Brexit discussion thread XII (Please read OP before posting)

ancapailldorcha

The election is basically an all-in gamble for both sides.

If the Conservatives lose to Labour then Brexit is dead. This is the least likely outcome in my opinion. The press will support Johnson as they do seem to agree with his Brexit stance. The Brexit party won't have the same levels of support as UKIP enjoyed in 2015 so they can be written off.

Labour has bigger problems. Corbyn, in my opinion needs to drop any sort of fantasy about a renegotiation with Brussels and plump for a People's Vote. He'll never be Brexity enough for those who remain fully committed to leaving the EU so he might as well try and win over one camp who will otherwise defect to the Liberal Democrats.

The Lib Dems will most likely regain some of the seats they lost in 2015. Unfortunately, I think that the most likely outcome is either a slim majority for the Conservatives or a hung Parliament. In the event of the latter, I can't see the Tories going into coalition with anyone as they are simply toxic at this stage. The party of fiscal prudence and the union has taken a wrecking ball to both. One way or another, Brexit or Remain they are done for a generation once reality forces the faithful to renunciate their hatred of the EU and start blaming the people responsible for this mess.

quokula

schmittel wrote: »

To date no. But this election will be very different. It will essentially be a second referendum.

If 50% of the population want to remain and under FPTP a party needs somewhere around 30% to gain a majority, or be largest party then simple mathematics suggest the party of remain - Lib Dems - should fancy their chances of doing very well.

The Lib Dems have consistently been the party of remain, they campaigned in 2017 promising a second referendum, now their message is simply Revoke.

If you are a UK voter who cares deeply about remaining in the EU, IMO it is a no brainer who to vote for, irrespective of party loyalties etc.

If the Lib Dems end up being fourth largest party, smaller than SNPs as they are now, it will suggest either their campaign/message/leader is flawed or the support for strong remain is overstated within the electorate.

Yep, it's a no brainer to vote for Labour who have a credible chance of getting into government and are committed to having a second referendum between a soft brexit and remain.

A vote for the Lib Dems is basically handing the keys to the Tories.

Professor Moriarty

A sobering thought. Bookies have a Labour majority at 20/1.

A Dub in Glasgo

In Scotland, all 13 Tory seats had the SNP in second place in 2017. The Tories were second place in 8 seats, all won by the SNP. Do you think Labour and the Lib Dems are going to give way to ensure anti-Brexit MP wins? Not a chance, if anything the Tories, Lib Dems and Labour will be working out how they can unseat as many SNP as possible by working together

prawnsambo

quokula wrote: »

Yep, it's a no brainer to vote for Labour who have a credible chance of getting into government and are committed to having a second referendum between a soft brexit and remain.

A vote for the Lib Dems is basically handing the keys to the Tories.

It's absolutely not. The point in voting LibDem is that there are constituencies (as I've shown above) where they have a better chance of taking a seat off the Tories than Labour do. In some cases, a far better chance. And although politically speakiing, you might be justified in calling them Tories (if you squint a bit), the purpose of this sort of tactical voting is (a) to keep the Tories out and (b) to stop brexit or at worst soften it. Blinkered party loyalty is pointless here.

quokula

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

In Scotland, all 13 Tory seats had the SNP in second place in 2017. The Tories were second place in 8 seats, all won by the SNP. Do you think Labour and the Lib Dems are going to give way to ensure anti-Brexit MP wins? Not a chance, if anything the Tories, Lib Dems and Labour will be working out how they can unseat as many SNP as possible by working together

Pretty sure the SNP are going to sweep the board in Scotland regardless of what the other parties do.

jem

I realy hope Im wrong but my initial guess is that :
SNP will clean up in Scotland but tory's hold a few seats.
Lib dems gain votes but come back with around the same number as they have now.
DUP lose 2 seats (I hope they lose more)
Brexit Party gain 4/5 seats
Labour lose seats
Tory's gain seats due to split of remain voters and Brexit party taking votes from labour and tories slip up the middle.
My guess is that while remain has 55% of the vote with FPP tories will have a majority of 40+ seats and we end up with a hard brexit

FrancieBrady

Amber Rudd is standing down.

A Dub in Glasgo

quokula wrote: »

Pretty sure the SNP are going to sweep the board in Scotland regardless of what the other parties do.

They will not win all the seats, they will get about 50

Professor Moriarty

jem wrote: »

I realy hope Im wrong but my initial guess is that :
SNP will clean up in Scotland but tory's hold a few seats.
Lib dems gain votes but come back with around the same number as they have now.
DUP lose 2 seats (I hope they lose more)
Brexit Party gain 4/5 seats
Labour lose seats
Tory's gain seats due to split of remain voters and Brexit party taking votes from labour and tories slip up the middle.
My guess is that while remain has 55% of the vote with FPP tories will have a majority of 40+ seats and we end up with a hard brexit

The Brexit Party are predicted to win two seats if they are very lucky.

quokula

prawnsambo wrote: »

It's absolutely not. The point in voting LibDem is that there are constituencies (as I've shown above) where they have a better chance of taking a seat off the Tories than Labour do. In some cases, a far better chance. And although politically speakiing, you might be justified in calling them Tories (if you squint a bit), the purpose of this sort of tactical voting is (a) to keep the Tories out and (b) to stop brexit or at worst soften it. Blinkered party loyalty is pointless here.

Yes, true, in a small minority of constituencies that are Tory / Lib Dem marginal then you should vote for Lib Dem.

But on a wider scale, imagine the following parliament make-ups

Labour 330
Tories 320

Result: people's vote between soft brexit and remain. Pretty good chance of remaining, or worst case scenario customs union is maintained, freedom of movement stays, and the economy is largely protected

Alternatively:
Tories 320
Labour 300
Lib Dems 30

Result: Basically the same situation as currently, Tories continue to pursue a hard brexit while the opposition majority fail to work together as the Lib Dems have repeatedly ruled out doing so, instead voting on endless delays until the EU stops granting them.

In the above scenarios I've ignored the SNP, Greens and Plaid who all cooperate with Labour, and the DUP who cooperate with the Tories, so I don't think their numbers change the outcomes drastically (though clearly as we've seen with the DUP they sometimes can)

Joe_ Public

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Labour has bigger problems. Corbyn, in my opinion needs to drop any sort of fantasy about a renegotiation with Brussels and plump for a People's Vote. He'll never be Brexity enough for those who remain fully committed to leaving the EU so he might as well try and win over one camp who will otherwise defect to the Liberal Democrats.

I agree with you here. I'd certainly advise him to simplify the message and remain vague as possible on it, just hammer the second referendum part of it relentlessly and forget the other bit that comes with it. It does seem a fair enough position to me and pretty clear by any standard, but if electorate wont buy it, then thats a problem. Has to deal with it or they'll struggle.

hometruths

quokula wrote: »

Yep, it's a no brainer to vote for Labour who have a credible chance of getting into government and are committed to having a second referendum between a soft brexit and remain.

A vote for the Lib Dems is basically handing the keys to the Tories.

With respect, I think that's nonsense. Let me put it another way.

If every single would be Remainer Lib Dem voter votes Lib Dem rather than a tactical Labour vote, the worst possible outcome for Lib Dems is that they are third largest party in a hung parliament and they hold the balance of power.

The only party they will support in Government is Labour and the price of that will be new leader and second referendum campaigning Remain. Job done as far they are concerned.

quokula

Joe_ Public wrote: »

I agree with you here. I'd certainly advise him to simplify the message and remain vague as possible on it, just hammer the second referendum part of it relentlessly and forget the other bit that comes with it. It does seem a fair enough position to me and pretty clear by any standard, but if electorate wont buy it, then thats a problem. Has to deal with it or they'll struggle.

I think they need to clarify that the renegotiation is not a "fantasy" - they're not asking the EU to compromise further, they're dropping the Tory red lines which are acts of self harm. Dropping them is beneficial to both the EU and UK.

IAmTheReign

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

The tories have a deal with the EU.

Unless the Brexit Party want to swing in behind there won't be any pacts.

The Tories will simply say - "vote for us and we leave the EU within days"

Brexit Party selling no deal.

No contest really.

The Brexit Party could still do serious damage to the Torys if they want to. They can campaign on the fact that the current deal is worse than Mays deal which he Torys weren't willing to vote for, and they wouldn't be wrong. They can also paint BJ as a power hungry traitor who was willing to settle for any old rubbish as long as he got to be PM, and again they wouldn't be wrong.

quokula

schmittel wrote: »

With respect, I think that's nonsense. Let me put it another way.

If every single would be Remainer Lib Dem voter votes Lib Dem rather than a tactical Labour vote, the worst possible outcome for Lib Dems is that they are third largest party in a hung parliament and they hold the balance of power.

The only party they will support in Government is Labour and the price of that will be new leader and second referendum campaigning Remain. Job done as far they are concerned.

The last time the Lib Dems held the balance of power, they shifted that balance to the Tories. And they've already explicitly ruled out working with Labour repeatedly.

It's odd that you mention a second referendum as their "price" when that's literally already Labour policy, and not Lib Dem policy. And demanding that another party changes leader in order to work with them is not a negotiating stance, it's just pointless posturing.

josip

Strazdas wrote: »

I think she'll hold it. The only way she'll lose it is if the Lib Dems have a poor enough election. The party doing very well in a GE and she losing her seat would be rather odd (to put it mildly).

Can someone please post what the 'literal' Labour policy is please?
I (think I) know the policy of CP, LD, BP, SNP and even DUP.
But I have no idea of what the LB policy is.

Joe_ Public

quokula wrote: »

I think they need to clarify that the renegotiation is not a "fantasy" - they're not asking the EU to compromise further, they're dropping the Tory red lines which are acts of self harm. Dropping them is beneficial to both the EU and UK.

They've had months to do it and not succeeded. More explaining and more clarifying just sounds like losing to me. Just keep it simple: we're the party of a 2nd ref, the only party who can deliver it. Take a leaf out of other party's books and just hammer that message home. Leave the details to after. That's what id be doing anyway.

hometruths

quokula wrote: »

The last time the Lib Dems held the balance of power, they shifted that balance to the Tories. And they've already explicitly ruled out working with Labour repeatedly.

It's odd that you mention a second referendum as their "price" when that's literally already Labour policy, and not Lib Dem policy. And demanding that another party changes leader in order to work with them is not a negotiating stance, it's just pointless posturing.

They have not ruled out working with Labour, they have ruled out working with Corbyn. There is no chance they will work with Tories.

Second ref is Labour policy but it is still far from clear if they will campaign on remain.

On the leader question I am not sure it is pointless - if Lib Dems believe Corbyn is unfit to be Prime Minister, they are quite right to say they won't support him.

In the aftermath of a GE there is a deadlock and Labour MPs face the choice of getting into government if they change their Leader or opposing another Tory governement, they will change their leader pretty quickly.

Akrasia

Sam Russell wrote: »

If he looks at T. May's performance at electioneering in 2017, he will find that every constituency she campaigned in resulted in a loss for the Tories. She would have been better running through fields of corn.

Cause and effect, was Theresa May campaigning only in the marginal constituencies where her internal polling showed that they had lost support from the last election?
Is part of this the reason why Corbyn did better than expected? Because she ignored what she thought were 'safe seats' and focused only on those she thought were most at risk

hometruths

josip wrote: »

Can someone please post what the 'literal' Labour policy is please?
I (think I) know the policy of CP, LD, BP, SNP and even DUP.
But I have no idea of what the LB policy is.

Exactly, and therein lies their problem.

ancapailldorcha

josip wrote: »

Can someone please post what the 'literal' Labour policy is please?
I (think I) know the policy of CP, LD, BP, SNP and even DUP.
But I have no idea of what the LB policy is.

Depends on who you ask.

John McDonnell, the Shadow Chancellor addressed us at Parliament Square for the People's Vote rally so it does seem like Labour will be backing that. What is deflating is that renegotiating and then holding a referendum was the Lib Dems disastrous policy in 2017 so I'm hoping that Corbyn will be talked out of that.

quokula

josip wrote: »

Can someone please post what the 'literal' Labour policy is please?
I (think I) know the policy of CP, LD, BP, SNP and even DUP.
But I have no idea of what the LB policy is.

People's vote between Remain and Labour negotiated deal. Labour negotiated deal includes dropping the Tory red lines and staying in the customs union. It's pretty straightforward.

hometruths

quokula wrote: »

People's vote between Remain and Labour negotiated deal. Labour negotiated deal includes dropping the Tory red lines and staying in the customs union. It's pretty straightforward.

But what way will the party campaign in second referendum? Leave with their negotiated deal or remain in the EU? i.e what is their policy on Brexit?

Silent Running

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Across the UK., since June 2016, demographics will have caused a 3% swing from Leave to Remain.

Now all they have to do is get them out to vote. That's the hard bit.

Professor Moriarty

Akrasia wrote: »

Cause and effect, was Theresa May campaigning only in the marginal constituencies where her internal polling showed that they had lost support from the last election?
Is part of this the reason why Corbyn did better than expected? Because she ignored what she thought were 'safe seats' and focused only on those she thought were most at risk

A major factor in the 2017 election was that May literally did not turn up for debates and for campaigning. This left Corbyn with the field to himself. Johnson is a deeply flawed person and politician but he has charisma. He will turn up everywhere.

If I were the Tories, I would make this a presidential style dogfight between Johnson and Corbyn. The possible Achilles heel in that strategy is that, without doubt, there is plenty of muck yet to be made public about Johnson. If Labour can find it and make it stick then it could be a game changer.

quokula

I don't understand why so many people have trouble with the concept of a second referendum.

By definition a referendum has to have at least two options. The government would have to decide what those options are. One of them is clearly remain. I guess they could have no deal, or Boris Johnson's agreement as the second option, but if they rightly see both of those options as very damaging for the UK, why wouldn't they give a better second option?

I can understand hardcore Brexiteers being opposed to Labour's plans as they take the most extreme options off the table, what I don't understand is so many remainers in the UK, or people here in Ireland who presumably want a return to a good relationship with the UK are so doggedly opposed to the idea.

Professor Moriarty

quokula wrote: »

I don't understand why so many people have trouble with the concept of a second referendum.

By definition a referendum has to have at least two options. The government would have to decide what those options are. One of them is clearly remain. I guess they could have no deal, or Boris Johnson's agreement as the second option, but if they rightly see both of those options as very damaging for the UK, why wouldn't they give a better second option?

I can understand hardcore Brexiteers being opposed to Labour's plans as they take the most extreme options off the table, what I don't understand is so many remainers in the UK, or people here in Ireland who presumably want a return to a good relationship with the UK are so doggedly opposed to the idea.

Brexiteers could make a strong argument that the decision to leave has been made. Following that logic, the only question to be asked in a second referendum is whether Britain leaves with Johnson's deal or No Deal.

quokula

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Brexiteers could make a strong argument that the decision to leave has been made. Following that logic, the only question to be asked in a second referendum is whether Britain leaves with Johnson's deal or No Deal.

Oh I totally understand that. But most of the criticism seems to be coming from remainers, even though Labour's policy is their absolute best case possible.

ambro25

quokula wrote: »

I don't understand why so many people have trouble with the concept of a second referendum.

By definition a referendum has to have at least two options. The government would have to decide what those options are. One of them is clearly remain. I guess they could have no deal, or Boris Johnson's agreement as the second option, but if they rightly see both of those options as very damaging for the UK, why wouldn't they give a better second option?

I can understand hardcore Brexiteers being opposed to Labour's plans as they take the most extreme options off the table, what I don't understand is so many remainers in the UK, or people here in Ireland who presumably want a return to a good relationship with the UK are so doggedly opposed to the idea.

For many of them, because they lack any meaningful understanding of 'democracy' as heavily-codified systems (all implementations of democratic representation are such), and so mistake an advisory referendum for an ochlocracy.

Hence the "implement the 2016 referendum result first" -type of arguments.