Rayvin

I mean if I'm getting back into the single market they can have my vote all day long tbh.

If it helps at all, I'm prepared to accept the heavy judgement that you and Gemmill (and frankly, anyone else) both think that Starmer getting lucky with a government crisis he had no hand in developing, and which he finally managed to land a blow with on about his 500th fucking try, means he's fucking certain to win the next election as long as I vote for him. I accept that you think I am naive for not believing this. It's tough to hear this, but somehow, I'll live.

That is close to tempting tbh.

Like fuck man He's misrepresented what I said and then run off into the hills with it.

You can have my vote if you recognise that being honest with people and working towards a restoration of a normal relationship with the EU is the only way forward for our country, and that this groundwork should start happening now so that you have credibility with the public when they eventually twig later on - or even as they twig right now, as they have started to do. You may have my vote if you are open and transparent about your intentions to play a longer term game with it, and ask me to be patient while you work towards this. You may not have my vote if you campaign for election as leader on the basis of doing 1 and 2, and then decide to abandon both entirely once in power. This tells me that my concerns do not matter to you, and I cannot trust you to work towards them. It tells me that you have a 'power at any cost' mentality, and that the only way I can engage with you, is by representing a cost. I do not recognise that opening the Brexit debate will cost them the election, I merely said that it wouldn't win them it. Those are two very different things. In my version, they're losing either way.

You came up with some arbitrary bullshit about the morality of my choice so I casually threw it back at you. I agree, they're not going to win the election by reopening the Brexit debate (despite the significant recent shifts in this opinion). But I remain convinced that this country is on the road to nowhere until that happens, and that it's not going to happen if the people who believe this don't make themselves visible in an electoral sense. The sooner we get to that point, the better. I remain unconvinced that they're going to win the election either way fwiw - we're all getting very excited about the last two weeks, but the Tories were utterly untouchable prior to that and once they dispense with Johnson, which they will, they'll get a boost. Starmer winning one trick doesn't mean he's got this all worked out. As I said earlier though, I'm prepared to be convinced of this if he starts actually getting somewhere.

I'd argue that no matter what Labour do while in power and out of the EU, it's not going to have as significant an impact on the lives of the less fortunate as rejoining the EU would in terms of the economic prosperity of this country. And moreover, I'd suggest that not taking a stand on this point is as bad as someone who votes Tory. It might even be worse.

Like I said, I'd take anything that puts FoM back on the table really. That doesn't change the fact that I need to commit to the position though. EDIT - As for the EU, whether they take us back or not matters less to me than the party I vote for at least trying to make it happen.

These points right here are really the end of the argument IMO. How does the "playtime = ability" argument deal with Joelinton?

I'd accept anything that restores freedom of movement. So I can leave more easily It's not about whether or not I know better than them, it's not my job to win them the election. It's about being an active part of their thinking - they will either group me under "this bloke wants back in the EU but he'll vote Labour anyway so his first loyalty is to the party, meaning we can assume we'll get his vote no matter what" or they will have me under "this bloke wants back in the EU and was prepared to leave the party over it, that's a vote lost that we would otherwise have". Which of those two positions is more likely to get me what I want? Myself and my issue are only relevant in their thinking if I'm being weighed up against their gains by going the other way - the only way I can diminish the appeal of the gammon appeasement is by sitting on the other side to them. And frankly it's a pretty lost cause based on how things seem to be, but I'm sticking to it because the right thing for this country is to grow the fuck up, admit we were wrong, and REJOIN THE FUCKING EU.

The PR point is fair but I'd need to be really convinced before I put a secondary issue ahead of a primary one.

I agree that Labour are the best bet for it to happen, but only if they believe there are votes in it. I am useless to my cause by throwing my vote at Labour and trusting them to just get it done anyway when they've already broken that particular trust in the short time Starmer has been in charge. So my choice is to be taken for granted by a party that is pandering to gammons, or to stand to the side and stick to what I believe is the single most important political issue this country has to deal with, which is rejoining the EU. It's not an easy choice, and I'm very aware that if I'm representative of a decent number of people (which I suspect I am given the numbers involved in moves towards the Greens and LDs) that it could mean bringing about another Tory government, but if we elect a Labour one that isn't interested in the issue then I'm no further forward than I would be under the Tories. If Labour come to understand that there is a serious vote winning proposition in rejoining the EU, they may pivot to it quicker than they would if I just throw in with the gammons and vote for them anyway. It's a long game, I'll grant you. And I'm under no real illusions that my vote is completely insignificant and this so called 'pressure' will likely not amount to much. But then I've never cast a vote in my entire life that actually mattered anyway (other than, ironically, the EU one) so I mean, what difference does it really make anyway?

As I've made clear before, I'm presently a single issue voter. That issue isn't nuclear power (I agree with your stance on that incidentally). The Greens aren't going to win power though so what their other positions are don't really matter to me. It's a wasted vote insofar as attempting to remove the Tories, it's not a wasted vote in terms of pressuring Labour.

Well he certainly won you over. I'm sticking with the greens for now but if he continues to improve on the run in to the GE at least it'll give me a difficult choice.

Where has this version of Starmer been until now?

I mean that article basically reinforces what was quite clear throughout but which some of us have struggled to see. They're not football people and we shouldn't expect them to be able to work well in this industry until they have more experienced football related management staff in place. Sounds like we had a series of problems throughout the recruitment process that were down to the boards naivety, although it's good to see them owning that. It'll all be fine but we need that DoF role filled and more broadly, we need more experienced people making key decisions.

Well this has been special The two standout moments I can remember for Shelvey for this season are being subbed on against Spurs and being sent off again within 10 minutes for two separate bookings, and floating a harmless free kick into the box for an easy opposition clear instead of shooting against a team that had an outfield player in net with 1 minute left to play in a game we needed to win. Clearly a player of absolute quality. "We played him so he must be good". FFS. We hired Bruce and kept him for 2 seasons man. And he was anything but good.

What misconduct charge does he have against Starmer?

Yeah it does tbh. Johnson should see this coming really but it'll be interesting whether or not he tries to hang on.

As a staunch republican, I wish her well as a human being but she'll get nothing beyond that from me. That said, she's a key part of the identity for some people in this country and I am tempted to say that the last thing we need right now is for her to die.

So is Starmer a tactical genius or is Boris a walking disaster?

Yeah that'll catch me, I racked up £20k of debt due to taking a 4 year course and coming from a financially challenged background (they gave extra allowances for that sort of thing back then). So that's another £500 a year on top of everything else. Nice. I'm actually fine with paying student debt (to the reasonable levels I had no, not the insane ones of today) but I'd rather not take another hit to the wallet given how unstable my work tends to be and how many other hits are presently landing.

Aye, sorry, I meant for them more than us Fair

My best guess, and I'm not even taking the piss here, is that they're now in the mindset of a small club and Arsenal represents a big day out. That's depressing as fuck if it's true, but this is how non-league teams react to drawing someone like Arsenal.

Well that poll is good news indeed. Long may that continue.