Brexit discussion thread X (Please read OP before posting)

VinLieger

Maybe ive got my tinfoil hat scrunched too tight but as more days of this nonsense go by i can't help but think and feel this whole mess is some kind of experiment or project that was engineered and not just to split UK/Europe and the west at large as many generally accept is Russia's longterm goal.

The objective?

Im not sure, maybe to see if one of the oldest democracies in the world can be shattered and broken for all the world to see and shown off as an example for some sinister purpose?

Or to see if the politics of left and right can be replaced by something far more divisive and polarising and will ultimately distract people from the real crimes being perpetrated by the elite upon the impoverished?

Its getting to the stage where it all just seems to perfect, especially in the levels of chaos constantly being created, leave or remain the rifts created in the UK will not be healed for a long long time and with either result there will be impact felt far afield for possibly just as long.

VinLieger

Shelga wrote: »

Labour’s policy makes more and more sense to me. Never thought I’d say that! Imagine if, in theory, the Lib Dems got a majority with something like 35% of the vote (highly unlikely but still). They just revoke article 50 without a vote? Accusations of being undemocratic would be completely valid.

But they wouldnt be valid, if they campaigned on that platform and won the majority of seats then like it or not with FPTP that is currently and for quite a long time what has been considered democratic in the UK.

swampgas

Shelga wrote: »

Listened to Jo Swinson on Radio 4 this morning and thought she came across as very unlikeable and arrogant. I’m as hardline a Remainer as there could possibly be, but you cannot just say you will unilaterally revoke article 50 and pretend the whole thing never happened. I think this latest Lib Dem policy is just more digging in of heels, no attempt to reach out to the other side, no attempt to reduce the polarity in UK politics at the moment.

She’s clearly trying to be ‘bold’ as the new leader, all over the airwaves claiming she can go from 18 seats to a majority of 330+ in the HoC. It’s one thing to be ambitious, but try not to completely alienate half the electorate as you go. I think their previous policy of a second referendum was ideal- they were unequivocally Remain, but not without the informed consent of the public.

She also completely rubbishes the SNP and Labour in every interview- also unnecessary and damaging, as she’ll likely have to work with one or both of them in the near future.

Labour’s policy makes more and more sense to me. Never thought I’d say that! Imagine if, in theory, the Lib Dems got a majority with something like 35% of the vote (highly unlikely but still). They just revoke article 50 without a vote? Accusations of being undemocratic would be completely valid.

Part of the problem with FPTP, apart from the obvious fact that voters have to vote strategically, is that political parties have to position themselves so that they will be as successful as possible despite the distortion that FPTP produces. All of the parties are affected by it. Here in Ireland we can be bewildered by the way British political parties and politicians position themselves, once the FPTP system is factored in it makes more sense.

We can be grateful that the two attempts to introduce FPTP into Ireland in 1958 and 1968 were defeated.

Zubeneschamali

Nody wrote: »

Farage has now come out stating he expects an extension as Boris "new deal" will not pass through the parliament;

It looks to me as if Farage's favourite outcome would be No Brexit allowing him to get into Westminster by campaigning against the Tories. Of course, he can't say that, but...

Zubeneschamali

fergiesfolly wrote: »

I know the replies here will talk of the economic hardships and GFA, but how long can this nonsense continue?

How long could Switzerland and Norway be joining without actually joining or calling it off?

How long could Sweden be joining the Euro without actually joining or calling it off?

History suggests this sort of nonsense can go on for 25 years or more.

Zubeneschamali

Shelga wrote: »

you cannot just say you will unilaterally revoke article 50 and pretend the whole thing never happened.

Obviously, the LibDems can't do this unless they get an overall majority, but there is nothing wrong with Swinson setting that out as her policy. If they win the next election, they can absolutely do it, they'll have a mandate to do it.

In practice, the LDs are the fourth largest party and have no chance whatsoever of winning an overall majority, so a more likely outcome is a Labour/LD/Green government propped up by the SNP, who agree to hold another referendum with Revoke A50 as one option.

Winters

swampgas wrote: »

Part of the problem with FPTP, apart from the obvious fact that voters have to vote strategically, is that political parties have to position themselves so that they will be as successful as possible despite the distortion that FPTP produces. All of the parties are affected by it. Here in Ireland we can be bewildered by the way British political parties and politicians position themselves, once the FPTP system is factored in it makes more sense.

We can be grateful that the two attempts to introduce FPTP into Ireland in 1958 and 1968 were defeated.

The mathematics behind the FPTP system is quite interesting actually. Over time it will create and protect the two party system. I hate to gloat over other political systems but STV PR is so well suited to modern politics.

Seth Brundle

Mod: below standard posts deleted!

Quick reminder of the rules outlined in the first post:
Insults directed at popular figures are not acceptable in this forum
Please do not post memes, videos or comedy links here
Please do not be uncivil to other posters
Please use the report function to alert the mods when necessary

Also: POLITICS CHARTER AND GUIDELINES

woohoo!!!

We're in the middle of a social media campaign. Buzz words like anti democratic abound, which can cover everything that a pov is against. The all too brief yellow hammer document is being dismissed as fantasy, merely the latest iteration of project fear. In the post Brexit era, all the problems will be dismissed as fake news or the fault of EU/remainers.

Sunlit uplands will come if only people believed in making Britain great again. These logic free, tugging at emotions and feelings messages are the reason why no deal has such a high level of support. How to counter playing on fears and offering unicorns, that's where the challenge is.

Shelga

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Obviously, the LibDems can't do this unless they get an overall majority, but there is nothing wrong with Swinson setting that out as her policy. If they win the next election, they can absolutely do it, they'll have a mandate to do it.

In practice, the LDs are the fourth largest party and have no chance whatsoever of winning an overall majority, so a more likely outcome is a Labour/LD/Green government propped up by the SNP, who agree to hold another referendum with Revoke A50 as one option.

Bit hypocritical of them though, having campaigned for proportional representation, to take advantage of the FPTP system to ignore the Brexit referendum.

Seth Brundle

Verhofstadt puts an interesting angle on a benefit of being a member of the EU...

https://twitter.com/Channel4News/status/1173548730542448645


Meanwhile Hulk actor Mark Ruffalo throws some cold water on an analogy used by Boris...

https://twitter.com/MarkRuffalo/status/1173273612075376641

beggars_bush

Shelga wrote: »

Bit hypocritical of them though, having campaigned for proportional representation, to take advantage of the FPTP system to ignore the Brexit referendum.

they'd have a much higher representation in a PR election though

Igotadose

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Meanwhile Hulk actor Mark Ruffalo throws some cold water on an analogy used by Boris...

https://twitter.com/MarkRuffalo/status/1173273612075376641

The LBC guy this morning said this a.m. "And at the end of his adventures, the Hulk steals clothes off a clothesline."

VinLieger

Shelga wrote: »

Bit hypocritical of them though, having campaigned for proportional representation, to take advantage of the FPTP system to ignore the Brexit referendum.

How is it hypocritical? There is one set of rules, yes they campaigned to change them but they lost that fight so now they are playing by the rules that they have to use, to not do so would be handicaping themselves vs the other parties

circadian

VinLieger wrote: »

Maybe ive got my tinfoil hat scrunched too tight but as more days of this nonsense go by i can't help but think and feel this whole mess is some kind of experiment or project that was engineered and not just to split UK/Europe and the west at large as many generally accept is Russia's longterm goal.

The objective?

Im not sure, maybe to see if one of the oldest democracies in the world can be shattered and broken for all the world to see and shown off as an example for some sinister purpose?

Or to see if the politics of left and right can be replaced by something far more divisive and polarising and will ultimately distract people from the real crimes being perpetrated by the elite upon the impoverished?

Its getting to the stage where it all just seems to perfect, especially in the levels of chaos constantly being created, leave or remain the rifts created in the UK will not be healed for a long long time and with either result there will be impact felt far afield for possibly just as long.

I present to you, The Foundation of Geopolitics by Aleksandr Dugin.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundations_of_Geopolitics

I've noticed that Tories are calling Corbyn a chicken as often as possible, shoehorning it into conversations at will. As an outsider it's embarrassing to see because it just seems like rich schoolboy taunts. If the electorate fall for this tactic then they are well and truly doomed.

SeaBreezes

VinLieger wrote: »

Maybe ive got my tinfoil hat scrunched too tight but as more days of this nonsense go by i can't help but think and feel this whole mess is some kind of experiment or project that was engineered and not just to split UK/Europe and the west at large as many generally accept is Russia's longterm goal.

The objective?

Im not sure, maybe to see if one of the oldest democracies in the world can be shattered and broken for all the world to see and shown off as an example for some sinister purpose?

Or to see if the politics of left and right can be replaced by something far more divisive and polarising and will ultimately distract people from the real crimes being perpetrated by the elite upon the impoverished?

Its getting to the stage where it all just seems to perfect, especially in the levels of chaos constantly being created, leave or remain the rifts created in the UK will not be healed for a long long time and with either result there will be impact felt far afield for possibly just as long.

The EU had become a force to be reckoned with in a trading sense... now what powers would benefit from a broken UK/ weakened EU..

trellheim

ambro25 wrote: »

I'm on the ground, and have €10 on Bettel outdoing Varadkar if there's a Johnson-Bettel presser.

Juncker is Luxembourgish too, lest people forget: they're politically very astute, but they don't do wooden tongue much. Just ask Asselborn (their SecState, of "f***" at Salvini -fame, back in May).

Any mood music coming out of Le Bouquet Garni ? come on someones normally briefing stuff here

Kermit.de.frog

Statement

President Jean-Claude Juncker and Prime Minister Johnson had a working lunch today in Luxembourg. The aim of the meeting was to take stock of the ongoing technical talks between the EU and the UK and to discuss the next steps.

President Juncker recalled that it is the UK’s responsibility to come forward with legally operational solutions that are compatible with the withdrawal agreement. President Juncker underlined the commission’s continued willingness and openness to examine whether such proposals meet the objectives of the backstop. Such proposals have not yet been made.

The commission will remain available to work 24/7. The October European Council will be an important milestone in the process. The EU27 remain united.

President Juncker was accompanied by the European commission’s chief negotiator, Michel Barnier.

President Juncker will travel to Strasbourg later today and will address the plenary session of the European Parliament on Wednesday morning.

lawred2

Shelga wrote: »

Bit hypocritical of them though, having campaigned for proportional representation, to take advantage of the FPTP system to ignore the Brexit referendum.

What?

An Ciarraioch

Our exporters, at least, should weather the worst - 2019 sales to Germany almost equalling those to GB:

https://cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/er/gei/goodsexportsandimportsjuly2019/

Akrasia

Nody wrote: »

Farage has now come out stating he expects an extension as Boris "new deal" will not pass through the parliament; what's with the lack of faith and hard positive thinking these days in the Brexiteer camp?! We were told that was all that was required and now they are backpedaling...

Farage doesn't want any kind of a deal

He's been banging on about a 'Clean Break' brexit in an attempt to re-brand 'no deal' or 'crash out'

In a divorce, a clean break means a complete end of financial ties to each other. I wonder will Farage expect his MEP pension to still be paid after his 'clean break' happens and the UK renege on their financial commitments to the EU.

J Mysterio

swampgas wrote: »

This description by Mike Stuchbery in the ByLine Times of the way the UK has changed in the last few years is (IMO) rather scary. Some of my own experiences visiting the UK regularly over recent years would be similar.
https://bylinetimes.com/2019/09/02/goodbye-to-all-that/

One paragraph in particular stood out for me:


The next few weeks could mark the point where we finally recognise that the UK has slipped past a point of no return.

Its a good article. The UK is already screwed though, in my opinion. Societal discourse, politics, hopelessnesly riven.

This can't be put back together again, its effectively a civil war, though the violence hasn't started.

swampgas

Winters wrote: »

The mathematics behind the FPTP system is quite interesting actually. Over time it will create and protect the two party system. I hate to gloat over other political systems but STV PR is so well suited to modern politics.

What's curious too is that the British did a lot of work popularising and spreading it.

... because it was invented by the Englishman Thomas Hare and has been used in many parts of the former British Empire, STV has in the past been referred to as "British proportional representation". Nonetheless it has never been used by more than a handful of constituencies in the British Parliament. In 1917, the Speaker's Conference in the United Kingdom advocated the adoption of STV for 211 of the 569 constituencies in the UK, and instant-runoff voting for the rest. Although the House of Commons voted in favour of the proposals five times, the House of Lords continually rejected it until the nationwide effort was ultimately abandoned in parliament.

From: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_and_use_of_the_single_transferable_vote

The HoC voted for STV 5 times, and 5 times the HoL blocked it. It doesn't reflect well on the UK's democratic credentials - an unelected group of peers repeatedly blocked the will of the elected MPs, and the the UK has suffered the consequences ever since.

Bit cynical

Akrasia wrote: »

Farage doesn't want any kind of a deal

He's been banging on about a 'Clean Break' brexit in an attempt to re-brand 'no deal' or 'crash out'

In a divorce, a clean break means a complete end of financial ties to each other. I wonder will Farage expect his MEP pension to still be paid after his 'clean break' happens and the UK renege on their financial commitments to the EU.

Well it just means national financial obligations. Employee pensions would still be paid.

J Mysterio

Shelga wrote: »

Listened to Jo Swinson on Radio 4 this morning and thought she came across as very unlikeable and arrogant. I’m as hardline a Remainer as there could possibly be, but you cannot just say you will unilaterally revoke article 50 and pretend the whole thing never happened. I think this latest Lib Dem policy is just more digging in of heels, no attempt to reach out to the other side, no attempt to reduce the polarity in UK politics at the moment.

She’s clearly trying to be ‘bold’ as the new leader, all over the airwaves claiming she can go from 18 seats to a majority of 330+ in the HoC. It’s one thing to be ambitious, but try not to completely alienate half the electorate as you go. I think their previous policy of a second referendum was ideal- they were unequivocally Remain, but not without the informed consent of the public.

She also completely rubbishes the SNP and Labour in every interview- also unnecessary and damaging, as she’ll likely have to work with one or both of them in the near future.

Labour’s policy makes more and more sense to me. Never thought I’d say that! Imagine if, in theory, the Lib Dems got a majority with something like 35% of the vote (highly unlikely but still). They just revoke article 50 without a vote? Accusations of being undemocratic would be completely valid.

I have a feeling Labour will win a majority next time round, even as polls suggest this to be very unlikely.

Enzokk

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Statement

I thought there was supposed to be a press conference? If there is only a statement what can we read from that, that it didn't go well? Why else would they not have a press conference? Maybe one wasn't scheduled but Johnson never would give up an opportunity for some press time in an election cycle.

Kermit.de.frog

No 10 statement

The prime minister and President Juncker had a constructive meeting this lunchtime. The Brexit secretary [Stephen Barclay] and Michel Barnier [the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator] were also in attendance.

The leaders took stock of the ongoing talks between the UK’s team and taskforce 50. The prime minister reconfirmed his commitment to the Good Friday/Belfast agreement and his determination to reach a deal with the backstop removed, that UK parliamentarians could support.

The prime minister also reiterated that he would not request an extension and would take the UK out of the EU on the 31st October.

The leaders agreed that the discussions needed to intensify and that meetings would soon take place on a daily basis. It was agreed that talks should also take place at a political level between Michel Barnier and the Brexit secretary, and conversations would also continue between President Juncker and the prime minister.

Just to point out here if the UK wants the backstop removed that would mean any alternatives that do the same thing would in actual fact be permanent.

Makes no sense for DUP surely.

Kermit.de.frog

Enzokk wrote: »

I thought there was supposed to be a press conference? If there is only a statement what can we read from that, that it didn't go well? Why else would they not have a press conference? Maybe one wasn't scheduled but Johnson never would give up an opportunity for some press time in an election cycle.

Mistake.

Presser will be with Luxembourg PM around 2:15

Sierra Oscar

Enzokk wrote: »

I thought there was supposed to be a press conference? If there is only a statement what can we read from that, that it didn't go well? Why else would they not have a press conference? Maybe one wasn't scheduled but Johnson never would give up an opportunity for some press time in an election cycle.

There’s a press conference due shortly. There is a loud pro-EU protest just yards away so that could delay things somewhat.

A Dub in Glasgo

Shelga wrote: »

Listened to Jo Swinson on Radio 4 this morning and thought she came across as very unlikeable and arrogant. I’m as hardline a Remainer as there could possibly be, but you cannot just say you will unilaterally revoke article 50 and pretend the whole thing never happened. I think this latest Lib Dem policy is just more digging in of heels, no attempt to reach out to the other side, no attempt to reduce the polarity in UK politics at the moment.

She’s clearly trying to be ‘bold’ as the new leader, all over the airwaves claiming she can go from 18 seats to a majority of 330+ in the HoC. It’s one thing to be ambitious, but try not to completely alienate half the electorate as you go. I think their previous policy of a second referendum was ideal- they were unequivocally Remain, but not without the informed consent of the public.

She also completely rubbishes the SNP and Labour in every interview- also unnecessary and damaging, as she’ll likely have to work with one or both of them in the near future.

Labour’s policy makes more and more sense to me. Never thought I’d say that! Imagine if, in theory, the Lib Dems got a majority with something like 35% of the vote (highly unlikely but still). They just revoke article 50 without a vote? Accusations of being undemocratic would be completely valid.

Lib Dems are a bunch of hypocrites. Look at their stance in Scotland

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/17905487.jo-swinson-accused-39-utterly-grotesque-39-hypocrisy-brexit-independence-referendums/

https://mobile.twitter.com/Celebs4indy/status/1173522232322265088

http://scotgoespop.blogspot.com/