINNER

    Posts
    17,935
    Victory in context; he's essentially been vindicated and the Conservatives can't form a majority with anyone who'd work with them apart from the DUP.

    I give it six weeks before we have another election.

  24. #64
    ALL GLORY TO THE CONTEST WINNER

    Posts
    17,935
    Quote Originally Posted by Nikumubeki View Post
    No UKIP in the parliament, eh?

    I'm still gonna retain Nikumurights to refer to Brits as "Farage's Bi***boys", though. sry.
    UKIP have never been in parliament apart from two Tories that defected. One of which lost his seat shortly afterwards and the other left the party to become an independent, and then didn't stand again in this election.

    Also they've essentially collapsed now.

  25. #65
    Admiral of Awesome
    Posts
    18,423
    Oh, a minority government can limp along for a good while.

    I don't know what it's like in the UK, but in Canadian politics there is a perception that the electorate gets pissed off by frequent elections, and therefore whoever is responsible for failing a confidence motion is thought to pay a price in votes.

    I don't know whether it's true or not, but it does encourage our opposition to cooperate on the really important things, because if e.g. the budget got voted down, it's considered an automatic vote of non-confidence.

  26. #66

    "Has it won yet?"

    Posts
    17,147
    From what I've seen of major snap elections, they often result as a political shoot-myself-in-the-foot for the incumbent. Maybe I'm just seeing the upsetting ones..?
    SnailIracing:n(500tpostshpereline)pants
    -----------------------------@%

  27. #67
    Human Computer
    Posts
    2,826

  28. #68
    Quote Originally Posted by Reid View Post
    So, from what I understand, everbody (conservatives and neoliberal left) **** on Jeremy Corbyn for being unelectable, and he proceeded to go on and lead Labour to a massive victory?
    If "losing by less than expected" is a massive victory, I suppose.

  29. #69
    ALL GLORY TO THE CONTEST WINNER

    Posts
    17,935
    Nobody in the UK wanted this snap election, it was an opportunistic attempt by the Conservatives to crush the Labour party because they were 25 points behind in the polls, and they ****ed it.

    They already had a majority.

  30. #70
    ^^vv<><>BASTART
    Posts
    8,980
    Quote Originally Posted by Thrawn[numbarz] View Post
    If "losing by less than expected" is a massive victory, I suppose.
    It is when they were projected to lose seats and instead took away the Tories majority.

  31. #71
    Quote Originally Posted by Reid View Post
    It is when they were projected to lose seats and instead took away the Tories majority.
    No I get it--I'm just saying it's a pretty low bar, haha.

    If I were getting my news solely from my leftist friends' social media feeds I would have had no idea Labour wasn't in control of the government, from the level of triumphalism.

  32. #72
    ALL GLORY TO THE CONTEST WINNER

    Posts
    17,935
    The could be in a few weeks, in theory.

    If the Tories can't pass a Queen's Speech in parliament [which essentially gives them consent to form the government] then from convention the Queen would ask the leader of the opposition if they're able to form a government instead and it's their turn to attempt to pass a Queen's Speech. If that happens then the Tories can either abstain and let Labour form the government, or they can vote it down and we get another election in 25 working days. The Tories don't want either of these things to happen so they could be ****ed.

    Then again the 2010 Fixed Term Parliaments act kinda complicates things because I don't think it accounts for this situation because it was a daft bill thrown together quickly to keep the Tories in power if their coalition with the Lib Dems fell to bits. And because we haven't had a situation like this since 1974.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •