Chach

You're addressing a different point, but why would Leave be warning of a no deal Brexit? Leave wanted to leave, that was Remain's job and the economic consequences of leaving were talked to death. Imagine a political campaign run by a leader on the basis of "we will create 100,000 new jobs and grow the economy" with a caveat added that they may create no jobs and no growth, its fanciful to expect politicians to offer up the worst case scenario, and you know what, lets just for once in the whole debate give the voters some agency. If you were worried about what deal you were going to get you put an x next to remain.

This is just terrible reasoning mate and I say this as someone who pretty much shares every bias you have regarding Brexit and politics in general. There's so many good faith arguments you can make for a change of leadership, I don't think the Brown/Blair comparison stands up at all. We don't even have to go back very far in this thread to find you declaring that May was a disaster and she couldn't even form government in her own right after her GE. There was no option to vote for "leave with a good deal" so you have to take that vote as a "leave come what may". How can the parliament then legislate to stop that happening and then accuse others of being undemocratic? I am going to advocate for the devil and offer up a alternative position for the decision to suspend parliament at such a critical time Boris knows the Europeans are shitting their pants at the prospect of a no deal Brexit, the leaders of the opposition and minor parties are actively reassuring the Europeans that they will legislate to stop that happening, Boris is giving himself some time to bully the Europeans into making concessions that the parliament will vote for. [respond to this bit I'm just putting the next bit in for the lols] Deep down you know this might work and now you are shitting your pants Boris is going to save the day and the imminent destruction of the Tory party you have dreamed of will be averted.

if you had asked me this a few years ago I would have probably said that conservatives were just small minded people with no imagination or capacity for logic and an unhealthy obsession with money what is going on in other peoples bedrooms. Trump and Brexit has separated the conservatives from the reactionaries though, and now I'm still I'm still trying to work it all out.

I know its tragic but I can't help but raise an eyebrow at this: "The decision to do it now is highly controversial because opponents say it would stop MPs being able to play their full democratic part in the Brexit process." Not like they haven't had enough chances.

https://www.scribd.com/document/423505284/Dear-Colleague-Letter-from-UK-PM-Boris-Johnson?fbclid=IwAR3J1IHnea9StTok1MHaMx0zhbwKpLZijmz9n5K23S4DKBxRBvOR0omw4bA

I cannot believe you would try and attribute that to Obamacare without some basic googling, What happened in the 80's and 2000's? Who was making the legislation during those periods. We have mostly single payer in Australia, I pay 2.5% of my gross income in a Medicare levy. Because I earn over a certain amount I am incentivised to also have have private insurance (or I have to pay an additional 1%) I claim on the private mostly for things like dental work (not covered by medicare) and my kids glasses/contacts. You will see from the graph ours is half the price of yours, that's how you do it. Its being done all over the world. it's amazing, just don't insert a profit motive.

I think think the definitions are fairly clear, the authoritarian (right or left) part just implies those people want to enforce those ideas on everyone. The squad are primarily focused on social justice and environmental matters and they are pretty authoritarian about it. In Australia those types are all in the Greens, or as I like to refer to them far left, over educated, inner city, latte drinking Tree Tories. I don't believe that the idea that conservatives are worried about expansion of government stands up to scrutiny, the market based solutions are already there. Step 1. Make carbon expensive, everyone else has to pay to have their garbage dealt with. Why should carbon be treated any different just because it floats. Step 2. Provide cheap finance to fund private clean energy projects. Step 3 Ban political contributions from organisations who have a vested interest in carbon pollution.

Why is this not viewed as a failure of the GOP when other western countries can deliver universal healthcare at half the cost?

I find it really surprising these are still considered progressive or left wing policies in any western liberal democracy. With regards to the green new deal and carbon pollution, why is that not a conservative priority?

Thought this was a good discussion from an ex ToryMP/remainer. https://player.fm/series/triggernometry/matthew-parris-on-a-second-referendum-and-the-future-of-the-conservative-party

Notwithstanding the fact you keep making assertions without providing any examples, you've literally described the authoritarian left then in a subsequent paragraph denied its a thing over there. For the record, what I am referring to is what is going on in the US, This is a US politics thread after all. Can you give me an example of something the "intolerant left" are doing in your opinion which is as bad and illiberal as say, the restrictive abortion laws being passed in Alabama?

It's not just the left though is it, look at anyone with a well thought out conservative position and they also hate Trump because of what he is doing to the GOP, which turns out isn't actually conservative but rather a bunch of evangelical reactionaries.

The point he's making is you will have no regulations so you will be able to allow in goods that you need, the EU will still have all the same regulations it had before Brexit so will have to stop goods at the border just as they do with any country that doesn't have a deal with them. Holystove has been been pretty much the sole source of dispassionate information since page 1, as everyone else has become more and more extreme in their position. Untwist your knickers mate

You're doing exactly what he is doing and taking the actions of a small group of authoritarians on the left and applying it to anyone/anything that identifies as left or liberal. Liberalism is a long established philosophical tradition and people closing down debate ie shouting down Ben Shapiro giving a talk at a Uni, or attacking Charles Murray at Middlebury College ARE NOT FUCKING LIBERAL BY ANY DESCRIPTION despite what they might claim. So people generalising like Piers or arseholes like Turning Point conflating liberalism with "the left" because it fits their narrative are just as guilty as the people demanding that everyone recognise biological sex is a social construct. There is a culture war going on and it is a moral panic, but it's both sides of the political spectrum engaging and people ,including you its seems in this instance, are choosing to see it only through the lens that confirms their own bias.

I am just going to assume you are pretending to be confused after publicly agreeing with the philosophy of Piers Morgan and we'll leave it there

Thank you, sir.

Thanks if can you delete (I can't work out how to do it)

I get this in a pop up You can only upload a total of 0MB. Please contact us for assistance.

Feature seems to be b0rked, what gives?

a) He only makes reference to liberals not the left b) he refers to the liberals as a homogenous group which they are not c) the phenomenon he is referring to is actually a very small group of people on the authoritarian left, those people are not liberals d) Piers claims to be a liberal but he has devolved into a provocateur spewing right wing talking points for attention e) Piers thinks Twitter is real life which is why he is confused about what is really going on f) Piers is not a very interesting thinker g) Piers is an arseclown

Yeah you also get the feeling that he genuinely cares about working class people and that is rare in politicians now. Everyone is trying to appeal to "aspirational" voters.

I think the correct response from Israel is give reasoned responses as to why they think shouldn't have suck a dick, theres valid reasons to criticise Israel (and also the Palestinians) and its actually part of their job as legislators to criticise matters of foreign policy. This is not a case of someone losing their show on TV because they've said things that would offend the sensibilities of advertisers. I wouldn't be so concerned if Trump wasn't goading the Israeli's into it so he can run a campaign by proxy against minority Democrats. It's despicable illiberal behaviour that you would expect from Putin or Erdogan not an American president.

It's cute how he BBC covers every one of his brain farts so dispassionately. This on the other hand I find quite disconcerting, unlikely many right wing free speech warriors will be up in arms about this. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-49373269

I'm not sure where you are going here trying to equate Trump with Clinton? Seemed she was always going to be a presidential candidate and has dedicated the majority of her life to public service.

Because from the outside its seemed like the US had two centre right parties (you did) before the 2016 election and Bernie really changed the conversation in a sensible "non woke" way that was appealing to people of all ages.