Off Topic Political Debate

Introducing logic is not the norm. All politicians have to have a great degree of flexibility or else they do not progress.

 

Nobody is forced to become PM Ed. David Cameron resigned because he was not able to do something which he believed would be bad for the country. We can presume that TM was nothing like the remainer that she claimed to be or she would not, now, be in this position. Many in the Tory camp were closet remainers - only being so because the boss was. BJ was not the only turncoat in the camp, there were many others in all but name.

 

Theresa May kept her head down during the referendum only mildly supporting remain although she had many reservations with the EU. Her stance was extremely clever, she will need this intelligence over the next couple of years.

 

She kept her head down but when she did speak out it was quite clear - have a look at posts 7196 and 7199, there is nothing unequivocal about that, even if she was just making the right noises at the right time. If we can't trust what she said then as being authentic how can we trust what she says now. You appear to regard 'keeping your head down', and swimming with the tide as being positive virtues - I need more than 'cleverness' from a politician, I need conviction and a set of values.

 

Corbyn is often attributed to have 'conviction and to have 'values'. There has never been a more useless and ineffective politician, he has single handedly done enormous damage to left wing causes.

 

I would say here that we will probably never know what Corbyn could have been like as a politician - in times of Brexit the Labour Party was always going to be hopelessly divided. Partly because there is a left wing case for Brexit as well as a right wing one, and secondly because the whole thing was a Tory theme - called by a Tory, mostly supported by Tories (or ex Tories), and implemented by Tories. Unfortunately Brexit has become the 'one and only theme' of British politics which has cast Labout onto the outer periphery of politics. I do not think there is one person who could have held the Party together under such circumstances. Corbyn's problem was that he was only 70% for remain (by his own admission) and that was not enough. Labour did not really want the referendum, it was not their theme. Corbyn was simply in the wrong place at the wrong time - at other times he could have been a very successfull leader.

 

Tonight has been a debate here with the Presidential hopefuls. It is interesting to see how real issues are discussed, and the left-right conflict seen in the UK is not so apparent. It all seems far more grown up somehow. With both of the right wing parties under legal investigation there have been comments of course to remind the public. Fillon has blown it, and seems to know it. While it was thought beforehand that Macron who is in the centre would come under pressure from both left and right, it has turned out that all of the others have turned on Le Pen and shown up her racist comments for what they are. Maybe after the result in the Dutch elections we can see a spirit of cooperation between people emerging, rather than the divisive policies that some put forward.

 

Brexit did put the LP in a difficult position but Corbyn was instrumental in the internal battle between extreme left wing ideology and the electable mainstream centre and right of the party. The battle between the two factions is only getting worse, only one side can prevail, only one side could ever form a government.

 

The Dutch elections saw increased support for an extreme right candidate, Le Pen's 'divisive policies' are proving fairly popular at the moment with the French electorate.

 

I am sorry SH. but you appear to glory in successes of the far right. To glory in anything which appears to be divisive towards European unity - do you see anyone in Europe 'hoping' that Britain fails ? I don't think so - it would just appear small, petty and vindictive. You also do not appear to have noticed that the far left, and the Greens, also increased their votes in the Netherlands - the Greens actually quadrupled their share of seats, and were the real winners there.

 

Le Pen is going backwards every week in the polls, not surprising when she said tonight that she didn't wish to discuss employment issues. The extreme right wing in Holland failed hopelessly to get anywhere near the numbers of votes he expected. The extreme left here is making no impression as normal, and the centre right socialist is tarred with the Hollande failure. It will always be more difficult to present a moderate centre policy as you can be attacked from both sides, but the days of extremes seems to be waning.

 

I do not support the far right but you cannot change reality because you disagree. I hope Europe is successful, not just Germany. The EU is damaging itself by putting political union before fiscal unity. There is real hardship in many EU countries which must be reversed.

 

Not correct, Le Pen has been leading the polls for the last three months. Until tonight there has been no drop in her support, between 17th -20th March she leads 2 out of 3 polls. Le Pen 26%, 25% 27%, Macron 25%, 25.5%, 23%.

The far right wing support is growing in Holland and holding in France. There is no sign of the right wing in Italy losing support either.

 

No need to shut up - you're entitled to your say, as is everyone else.

But I would point out that your 'accept the verdict and implement it' contention isn't exactly correct - the referendum was quite clearly labelled as 'advisory', and, as such, there was no need at all to accept the result and implement it. No-one can possibly know what effect that fact had on the decision made by near 28% of the electoral role to not bother voting - just as, I suppose, no-one can say with any certainty that they would have voted had it not been advisory. But the fact remains that the UK is being taken out of the EU on the wishes of around only 37% of the electorate - to me, that does not constitute a mandate.

 

It was made clear by both camps that the result would not be treated as advisory. Brexit is happening because the majority of voters in the excellent turn out referendum wanted it to happen. It was UK democracy at its finest.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39325559

 

At the end of the debate, 3 hours on the prime TV channel, there was the usual poll of who had been the most impressive candidate for the next French President. The result: Emmanuel Macron récolte 29%, Jean-Luc Mélenchon (20%), François Fillon et Marine Le Pen, à égalité à 19%. Le candidat socialiste, Benoît Hamon, arrive en dernière position à 11%."

 

OFH, the odds are on Macron beating Le Pen in the final round. If this happens how can Macron govern without any MP's ?

 

The Presidential system is totally unlike the UK. It is harder, but you don't actually need a party behind you. You can have a republican as the President in the USA without having a majority in Congress. The doubts surrounding Macron are that his party is in the early stages of organization and maybe will not have the foot soldiers to get his message out. The FN has a different problem. Money. Their funding took a serious hit when the Russians who had lent them millions demanded repayment, taking them to court when they couldn't pay.

 

I fully understand the USA political system but how can Macron govern without any MP's? How can he form a cabinet? Does he hope to have members of his own party elected to the National Assembly in June?