I find the whole situation bizarre in the extreme. I follow just out of interest Paul Mason on Twitter, at the moment they are organising protests around the country. He was chanting the other day Johnson we are coming to get you, we will remove you and your lack of democracy. If you want to remove him tell your mate Corbyn to call an election, it’s relatively simple.
The Labour position of not leaving without a deal is also absurd. The EU have made it quite clear the May deal is not open for discussion. That’s the only deal in town, that deal was voted down 3 times, especially by the Labour Party.

I completely agree about Labour’s position being a mess. Irrespective of his politics Corbyn just isn’t a leader. No shame in that, but it is a problem.

However, I think the reason they’re getting away with election dodging (apart from the country being polarised) is because they will accept one as soon as an immediate back door no deal is blocked.

Johnson can call it cowardice, but bravery in the face of an openly duplicitous PM would be of the variety Sir Humphrey Appleby used to warn against. Stupidity is worse than cowardice, especially temporary cowardice.

Tbf, in the probably unlikely event of Labour winning a majority the EU would likely re-open negotiations based on their more moderate position - if they finally choose just one. The issue would be that even if it all went smoothly, it’d take a good amount of time. Well into 2020, I imagine. And Labour then get stuck holding the Brexit blame ball.

The Labour party voted against the withdrawal bill because it was a hard, Tory-style Brexit. When the Conservatives went down that route they should have been very sure they could marshall their own MPs behind it because it was a very partisan approach to take in the Commons.

The EU would happily re-open negotiations if there was a material change in the British position - i.e. the red lines laid down by May, which she was not obliged to create, weren't mandated by the referendum and which made passing anything so much harder, would not apply if say a Corbyn government came in with their own priorities for what to get out of the process of our leaving.

Labours position (I think) is very different to the Tories and they would seek "A customs union", which, although meaning that we would still need to contribute to the EU (as Norway does), it would theoretically allow the UK to strike its own trade deals with the rest of the world.
To those not entrenched in either "leave" or "remain", this does seem like some sort of middle ground bur, it certainly wont appease the ERG or the right wing of the Tory party.

Duplicitous prime minister? If reports on social media and certain newspapers are correct, that the rebel conservative rebel group along with labour ,headed by Hilary Benn have colluded with the EU to agree to extend the leave period beyond October is true .This prior to the government vote. Then that would be staggering,that would make Labour’s claim of Johnson’s lack of democracy pathetic. This apparently made the Tory rebels vote down Johnson’s bill. I have a sneaky feeling Johnson has a trick card up his sleeve.

Absolute rubbish.
For a bloke who would "rather die in a ditch" than extend the deadline, he will do ANYTHING to get a "no deal" Brexit through.
Remember, he hasn't even tried to renegotiate the deal OR come up with a solution to the Irish backstop so, regardless of the rhetoric, a new deal is no closer now than it ever was.
Surprise, surprise, he has been telling porkies and pretending that progress has been mad, while just winding down the clock until the end of October. There is no doubt whatsoever that he and his cronies just want a no deal outcome and bugger the rest of us.

No its about a style of leadership - I doubt Thatcher would have stood for this type of behaviour either. The problem May had is she lead a terrible campaign in 2017, then under-mind the Brexit negotiators and once again was found wanting, she was in no position to upset anyone. Boris is in a whole different position - and to be fair to him 21 out of 320 is not bad on such an issue.

Out in the real world most people debate the topic but in the end if you lose the argument then you support the decision. Doubt many directors would survive long if they defied the board-agreed policy.

And yet, half of the cabinet, including many of the current incumbents, were going against May, the minute that thet were outside the front door at Chequers - hypocrites all of them.

If you have a party full of nodding dogs, you have a dictatorship.

One less now
Amber Rudd spewed it

Nobody said they were a party of nodding dogs - I'm sure Johnson and Gove don't see eye to eye on much but they will rally around an agreed policy - that is what grown ups do.

A dictatorship is where one person simple decides without consultation - this is not the case here.

Why has Corbyn not gone for a vote of no confidence - because his own MPs wouldn't back him and you suggest the Tories are hypocrites

If everyone was allowed to do their own thing you have complete chaos.

There has to be a resolution to the Brexit situation - it seems to me MPs will not accept no deal, will only accept a deal that is so close to our current deal that we are not really leaving. They were mostly elected on a promise of upholding the result of the referendum - hypocrites all those that have sought to frustrate Brexit.

And even worse Labour now don't want to give the public the opportunity to tell them what they think

Of course they wont, because the country will not vote for a party with Corbyn, Abbott et al around.

The party has an agreed policy - in voting Boris as the leader they knew what they were getting. You can't have a situation whereby every MP does their own thing it would be complete chaos. There would be no point of party politics if no MP followed the party line. Also what would the public be voting for? guarantee there wasn't one Tory candidate who said on their manifesto that they would actively fight against Brexit at the last GE.

You can disagree and have your say but once the decision is made by the majority then surely you have to support that majority that's the democratic way. So in your world if all the MPs decided Corbyn would be a better PM they should do that even if the Tories won a huge majority?

The ruling party had a majority of one not such a big achievement when faced with such a decisive issue. Let's see how many of the 21 would vote for Corbyn as a short term leader - the government's majority would hold up on that issue. I bet more than 21 Labour MPs would not vote for Corbyn on that issue.