Jump to content

mormont

Board Moderators
  • Content count

    39,676
  • Joined

  • Last visited

2 Followers

About mormont

  • Rank
    Vamos vamos Argentina!
  • Birthday 05/10/1972

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    St Andrews, Scotland

Recent Profile Visitors

34,139 profile views
  1. mormont

    US Politics: Shutbound & Down

    So Trump 'fighting for the LGBT community' is going really well then.
  2. mormont

    US Politics: Shutbound & Down

    On the proposed-and-now-rejected deal: Look, to be worth taking, any deal McConnell or Trump proposes that includes wall funding doesn't just have to be a good deal. It has to be sensationally good. Why? Because right now Trump is as deep in a corner as he has ever been, and he painted himself into it. If he doesn't get this wall funding, politically he is deeply, deeply damaged. Maybe finished. His base will not forget it. This truly has the potential to be the thing that breaks his hold over quite a lot of them. The stakes are very high for Trump here. This chance may not come back for Democrats. He can only be allowed to get that funding at a dear, dear price, if at all.
  3. mormont

    Best place for a particular topic?

    Generally, we accept threads drawing parallels betweeen ASOIAF and other media in the appropriate book or TV forum.
  4. This... is not analogous, sorry.
  5. mormont

    US Politics: Shutbound & Down

    Not really. The question isn't whether the other candidates can carry Texas. The question is, if O'Rourke can't, then what else does he bring to the table? To try to frame it the other way around is really moving towards to treating him as the default candidate. And that would be presumptuous to say the least.
  6. mormont

    US Politics: Shutbound & Down

    This sounds as if you're implying that the anti-O'Rourke sentiment comes exclusively from party insiders, which given that it's in response to Jace, is pretty amusing. O'Rourke may be a good candidate or a bad one. But it's allowed to be sceptical of him at this point. He is largely untested, after all. You don't need to don the tinfoil hat to explain away any opposition. Well, for one thing, I understand it has long been received wisdom that Presidential candidates should be able to carry their home state. If O'Rourke couldn't carry Texas as a gubernatorial candidate against Ted Cruz, why would anyone believe he could carry it as a Presidential candidate against Trump? That doesn't automatically rule him out, of course. But it's a point against him. Privilege is a hell of a drug.
  7. There's very little this particular British PM has the power to grant. Nevertheless, she's happily entertaining people from all sides of the spectrum right now who are asking her for things she has no power to grant, including that she should rule out a hard Brexit, that she should unilaterally set a time limit for the backstop, etc. Now, do I believe that Corbyn's precondition here is a tactical move to keep him away from this mess? Probably. I don't think anyone can doubt that I am seriously sceptical of Corbyn's approach to Brexit. But let's be adults. We do not need to adopt this overly literal, pedantic view of a political condition. We've already discussed what Corbyn means by this request: stop using hard Brexit as a threat to force through your rejected deal. If May were to respond by saying 'while I cannot necessarily prevent a hard Brexit happening due to factors beyond my control, I'm happy to do whatever I can to take hard Brexit off the table in order to make progress for the good of the country', Corbyn would have to accept that. But May will not do that, because she actively wants to talk up hard Brexit. It is her entire strategy. That is what is going on. We all know that. So let's not get bogged down in literalism. May has also set impossible preconditions.
  8. mormont

    Star Wars Thread: I KNOW WHAT THAT IS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    As far as I understand from context, it's a competent female character. Rey being a skilled melee fighter is established early in the film. I know that addressing things in novelisations is not ideal, but it applies here: it's explained that the mental contact between Rey and Kylo Ren was two-way, allowing Rey to sense things in Kylo Ren's head, including that the Jedi mind trick was a thing and how to attempt it. We're shown her using the helmet flight simulator, though, and that's basically the same as Luke/Anakin being expert fighter pilots instantly because they can use ground craft like landspeeders and pods. As a scavenger, she's shown as familiar with the necessary tech (and again, she seems to have repaired some of her stuff including the helmet herself). That's more backstory than the boys got. You largely got it, to be fair.
  9. You understand you're just going over the same ground I was already responding to? And that this has been discussed widely in the press and indeed in that Twitter thread, so I'm not confident that if you don't read it elsewhere, you'll read it here. But sure. OK. What Corbyn is asking, specifically, is for the PM to actually commit to a real consultation (as she should have done in 2017) rather than a cosmetic one where she insists the end result must be a deal substantially similar to the one just rejected. To ask for more time from the EU if necessary, and to stop using the threat of No Deal as her one and only tool to get her own deal through. I don't doubt that the EU will grant more time if there is a realistic prospect of a deal that will carry majority support, or a second referendum, or even an election. But May is ruling all of those out. No Deal is the only thing she won't rule out. The smarter play for Corbyn is to attend the talks and still insist that No Deal must be ruled out, rather than setting it as a precondition for talks. But still, it is not unreasonable to ask that the government rule out No Deal. Unless, of course, you're a Brexiter and fear that doing so would risk there being No Brexit at all. Hey, that sounds familiar. Oh yeah: it's Theresa May's entire strategy for resurrecting her deal by corralling the hard Brexiteers and ignoring everyone else.
  10. In asking for 'No Deal to be taken off the table', what Corbyn - and the SNP, and others - are asking the government to do is commit to measures that would prevent No Deal kicking in automatically. This is perfectly reasonable and makes complete sense to me.
  11. No. What 'managed No Deal' actually is, is a desperate attempt to make No Deal seem less scary than it will in practice be. What its proponents say it is, is some sort of process where we go out without a deal, but somehow make side arrangements on specific issues which will limit the damage. Nobody, however, can explain exactly what will be agreed and how, or how it will limit the damage. It's yet another fantasy solution which can't work in practice and on which nobody has done any work beyond five minutes on the toilet coming up with a vague concept.
  12. In what conceivable way could it be seen as leadership? May doesn't have 'steel'. Refusing to resign isn't 'steel', it's just self-interest. The best summary of the situation is this: despite the fact that it is palpably obvious that Parliament does not have confidence in the government, having repeatedly defeated it and resoundingly rejected its flagship and indeed only real policy proposal, there are around a hundred MPs willing to pretend they have confidence in the government because that's how much they hate Jeremy Corbyn. May is supremely irrelevant to her own survival.
  13. You're entitled to think that, but the facts don't really back you up. This 'consultation' is pretty clearly a sham: far from trying to 'pull together ideas', May has established as a precondition the exclusion of almost all alternative ideas, and that the only agreement she will consider is other people agreeing with her.
  14. No, that's not how things work. If nobody else is leading, that doesn't mean you are. Sometimes, nobody is leading.
  15. A few misunderstandings here. First of all, there is no such thing as a 'managed No Deal'. Doesn't exist. Can't exist. It is a pure fantasy, and we got to this stage by telling people they could have fantasy deals, so let's not do that again. Secondly, May was originally the most reluctant of Remainers, and did little or nothing for the Remain cause. She is no longer a Remainer, whatever excitable elements on the right would have you think. May has genuine red lines and specifically seems willing to accept whatever outcome she has to in order to end freedom of movement. I just can't see her signing up to any referendum that doesn't mean ending FoM. Thirdly, the hard Brexiteers are mostly not going to accept a referendum even if their preferred option is on the ballot, because they don't see the point in risking what they already have. It's not 'surviving' when your opponents are keeping you in front of them as a human shield. And May has not shown, and continues not to show, any leadership. Even now, her approach is to have 'negotiations' with the other parties, seeking a 'consensus', which actually consists of insisting they must do as she says. A second referendum is off the table. A Norway deal is off the table. Revoking A50 is off the table. But No Deal cannot be taken off the table. Is this leadership? Or just posturing? There's a difference.
×