Brexit Referendum - Page 555 - Politics and Economics

If Corbyn can't be elected why aren't the Tories dissatisfied with May supporting the no confidence motion then?

You're failing to be consistent across two minutes.

01-16-2019 , 07:35 AM

#13852

chezlaw

Limey Bastard

Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 47,878

Quote:

Originally Posted by dereds

Tory party rules aren't consistent with replacing May in 14 days.

That's a different thing. The PM doesn't have to be the tory leader, they can have tht coronation later.

One thing we can be sure of the tory party is that they will give up power for a GE iff a) they have no choice or b) they expect to do very well

Quote:

Even if the Tories were scared of a Corbyn government that's a good thing, I want a Labour government that is entirely inconsistent with the political commitments of Toryism.

Absolutely. That's why they wont the GE option even if May loses. As pointed out they have another option though so if they want to get rid of May they can do so. The risk of some ambush from the tory right is her biggest risk tonight although even that is looking unlikely.

01-16-2019 , 07:38 AM

#13853

chezlaw

Limey Bastard

Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 47,878

Quote:

Originally Posted by dereds

If Corbyn can't be elected why aren't the Tories dissatisfied with May supporting the no confidence motion then?

You're failing to be consistent across two minutes.

Oaf is just trying to have a go at me - I'm his latest obsession (I assume previous ones)

Although in doing so is has confirmed that he is no supporter of the left.

01-16-2019 , 07:41 AM

#13854

jalfrezi

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 14,795

Quote:

Originally Posted by chezlaw

That's a different thing. The PM doesn't have to be the tory leader, they can have tht coronation later.

One thing we can be sure of the tory party is that they will give up power for a GE iff a) they have no choice or b) they expect to do very well

Absolutely. That's why they wont the GE option even if May loses. As pointed out they have another option though so if they want to get rid of May they can do so. The risk of some ambush from the tory right is her biggest risk tonight although even that is looking unlikely.

Bolded is true of any government (also, drop the silly iff statements - this is English, not Basic programming.).

01-16-2019 , 07:44 AM

#13855

dereds

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 16,782

Quote:

Originally Posted by jalfrezi

Bolded is true of any government (also, drop the silly iff statements - this is English, not Basic programming.).

In philosophical shorthand the difference between iff and if is important

01-16-2019 , 07:46 AM

#13856

O.A.F.K.1.1

Ted Patrick

Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 27,952

This is amazing.

ITT we Learn Labours inability to make massive poltical capital, where the potential for Government exists, out of a huge series of disasters for a sitting Tory PM is nothing to do with the current Labour leadership.

01-16-2019 , 07:55 AM

#13857

dereds

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 16,782

Quote:

Originally Posted by O.A.F.K.1.1

Unless you can specify why Tories not voting for a no confidence motion is the Labour leaderships fault then then this kind of detour suggests you don't really have a clue and just want to bash Corbyn.

Given the FTPA and the current state of Parliament how should a Labour government force an election?

01-16-2019 , 07:55 AM

#13858

O.A.F.K.1.1

Ted Patrick

Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 27,952

Quote:

Originally Posted by dereds

The point is you aren't being clear so I am not sure what to infer from your comment. If you would like to state exactly why the failure of the No Confidence vote is going to be Corbyn's fault we can discuss it.

Otherwise you can just randomly blame Corbyn for stuff and I can waste time somewhere else.

The vacuum point is entirely clear. Think about it for a second.

01-16-2019 , 07:57 AM

#13859

dereds

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 16,782

No it isn't and if it is so clear to you why aren't you prepared to help me understand it?

This bollocks of claiming something is clear while failing to point it out is a ****ing nonsense and anyone relying on it is a fraud.

01-16-2019 , 08:00 AM

#13860

O.A.F.K.1.1

Ted Patrick

Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 27,952

Quote:

Originally Posted by dereds

Not when its so obviously no **** sherlocky obviously clear.

01-16-2019 , 08:03 AM

#13861

O.A.F.K.1.1

Ted Patrick

Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 27,952

The point is with a different more capable leader we could and should be discussing a different set of political coordinates and factors at this point.

Corbyn has lead Labour to this specific set of conditions.

You are just hand waving away all the potentials of the epic historically unprecedented Tory disaster away and assuming all the difficulties the current Labour leadership has in leveraging such are concrete givens that would have marched up through history regardless of the action of the Labour leader.

Last edited by O.A.F.K.1.1; 01-16-2019 at 08:11 AM.

01-16-2019 , 08:04 AM

#13862

dereds

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 16,782

Quote:

Originally Posted by O.A.F.K.1.1

Not when its so obviously no **** sherlocky obviously clear.

See I have two politics degrees, one a BA with history awarded 25 years ago, one a MA in political philosophy completed last year whose first election campaign was 1983 and if you aren't prepared to state your case I am going to assume that your case is ****ing awful.

You have spent more time refusing to make the case than it should take to actually make one that is so obviously **** sherlocky clear. Which says more about you than it does my ability to read your ****ing mind.

01-16-2019 , 08:09 AM

#13863

O.A.F.K.1.1

Ted Patrick

Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 27,952

Hahahahahah

Never go full ****** and appeal to your own authority.

01-16-2019 , 09:28 AM

#13864

dereds

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 16,782

The point was if someone with a reasonable standard of political education is unable to understand what you consider so clear then maybe it's not so ****ing clear.

And the reply you managed in between the post I quoted and my reply doesn't do anything to clarify it. If you are unable to make a specific point I am going to assume you don't have one.

But yeah you work away with your ableism and your ignorance of what an appeal to authority is.

01-16-2019 , 09:45 AM

#13865

jalfrezi

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 14,795

Quote:

Originally Posted by dereds

In philosophical shorthand the difference between iff and if is important

Of course. I meant drop the annoying abbreviation because some won't understand it, not replace it with "if".

01-16-2019 , 09:49 AM

#13866

dereds

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 16,782

Quote:

Originally Posted by jalfrezi

Of course. I meant drop the annoying abbreviation because some won't understand it, not replace it with "if".

Okay I wasn't sure where basic programming came into it. Tbh the internet would quickly fill up if we never used abbreviations

01-16-2019 , 09:53 AM

#13867

jalfrezi

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 14,795

If it's an actual term in use in philosophy then I've learned something interesting today, for once, which is a good thing. I've only encountered it in programming and assumed that was its origin.

01-16-2019 , 09:55 AM

#13868

dereds

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 16,782

Yeah it's still shorthand for if and only if but it's regularly used.

01-16-2019 , 10:00 AM

#13869

jalfrezi

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 14,795

I see. Not in spoken English though, surely?

01-16-2019 , 10:05 AM

#13870

dereds

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 16,782

nope apart from anything else I'm not sure how I'd pronounce it differently

01-16-2019 , 10:14 AM

#13871

grizy

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 20,779

Iff has been around for longer than modern programming. If we include earlier iterations from math, it's been around even longer.

I always read the whole thing out "if and only if."