Brexit Referendum Superthread

catbear

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

But having a vote now means in Scotland the issue wont be as much brexit but the desire for another referendum and SNP could lose seats to those against the referendum.

Can't see that happening. There's no reason for anyone to vote Tory in Scotland now as even a few returned seats would have little or no impact on the ground.

Scotland actually has more leverage with the threat of breaking up the union because of a hard brexit and I can't see scottish voters rolling over on that.

However if May hovers up the 4 million Ukip votes from the last election then she has some room for a soft Brexit and keeping the UK together.

ArmaniJeanss

People probably need to be realistic about the LibDems aims in this GE. Starting from a base of just 9 they will likely target somewhere round 22/25 seats.
They don't have the money, the candidates or the people on the ground to be a serious player in enough constituencies to threaten anywhere close to the number of seats needed to beat even a destabilised Labour overall.

ancapailldorcha

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

People probably need to be realistic about the LibDems aims in this GE. Starting from a base of just 9 they will likely target somewhere round 22/25 seats.
They don't have the money, the candidates or the people on the ground to be a serious player in enough constituencies to threaten anywhere close to the number of seats needed to beat even a destabilised Labour overall.

True but also bear in mind that there is a vacuum at the moment with Labour lurching off to the far left and the Tories heading back to the right.

wes

catbear wrote: »

However if May hovers up the 4 million Ukip votes from the last election then she has some room for a soft Brexit and keeping the UK together.

Soft Brexit would kill IndyRef 2, and Sturgeon would be mad to go ahead in that scenario, but I don't think thats the case. The Torys seems to be going for a hard Brexit, one way or the other.

Jayop

Just incase like me you rarely look beyond threads that you have already posted in, there's a new thread for the GE.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057730772

catbear

demfad wrote: »

Ergo: It is not possible for Labour to run in coalition with Libdems
Ergo: Easy win for Tories against split opposition.

I take your point but post corbyn Labour or Labour offshoot could be a runner.

oscarBravo

Sterling has strengthened on news of the election. The reason is interesting (and topical for this thread): the markets seem to believe that a larger Tory majority will mean a softer Brexit, as May won't be under so much pressure to appease hardliners.

awec

This post has been deleted.

ancapailldorcha

awec wrote: »

She had a mandate. Britain doesn't vote for a PM, there have been loads of PMs in Britain that got there without an election.

True but she said the same to Gordon Brown before although she is calling an election now rather than waiting out her term.

Jayop

awec wrote: »

She had a mandate. Britain doesn't vote for a PM, there have been loads of PMs in Britain that got there without an election.

Technically you're true, but it's my view that if the PM is replaced mid term they should go back to the polls. While the electorate don't vote for a pm they do know before the election who the party leaders are and if they vote for x party it's a vote for their leader as pm.

It's perfectly fair to say she doesn't have as legitimate a mandate as Cameron had.

steddyeddy

She hasn't got a leg to stand on regarding indyref2 now. "Now is not the time" will be significantly harder to sell after today's events.

Calina

steddyeddy wrote: »

She hasn't got a leg to stand on regarding indyref2 now. "Now is not the time" will be significantly harder to sell after today's events.

Arguably, this doesn't trouble her when you bear in mind the way that arguments in favour of Brexit could be applied to Scottish independence from the UK.

Sam Russell

Calina wrote: »

Arguably, this doesn't trouble her when you bear in mind the way that arguments in favour of Brexit could be applied to Scottish independence from the UK.

Well, everyone who is in favour of Brexit opposes Scottish Ind. for exactly the same reason but applied for the opposite reason by some form of mental gymnastics. It applies conversely as well.

This is not the right time - for what, a general election, or a second Scottish Referendum?

Well, if the SNP snap up all the seats in Scotland, can they be denied?

Calina

Sam Russell wrote: »

Well, everyone who is in favour of Brexit opposes Scottish Ind. for exactly the same reason but applied for the opposite reason by some form of mental gymnastics. It applies conversely as well.

This is not the right time - for what, a general election, or a second Scottish Referendum?

Well, if the SNP snap up all the seats in Scotland, can they be denied?

Nowhen is ever the right time for anything; these are excuses.

The main thing that I think Sturgeon needs to be sure of is that if she gets a referendum, she is reasonably sure of winning it this time. Her current numbers suggest they should not be denied.

In the meantime, I am wondering what will happen if the Tory Party fail to make a majority - it is highly unlikely - but a hung Parliament would make things very interesting given that there's a timer ticking away now.

Enzokk

oscarBravo wrote: »

Sterling has strengthened on news of the election. The reason is interesting (and topical for this thread): the markets seem to believe that a larger Tory majority will mean a softer Brexit, as May won't be under so much pressure to appease hardliners.

Which doesn't make sense to me, if anything a small majority is more likely to mean a softer Brexit as the party will need support from the opposition as the staunch anti-EU Tories could derail any plans for votes in the future. If she has a bigger majority, unless those taking the place of the Labour politicians are more pro-EU it seems that it is more likely to result in a harder Brexit.

Also, all indications from May has been a hard Brexit. She doesn't want to be part of the customs union to negotiate their own trade deals, she doesn't want free movement so less access to the market than they presently have and she doesn't want anything to do with the ECJ. Unless they think she flips flops on all her positions, which is possible, I don't see how she changes from a hard Brexit to a softer stance.

oscarBravo

Enzokk wrote: »

Which doesn't make sense to me, if anything a small majority is more likely to mean a softer Brexit as the party will need support from the opposition as the staunch anti-EU Tories could derail any plans for votes in the future. If she has a bigger majority, unless those taking the place of the Labour politicians are more pro-EU it seems that it is more likely to result in a harder Brexit.

Also, all indications from May has been a hard Brexit. She doesn't want to be part of the customs union to negotiate their own trade deals, she doesn't want free movement so less access to the market than they presently have and she doesn't want anything to do with the ECJ. Unless they think she flips flops on all her positions, which is possible, I don't see how she changes from a hard Brexit to a softer stance.

That was my take on it too - including your last sentence. Trying to predict May's actions is starting to feel like trying to predict Trump's.

demfad

Enzokk wrote: »

Which doesn't make sense to me, if anything a small majority is more likely to mean a softer Brexit as the party will need support from the opposition as the staunch anti-EU Tories could derail any plans for votes in the future.If she has a bigger majority, unless those taking the place of the Labour politicians are more pro-EU it seems that it is more likely to result in a harder Brexit.

Also, all indications from May has been a hard Brexit. She doesn't want to be part of the customs union to negotiate their own trade deals, she doesn't want free movement so less access to the market than they presently have and she doesn't want anything to do with the ECJ. Unless they think she flips flops on all her positions, which is possible, I don't see how she changes from a hard Brexit to a softer stance.

The candidates she selects are key. Already the hardliners are pushing for a purge.


Edit: I actually think hard Brexit candidates will get less votes. Hard Brexit isn't popular.

Peregrinus

oscarBravo wrote: »

That was my take on it too - including your last sentence. Trying to predict May's actions is starting to feel like trying to predict Trump's.

Actually, this is being driven from the other end, so to speak.

If May doesn't hold an election now, the next election is due in May 2020. What will the UK political landscape look like then? There are two possibilities:

1. Brexit negotiations conclude on schedule or within a reasonable time after the scheduled end (in March 2019) and the Brits have just completed their first year or so outside the EU. Some people are upset because the Brexit was not as hard as they wanted. Others are upset because the Brexit was harder than they wanted. And many people are upset because, although they voted for Brexit, they now have to live with the consequences of their decision and they are looking for someone to blame for that. Still others are upset because they are having to live with a Brexit that they always oppposed, and they (rightly) blame the Tories for this.

All in all, there's lots of upset going around, and this is maybe not the best time (from the incumbent's point of view) to have an election.

Plus, remember, May was a remainer during the Brexit campaign. Unless we assume she was lying through her teeth - always possible in a politician - we can conclude that she thinks Brexit is, on balance, bad for the UK and that the UK will be worse off in three years' time than it is today.

2. Brexit negotations don't conclude on schedule, but get extended. That's even worse, because it means negotations have not gone well, there has been friction. If the negotiations are still ongoing, the government looks incompetent plus there is obviously real uncertainty about how all this will end. Again, not a great time to be an incumbent facing into an election.

So, the main point of holding the elections now is so that you don't have to go to the people again until June 2022, hopefully three years after Brexit implementation with enough time for some of the Brexit-related discontent to dissipate, and for new issues to come to centre stage.

Enzokk

demfad wrote: »

The candidates she selects are key. Already the hardliners are pushing for a purge.


Edit: I actually think hard Brexit candidates will get less votes. Hard Brexit isn't popular.

If your opposition offers your voters nothing different in terms of Brexit, which Labour under Corbyn will not, the dislike of Corbyn should mean more votes for unpopular candidates. It is funny though that people will agree with Corbyn's stance on most issues, even hard conservatives, but the image of the man takes precedence over the issues.

In any case I don't see how a UK general election changes much for the Brexit negotiations, other than condensing an already tight schedule. I predict that the UK will walk away with a terrible deal of their own making because Theresa May has decided to have a general election now instead of before the triggering of article 50.

The key people that will negotiate for the UK shouldn't change either, so even if their are more pro-EU MPs in parliament it doesn't matter if David Davis is still the man leading the charge.

At the end of all this the media will blame the EU for what they will perceive as punishment, yet the UK will be the one with the blown off foot and the smoking gun will be in their own hands.

Enzokk

Peregrinus wrote: »

Plus, remember, May was a remainer during the Brexit campaign. Unless we assume she was lying through her teeth - always possible in a politician - we can conclude that she thinks Brexit is, on balance, bad for the UK and that the UK will be worse off in three years' time than it is today.

Agree with your post, after triggering article 50 this was the only time to hold an election. In hindsight she should have triggered an election before article 50 but that is past now. I don't agree that she was a remainer. I think she wanted to Brexit, but she is maybe not shrewd but opportunistic and decided to stick with her boss who wanted to Remain. That is the only reason she was for Remain. The fact that she is staunchly against the common market and the ECJ now seems to more of her true intentions than some token speeches of what they thought should have been a comfortable vote to stay in the EU.

She hedged her bets and she won the ultimate prize, even if she wasn't playing the stakes for leadership at the time. That was Boris Johnson who threw in all his chips to become leader for something he probably didn't believe in either. Strange how that turned out.

demfad

Enzokk wrote: »

If your opposition offers your voters nothing different in terms of Brexit, which Labour under Corbyn will not, the dislike of Corbyn should mean more votes for unpopular candidates. It is funny though that people will agree with Corbyn's stance on most issues, even hard conservatives, but the image of the man takes precedence over the issues.

I don't agree with you. Labour voters who don't like Corbyn won't vote for a hard Brexiter. Why would they? They will vote Lib Dem.
Corbyn is the leader of a political party now. Part of his job is to translate his 'stances' into coherent actionable party policy. He has been treated unfairly by the press I agree. That does not excuse his many flaws as leader of the opposition.

In any case I don't see how a UK general election changes much for the Brexit negotiations, other than condensing an already tight schedule. I predict that the UK will walk away with a terrible deal of their own making because Theresa May has decided to have a general election now instead of before the triggering of article 50.

By 2019 the excruciating drip of leaks about the terrible deal will have sunk into the electorate. Also, in all probability Trump-Russia will have long blown up 'yugely' with contagion (same bad actors in both) casting doubt on Brexit.
Without an election now it would be very difficult to resist the calls for one later or even a second referendum on the deal. She must avoid a plebiscite on the actual known deal AT ALL COSTS.

The key people that will negotiate for the UK shouldn't change either, so even if their are more pro-EU MPs in parliament it doesn't matter if David Davis is still the man leading the charge.

That's assuming a Tory win. If Corbyn resigned tomorrow replaced by (eg) Kerr Starmer, you might not be as confident.

At the end of all this the media will blame the EU for what they will perceive as punishment, yet the UK will be the one with the blown off foot and the smoking gun will be in their own hands.

As the Washington Post says 'democracy dies in darkness'. When the editor of the Daily Mail is the only person to have visited T May in no. 10 then you've got a sure sign that twilight is upon the UK.

A Dub in Glasgo

Sam Russell wrote: »

Well, if the SNP snap up all the seats in Scotland, can they be denied?

The SNP does not even need all the seats, a simple majority will be fine

Water John

There are attempts, not Sam here, to set the bar very high for the SNP.
Almost of the line, that if they don't take all the seats this time, they actually lost.

Sam Russell

Water John wrote: »

There are attempts, not Sam here, to set the bar very high for the SNP.
Almost of the line, that if they don't take all the seats this time, they actually lost.

Is that not always the way.

In the last election, the Tories got 37% of the vote and had a magnificent election and victory. Labour got 32% of the vote and had a disastrous election.

It is called spin. A few slim majorities going the other way, and it would be a different story.

It is said that 42% for the Tories would give them a majority of over 100 seats.

steddyeddy

Theresa May had no real opposition in parliament. The 2nd largest party, Labour are a mess at the moment and neither the SNP or LIb dems pose a serious threat to Brexit.

I personally don't think May wants to minimise the Brexit hardliners in her party. First of all nothing May has said has given me reason to think she's not a hardliner. Secondly as previous posters have said, shes's not one to compromise on her beliefs. Anything she does has been with conviction. We've seen hints that she's quite Thatcheresque in her approach to thing like the North and even how she deals with her own cabinet. If anyone watched Newsnight last night it was clear that she didn't consult with all of them prior to this election.

So I don't buy the theory that she's appeasing anyone. It's more likely that she's engaging in party political politics and using Labours troubles to gain a larger majority. Not in the country's benefit at all.

ancapailldorcha

May's principal aims seem to be withdrawing from the ECHR and cutting migration down to the tens of thousands. The way I see it is that she needs a bigger majority to justify leaving the single market for the sole reason of achieving these insane goals. At the moment, a small number of Tories could topple her.

steddyeddy

George Osbourne quits as MP. From the Independent.

ancapailldorcha

steddyeddy wrote: »

George Osbourne quits as MP. From the Independent.

I find the idea of Labour MP's standing down to be more concerning:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/uk-general-election-snap-2017-labour-losses-seats-polls-projection-prediction-a7689611.html

Osborne was already taking flak for editing the standard and for his actions during the EU referendum. His hopes of being leader are in the bin. Labour could reinvent itself as a party opposing Brexit while supporting state support for areas experiencing high immigration. Alas...

steddyeddy

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I find the idea of Labour MP's standing down to be more concerning:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/uk-general-election-snap-2017-labour-losses-seats-polls-projection-prediction-a7689611.html

Osborne was already taking flak for editing the standard and for his actions during the EU referendum. His hopes of being leader are in the bin. Labour could reinvent itself as a party opposing Brexit while supporting state support for areas experiencing high immigration. Alas...

If May really wants to destroy the SNP she shouldn't aim to crush Labour. When they're on the best game they're the real competition for the SNP, not the Tories. Most Scottish seem to have an ideological opposition to Tory policies.

ancapailldorcha

steddyeddy wrote: »

If May really wants to destroy the SNP she shouldn't aim to crush Labour. When they're on the best game they're the real competition for the SNP, not the Tories. Most Scottish seem to have an ideological opposition to Tory policies.

The SNP seems to be here to stay though. Nothing May does in the short term will change that.