Brexit discussion thread XII (Please read OP before posting)

johnnyskeleton

Enzokk wrote: »

At the moment there is no path to remain in the UK with the Tories in charge. There is no chance to revoke as the Lib Dems will not win a majority. Whatever Corbyn may believe about the EU, he is offering a second referendum with a choice to remain. If you are a remainer in the UK and your constituency isn't a current Lib Dem seat or close marginal with the Lib Dems then the choice is surely Labour.

It should be simpler than that. If you are a remainer in the U.K., vote Lib Dem, SNP etc. You might in an individual constituency tactically vote for Labour if the alternative is that it will be a Tory seat, but this would be voting for Labour through gritted teeth.

If youre a remainer, and Labour's pitch to you is that you should vote for them because everyone else has a clear view on what they want, its not a good look.

Also if Labour wins you don't want your leader to take a stance because if you lose he will resign, see Cameron.

Perhaps. I suppose its hard for me to put myself into the shoes of a UK Labour supporter, but from an Irish point of view, these British politicians refusing to nail their colours to the mast for fear of losing their seats is IMO one of the main reasons why the Brexit negotiations have stalled, second perhaps only to the fact that no Brexit deal can measure up to the deal they currently have i.e. being a member of the E.U.

How could he implement a policy he doesn't believe in?

Exactly.

He will get the best deal from the EU he can get as believing in Brexit doesn't mean a better deal, see May vs Johnson. So for me trying to focus on his personal view when it is the policy he will enact is a red herring.

I agree, its not about his personal views. What is the policy he will enact? No one knows. It's a bit of a "let the people decide" mixed with "a labour brexit" that is somehow different to a "bankers brexit" but which has no firm details.

Even if you accept that renegotiating a better deal and then letting the people decide IS a valid policy, what will he renegotiate? Will he negotiate for the UK to remain in the Single Market and Customs Union? Will he then campaign go to the people and say "I've negotiated a new deal, but its terrible because it means we cant nationalise the banks" etc?

The lack of leadership can be easily understood by comparison to Jo Swinson. She gets ridiculed a lot, called anti-democratic by Labour supporters by the dubious claim that she will cancel brexit and remain whether the people want it or not etc, but the bottom line is that she has said she thinks remaining in the EU is a good idea. It is clear what she wants.

I think pro EU British voters, even those who want to leave but on the softest of possible Brexits i.e. remain in SM and CU, should vote Lib Dem.

If that splits the Labour vote, that is unfortunate. But it would be better than another 3, 4, 5 years of wheel spinning

robinph

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

It matters what Labour stand for, and by extension it matters what their leader does. It's not so much what way he would vote, so much as what way he would campaign.

If I were in the U.K. and wanted to remain, I'd struggle to vote for a Labour MP. Even if they were an individual pro remain MP, one has to have an eye to what the Leader of that party and, by extension, a minority but significant part of that party, wants to do.

What else would you do though if you wanted remain. Unless you are in Brighton and can vote Green, Scotland and can vote SNP or one of the few other locations where there is a LibDem option then the only choice left that isn't some version of Brexit is to vote Labour and then vote for remain in the 2nd referendum if they get in.

Don't care what other policies they might have tbh, the only one I care about is stopping Brexit and the only way to that path which I can have any effect on is to ensure my small vote does it's bit to prevent as many Tories getting in as possible. If Labour then stop Brexit but start screwing up the country in other ways then they will be gone again within 5 years.

Brexit is the thing that needs to be stopped happening as it can't be reversed once it's happened, anything else that Labour might do can be reversed by the next government if needed.

johnnyskeleton

Sam Russell wrote: »

I think Corbyn should have answered the conundrum of how he will vote after he has negotiated his deal is to say: 'It depends on the deal - what I want is a deal that meets the six tests - If it does, then I will campaign for it, If not then remain is the better option'.

He should not get dragged into hypothetical question as there be dragons. It does not help that his own compass tells him that out of the EU is what he has always believed, and still does. And everyone knows that as well.

He should be on total attack of Tory lies, and particularly, Johnson lies. 'He is not dead in a ditch!' 'We are still in the EU, and Oct 31st has passed!' 'The PM pulled the WAB, not the opposition!' 'The 40 hospitals is a myth - there is no funding and no plans!' 'The NHS is under threat from the Tories - they plan to allow the US companies to run it for profit!' etc. etc.

He should not let the liars of Downing St win.

I agree, and it is the perogative of the opposition to criticise without putting forward proposals of their own. But Labour, under pressure from the Lib Dems, have been forced from their position of unarticulated fence sitting to one of, well, stated fence sitting.

Corbyn contributes to the very real feeling that there is a widening divide between politicians and voters (I hate the people vs parliament propaganda, by the way) because people are looking for leadership and decisiveness and a way forward.

The main complaint for people, as I see it, is not to do with any of the UKIP/Brexit Party/DUP claims of Brexit being betrayed etc, it's that they've been living in uncertainty for so long. Boris promises wrong headed but popular certainty, Jo Swinson offers sensible but unpopular certainty, and Labour offer.....answers on a postcard

johnnyskeleton

robinph wrote: »

What else would you do though if you wanted remain. Unless you are in Brighton and can vote Green, Scotland and can vote SNP or one of the few other locations where there is a LibDem option then the only choice left that isn't some version of Brexit is to vote Labour and then vote for remain in the 2nd referendum if they get in.

There is some substance to what you say. But while "vote for us because you've no alternative" may make some remain supporters vote for Labour tactically, others wont.

There is almost always a Lib Dem option, as they are running 611 candidates. In Scotland and Wales I can see Labour not getting any seats. Even places like Canterbury, which are billed as a Labour v Conservative marginal, could still get a Lib Dem elected if voters can get over the 2010 coalition government.

But as regards other constituencies, if the only reason to vote for Labour is because they say there is no one else to vote for, then a lot of people will just simply not vote or vote for a smaller party, knowing that it will be splitting the vote but not caring.

Even if people will still begrudingly vote for Labour, they aren't going to be out canvassing for them, encouraging others to vote, getting involved etc. If your pitch to anyone thinking of voting for a third party candidate is "go ahead, throw away your vote", then it is a position of extreme weakness.

Enzokk

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Ultimately, a lot of people just do not trust Corbyn. He has constantly demurred, prevaricated and obfuscated. Yes, he has now said that he will hold a referendum with remain on the ballot but that distrust is still present. He has associations with known communists who are openly hostile to the EU and who did their bit to frustrate Alan Johnson's Labour Remain campaign in 2016, namely Seumas Milne and Andrew Murray.

What you have said is not illogical. However, a lot of people are still wary of voting Labour when there is a party more committed to the Remain cause on the ballot even if their chances are poor.

No doubt there is a feeling among people in the UK that they cannot trust Corbyn. I don't understand it but then again I have no interest in the Daily Mail or other news papers that have been pushing this agenda. I do find the following interesting though in regard to the election, firstly it seems viewers thought both Corbyn and Johnson did well but Corbyn did do better.

https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1196918610528210944?s=20

And then this, it seems like the NHS is becoming more important than Brexit for people and this is bad for the Tories.

https://twitter.com/JoeMurphyLondon/status/1197139107501223936?s=20

This with the press now hopefully starting to ask Johnson the questions on where the 40 new hospitals will be and how he thinks they will build 34 new hospitals with the £100m allocated, I think there is still time for this election to turn.

ancapailldorcha

Enzokk wrote: »

No doubt there is a feeling among people in the UK that they cannot trust Corbyn. I don't understand it but then again I have no interest in the Daily Mail or other news papers that have been pushing this agenda. I do find the following interesting though in regard to the election, firstly it seems viewers thought both Corbyn and Johnson did well but Corbyn did do better.

Frankly, that's quite condescending. There are plenty of people who distrust Corbyn who've never purchased a tabloid here.

I don't trust him because he's voted against the EU ever since it was just the EEC in the seventies.
I don't trust him because he refused to share a platform with previous Labour prime ministers as part of the Labour remain campaign while being willing and able to refer to organisations like Hamas and Hezbollah as his friends.
I don't trust him because of his mealy-mouthed response to the Salisbury attacks.
I don't trust him because of his continued support for despots like Morales and Maduro not to mention the authoritarian Cuban regime.
I don't trust him because of his warmth towards the IRA.
I don't trust him because he took money from Iranian state TV.

Enzokk

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Frankly, that's quite condescending. There are plenty of people who distrust Corbyn who've never purchased a tabloid here.

I don't trust him because he's voted against the EU ever since it was just the EEC in the seventies.
I don't trust him because he refused to share a platform with previous Labour prime ministers as part of the Labour remain campaign while being willing and able to refer to organisations like Hamas and Hezbollah as his friends.
I don't trust him because of his mealy-mouthed response to the Salisbury attacks.
I don't trust him because of his continued support for despots like Morales and Maduro not to mention the authoritarian Cuban regime.
I don't trust him because of his warmth towards the IRA.
I don't trust him because he took money from Iranian state TV.

Fair enough, I should have clarified that it's not a Corbyn problem but a Labour problem. It is made much worse for Corbyn due to what you list as problems with his past associations and actions.

Strazdas

Enzokk wrote: »

And then this, it seems like the NHS is becoming more important than Brexit for people and this is bad for the Tories.

https://twitter.com/JoeMurphyLondon/status/1197139107501223936?s=20

This with the press now hopefully starting to ask Johnson the questions on where the 40 new hospitals will be and how he thinks they will build 34 new hospitals with the £100m allocated, I think there is still time for this election to turn.

Interesting : so far it has been 'Brexit, Brexit, Brexit' with Johnson but the voters moving on to other issues could be a big spanner in the works.

liamtech

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Frankly, that's quite condescending. There are plenty of people who distrust Corbyn who've never purchased a tabloid here.
...
I don't trust him because he's voted against the EU ever since it was just the EEC in the seventies.
I don't trust him because he refused to share a platform with previous Labour prime ministers as part of the Labour remain campaign...

I agree with you on the various opinions at play which are problematic for Labour, led by Corbyn, but for me the above is a massive reason for Labour losing support in the polls

As an example - imagine you could remove all sections relating to Corbyn's renegotiation, and dodging on the question of whether he is Remain or Leave in that circumstance' - imagine all of that was excised from last nights debate? Given how ridiculous BoJo came across in referring everythig (NHS, Economic Policy, the Environment) to brexit - Corbyn would have won hands done - by a landslide. The only major pitfall he had was on his Brexit plans

• win the election
• spend months (3 he said, more like 6 in my view) renegotiating, while tacitly endorsing the concept of a 'Good Brexit'
• Then returns and divides his party during the referendum -
• While he fence sits, and pretends he is entirely neutral

Its incredible in my view - in the strictest sense of the word - Not Credible

Aside from his Brexit policy Jeremy could be holding a winning hand here - and all of the other concerns you listed become simple 'he said she said's' - they could just be dismissed as opinions he held, always a man of piece, an honest Broker out to hear both sides' etc etc

Add co-operation with other Remain/Unite to remain groups- that's a full house, as far as i would be concerned.

But maintain his Brexit stance, and he is an easy target, and can be labeled the ditherer, who doesn't quite know what he wants, or at least wont say what he wants to the electorate

Bottom line is he did fantastic in the debate in my view. And i hope he does well but the best i am expecting is denying BoJo a majority

edited to make clear the nature of the original quote

Capt'n Midnight

robinph wrote: »

Brexit is the thing that needs to be stopped happening as it can't be reversed once it's happened, anything else that Labour might do can be reversed by the next government if needed.

More importantly once Brexit happens there is nothing stopping a Tory government undoing all the citizens rights inherited from the EU.


Meanwhile Boris Johnson aims to change National Insurance rules so workers will not have to pay it until they earn £12,500.



Sounds like a soundbite aimed at the lower paid ?

Oh yeah.

Because the threshold will be only £9,500 which is only £872 higher than it's at present. So only 22.5% of what was announced. :mad:

So Boris announced £11Bn and then more quietly dialled it back down to £2Bn.

But the PM said bringing in the £9,500 threshold sooner would "help with the cost of living" and "put £500 in the pocket of everybody" - although a later press release claimed the saving would be around £100 per person.

Both figures are still higher than the estimate of the Institute for Fiscal Studies, who said the threshold would save workers about £85 per year and cost the government £2bn.

£500 becomes £85
The problem is that people will remember the announcements and not the later corrections.

serfboard

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

The problem is that people will remember the announcements and not the later corrections.

That's propaganda for you.

Capt'n Midnight

It looks like remaining in the EU is kinda important. Service industries , GDPR , data adequacy etc.

Sunny uplands indeed.

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2019/11/19/who_loves_brexit_irish_disties_love_brexit/

Figures from tech industry analyst Context show a remarkable jump in server, storage and networking sales in the Republic of Ireland through the last two quarters, pointing to companies continuing to invest in insurance against a hard Brexit.

Against a backdrop of falling European sales, UK sales slumped 14 per cent in the third quarter, while sales in Ireland jumped 34.8 per cent in the second quarter and 26 per cent in the third quarter of 2019 compared to the same periods last year.

...
There are 55 active data centres in Ireland and another 35 in the pipeline – and eight of those are already under construction.

Janey Mack

Had to laugh at Johnson referring to his ‘great deal’ or ‘brilliant Brexit deal’ whenever he was challenged in the debate. His counter argument seems to be - they said I couldn’t get a deal and they were wrong - ipso facto - everything else they say is wrong.

I am reminded of this, written by a Yellowhammer Civil Servant -

“ I’m not an expert on the finer points of Johnson’s new deal, but it feels as if MPs are being gaslighted into congratulating him for the political equivalent of negotiating full price on a DFS sofa.”

Bit cynical

liamtech wrote: »

Aside from his Brexit policy Jeremy could be holding a winning hand here - and all of the other concerns you listed become simple 'he said she said's' - they could just be dismissed as opinions he held, always a man of piece, an honest Broker out to hear both sides' etc etc

Add co-operation with other Remain/Unite to remain groups- that's a full house, as far as i would be concerned.

But maintain his Brexit stance, and he is an easy target, and can be labeled the ditherer, who doesn't quite know what he wants, or at least wont say what he wants to the electorate

Bottom line is he did fantastic in the debate in my view. And i hope he does well but the best i am expecting is denying BoJo a majority

But unfortunately for Corbyn, of course, is that this is the Brexit Election.

From the individual voter's perspective it is hard to see why you would vote Labour on Brexit policy regardless of your position on Brexit itself.

Labour's rejection of no deal (i.e. cancel Brexit if they can't negotiate a satisfactory deal) is hardly a threat to the EU during negotiations since Brexit is not in the interest of the EU in the first place.

Then the referendum on the deal: if a very unattractive deal is negotiated then it will be rejected by the people and Brexit is canceled. Again where is the incentive for the EU to negotiate a good deal?

If you are in favour of Brexit you will reject Labours policy. If you are against Brexit, then the Lib Dems have a much more attractive position without the rigmarole of Labour.

Labour's stance made a certain amount of sense in opposition but now it is working against them.

Joe_ Public

Bit cynical wrote: »

But unfortunately for Corbyn, of course, is that this is the Brexit Election.

From the individual voter's perspective it is hard to see why you would vote Labour on Brexit policy regardless of your position on Brexit itself.

Labour's rejection of no deal (i.e. cancel Brexit if they can't negotiate a satisfactory deal) is hardly a threat to the EU during negotiations since Brexit is not in the interest of the EU in the first place.

Then the referendum on the deal: if a very unattractive deal is negotiated then it will be rejected by the people and Brexit is canceled. Again where is the incentive for the EU to negotiate a good deal?

If you are in favour of Brexit you will reject Labours policy. If you are against Brexit, then the Lib Dems have a much more attractive position without the rigmarole of Labour.

Labour's stance made a certain amount of sense in opposition but now it is working against them.

You would vote labour, i presume, if you saw it as the only or best way of getting to a second referendum. It is possible, of couse, that a lot of remain voters still wont but it still remains the case that a labour led government is the only reality path to remaining in the eu. The notion floating around today that the lib dems could somehow trade johnson into granting a second referendum seems fanciful to me.

quokula

Bit cynical wrote: »

But unfortunately for Corbyn, of course, is that this is the Brexit Election.

From the individual voter's perspective it is hard to see why you would vote Labour on Brexit policy regardless of your position on Brexit itself.

Labour's rejection of no deal (i.e. cancel Brexit if they can't negotiate a satisfactory deal) is hardly a threat to the EU during negotiations since Brexit is not in the interest of the EU in the first place.

Then the referendum on the deal: if a very unattractive deal is negotiated then it will be rejected by the people and Brexit is canceled. Again where is the incentive for the EU to negotiate a good deal?

If you are in favour of Brexit you will reject Labours policy. If you are against Brexit, then the Lib Dems have a much more attractive position without the rigmarole of Labour.

Labour's stance made a certain amount of sense in opposition but now it is working against them.

The Tories and the right wing media want it to be the Brexit election. Brexit is not the number one issue for voters, and it’s trending downwards. So it’s probably inaccurate to call it the Brexit election.

With that said Labour still have the only mature, workable policy of any major party on Brexit. They can’t pursue a damaging Brexit that would harm the country, and they can’t revoke out of hand and disenfranchise more than half the electorate. They’re doing the only responsible thing they can, even if it is potentially a harder sell.

Bit cynical

Joe_ Public wrote: »

You would vote labour, i presume, if you saw it as the only or best way of getting to a second referendum. It is possible, of couse, that a lot of remain voters still wont but it still remains the case that a labour led government is the only reality path to remaining in the eu. The notion floating around today that the lib dems could somehow trade johnson into granting a second referendum seems fanciful to me.

However I would wonder how many voters want a second referendum for its own sake as opposed to as a means of cancelling Brexit. I agree with your other point about Johnson granting a second referendum.

quokula wrote: »

The Tories and the right wing media want it to be the Brexit election. Brexit is not the number one issue for voters, and it’s trending downwards. So it’s probably inaccurate to call it the Brexit election.

With that said Labour still have the only mature, workable policy of any major party on Brexit. They can’t pursue a damaging Brexit that would harm the country, and they can’t revoke out of hand and disenfranchise more than half the electorate. They’re doing the only responsible thing they can, even if it is potentially a harder sell.

However legally they can cancel Brexit and if they were to get a majority on a cancel Brexit ticket they would have the democratic mandate to do that. Yes it would upset Leave supporters but holding another referendum is going to upset Leave supporters just as much particularly in the circumstances in which it is likely to be held under Labour.

The problems is that they can't change from their earlier policy in opposition to this now without being subject to accusations of flip flopping.

LuckyLloyd

Voting Lib Dem and in the process gifting them an extra maybe 10 - 15 seats but also confirming a whopping Conservative majority will be the last silly act of the completely hapless and defeated remain cause in the UK. If you want to stop Brexit you need a Labour government and the second referendum they will provide. That’s it. The Lib Dem’s cannot win this election which means they cannot enact their revoke policy which means a vote for them is a vote to leave on Johnson’s deal.

For sure, it highlights the major issues with using a general election to try and solve the issue but here we are. Voting for the Lib Dems as a remainer because you don’t like Corbyn is the voting equivalent of a selfish teenage tantrum. Useless and self defeating.

Bit cynical

Of course remain voters are going to vote tactically and and many will also vote Labour for reasons other than their Brexit stance, but these votes are in spite of Labour's stance. The position itself will have the tendency to drive voters away.

I can see why Labour are doing it. They want to appeal to Remain voters while still retaining some Leave support. But in an election trying to appeal to both sides of a particular issue can have the opposite effect.

listermint

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Voting Lib Dem and in the process gifting them an extra maybe 10 - 15 seats but also confirming a whopping Conservative majority will be the last silly act of the completely hapless and defeated remain cause in the UK. If you want to stop Brexit you need a Labour government and the second referendum they will provide. That’s it. The Lib Dem’s cannot win this election which means they cannot enact their revoke policy which means a vote for them is a vote to leave on Johnson’s deal.

For sure, it highlights the major issues with using a general election to try and solve the issue but here we are. Voting for the Lib Dems as a remainer because you don’t like Corbyn is the voting equivalent of a selfish teenage tantrum. Useless and self defeating.

Tactical voting on Both sides is the the only answer. Your simplistic stuff about voting labour won't cut it ever.


There has to be a shared tactictal voting agreement between labour greens and LD.

So far labour and LD are both being pricks about it.

gooch2k9

Bit cynical wrote: »

However I would wonder how many voters want a second referendum for its own sake as opposed to as a means of cancelling Brexit. I agree with your other point about Johnson granting a second referendum.
However legally they can cancel Brexit and if they were to get a majority on a cancel Brexit ticket they would have the democratic mandate to do that. Yes it would upset Leave supporters but holding another referendum is going to upset Leave supporters just as much particularly in the circumstances in which it is likely to be held under Labour.

The problems is that they can't change from their earlier policy in opposition to this now without being subject to accusations of flip flopping.

From my point of view I'd like a referendum as it could stop Brexit. If it didn't so be it. A second referendum on known terms deserves to be respected in a way that the first one doesn't.


Whichever way it would go would at least be an informed decision.

CelticRambler

Bit cynical wrote: »

Labour's rejection of no deal (i.e. cancel Brexit if they can't negotiate a satisfactory deal) is hardly a threat to the EU during negotiations since Brexit is not in the interest of the EU in the first place.

Then the referendum on the deal: if a very unattractive deal is negotiated then it will be rejected by the people and Brexit is canceled. Again where is the incentive for the EU to negotiate a good deal?

The EU negotiates trade deals with a willing partner. The UK - or at least the Leave campaign and enabling Tory government - has stated categorically that it is not a willing partner. From that point onwards, the EU's position is to protect its internal market as a priority and create opportunities for its own businesses second. Negotiating a "good" deal for the UK is not part of the EU negotiating team's mandate.

liamtech

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Voting Lib Dem and in the process gifting them an extra maybe 10 - 15 seats but also confirming a whopping Conservative majority will be the last silly act of the completely hapless and defeated remain cause in the UK. If you want to stop Brexit you need a Labour government and the second referendum they will provide. That’s it. The Lib Dem’s cannot win this election which means they cannot enact their revoke policy which means a vote for them is a vote to leave on Johnson’s deal.

For sure, it highlights the major issues with using a general election to try and solve the issue but here we are. Voting for the Lib Dems as a remainer because you don’t like Corbyn is the voting equivalent of a selfish teenage tantrum. Useless and self defeating.

listermint wrote: »

Tactical voting on Both sides is the the only answer. Your simplistic stuff about voting labour won't cut it ever.


There has to be a shared tactictal voting agreement between labour greens and LD.

So far labour and LD are both being pricks about it.

CelticRambler wrote: »

The EU negotiates trade deals with a willing partner. The UK - or at least the Leave campaign and enabling Tory government - has stated categorically that it is not a willing partner. From that point onwards, the EU's position is to protect its internal market as a priority and create opportunities for its own businesses second. Negotiating a "good" deal for the UK is not part of the EU negotiating team's mandate.

Tactical voting would win this for remain, but my view is that co-operation among parties would also be essential to assist a remain win . If One of Labour/LibDem/Green/Plaid ran in each constituency, and, leaving Scotland to the SNP (yes i know it is problematic for the Union, but the SNP are opposed to Brexit) then this would possibly be a revolutionary election - regardless of the Tory's massive lead in the POLLS, remain could win it in that scenario

Unfortunately that is not going to happen. Some blame both Swinson and Corbyn (especially Swinsons rather extreme revoke policy, which even to me as a remainer, i find difficult to justify) - However despite being a proper Lefty, i blame Corbyn for the lack of co-operation. And more importantly for the fact that Labour are not entering this election as a party of remain.

And as i have repeatedly said, arguing for a renegotiated Brexit along Corbyn based Red lines, is a tacit endorsement of the idea that a 'Good Brexit' exists - its doesn't, in my view

The only hope is now to frame the election on the NHS, Tory Austerity, and BoJo's lack of pedigree when it comes to being an honest politician. Il be waiting up all night for this one on 12th/13th December. But i suspect a win for remain is simply a loss for the Tories - ie no majority

Otherwise its over - no more Benn Acts - no More Letwin Ammendments - Brexit - done and dusted

Leroy42

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Voting Lib Dem and in the process gifting them an extra maybe 10 - 15 seats but also confirming a whopping Conservative majority will be the last silly act of the completely hapless and defeated remain cause in the UK. If you want to stop Brexit you need a Labour government and the second referendum they will provide. That’s it. The Lib Dem’s cannot win this election which means they cannot enact their revoke policy which means a vote for them is a vote to leave on Johnson’s deal.

For sure, it highlights the major issues with using a general election to try and solve the issue but here we are. Voting for the Lib Dems as a remainer because you don’t like Corbyn is the voting equivalent of a selfish teenage tantrum. Useless and self defeating.

But what if you a remain voter that doesn't agree with Labour policy? Just as people claim that once Brexit is out of the way giving the Tories a majority will give them licence to do whatever they want, the same is true for Labour.

So voting Lib Dems means that, if the numbers work out, Lib Dems could be the brake (should be) on the most extreme lefty notions of Corbyn and the rest.

And remember, that throughout the last parliament, the line that 87% (or whatever) voting for parties that stated that they would carry out the will of the people. Well a vote for Labour can still be argued that way, certainly in terms of Brexit itself.

stefanovich

CelticRambler wrote: »

The EU negotiates trade deals with a willing partner. The UK - or at least the Leave campaign and enabling Tory government - has stated categorically that it is not a willing partner. From that point onwards, the EU's position is to protect its internal market as a priority and create opportunities for its own businesses second. Negotiating a "good" deal for the UK is not part of the EU negotiating team's mandate.

Of course the UK wants a deal, as does the EU. Everything else is just posturing.

The EU is a protectionist entity at its core. The Germans will still want to sell BMWs to the UK.

LuckyLloyd

Leroy42 wrote: »

But what if you a remain voter that doesn't agree with Labour policy? Just as people claim that once Brexit is out of the way giving the Tories a majority will give them licence to do whatever they want, the same is true for Labour.

So voting Lib Dems means that, if the numbers work out, Lib Dems could be the brake (should be) on the most extreme lefty notions of Corbyn and the rest.

And remember, that throughout the last parliament, the line that 87% (or whatever) voting for parties that stated that they would carry out the will of the people. Well a vote for Labour can still be argued that way, certainly in terms of Brexit itself.

If you’re a remain voter remaining should be the priority. The Lib Dem’s cannot achieve remain so a vote for them is a vote to leave on Johnson’s deal. The only exception is in a seat where the Lib Dems already hold it or were closest last time out.

Yeah yeah, people don’t like that reality, but there it is. If you’re a remainer in a seat where your Lib Dem candidate cannot win a vote for them is a vote for Johnson’s deal by proxy.

LuckyLloyd

stefanovich wrote: »

Of course the UK wants a deal, as does the EU. Everything else is just posturing.

The EU is a protectionist entity at its core. The Germans will still want to sell BMWs to the UK.

Still peddling lines about the German car makers swooping in to grant the UK unicorns? Have ye paid no attention to the reality of this thing since 2016?

stefanovich

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Still peddling lines about the German car makers swooping in to grant the UK unicorns? Have ye paid no attention to the reality of this thing since 2016?

Friendly reminder that Brexit has not happened yet. Of course decoupling from the tentacles of the EU is going to be tricky. They deliberately made it that way.

Leroy42

stefanovich wrote: »

Of course the UK wants a deal, as does the EU. Everything else is just posturing.

The EU is a protectionist entity at its core. The Germans will still want to sell BMWs to the UK.

The EU is a club that is run for the benefits of its members. Is that protectionist, well I guess it is, but the individual countries within it are not as they have each given up protection of their own market for availability of other markets.

What the UK is trying to do is protectionist. It wants to set the rules that suit it.

On the subject of a deal, there was an opinion piece in the Irish Times a few days ago basically saying that the EU are going about this wrong as they appear to be thinking that the UK will struggle outside the EU. And whilst that is true in the short term, it will mean that within a very short space of time the EU will have a direct competitor, seemingly willing to race to the bottom, that will be very aggressive against them. The EU will still struggle due to its size, rules and make-up, whilst the UK will be able to adapt.

That might not be good for everyone in the UK, and that to me seems to be at the core of the misunderstanding by the EU. They seem to continue to think that at some point the government will look to what is best for the country as a whole, when all evidence seems to suggest that won't be the case.

Sam Russell

stefanovich wrote: »

Of course the UK wants a deal, as does the EU. Everything else is just posturing.

The EU is a protectionist entity at its core. The Germans will still want to sell BMWs to the UK.

I would put it the other way.

The UK will still want to buy BMW and Mercedes cars.

The extra cost will be 10% tariff on the import price of the car, or 7% of the retail price. This will also be reflected on the residual price of 2 to 3 year old cars, so trade up costs will be only slightly higher. Mercedes, a while ago, cut their retail prices by 10% across the board so they have the room to absorb the tariff.

The EU did not change their negotiating stance to reflect the UK obsession that the German car makers would put pressure on Merkel to put pressure on Barnier to give in to the UK - it did not happen.