Brexit discussion thread XII (Please read OP before posting)

Joe_ Public

No fan of Amber Rudd, windrush just for one, but way they are treating her speaks volumes. Give her the whip back and let her go out with dignity, but no, they wont do that. A warning to others, i suppose. The "nasty" party eating its own.

Varta

Joe_ Public wrote: »

No fan of Amber Rudd, windrush just for one, but way they are treating her speaks volumes. Give her the whip back and let her go out with dignity, but no, they wont do that. A warning to others, i suppose. The "nasty" party eating its own.

And the the members of the Labour party give each other chocolates and flowers each day.

Strazdas

Shelga wrote: »

“You could argue”- meaning you could take wild guesses at what 60% of the electorate actually want.

If you want an answer to a specific question, a referendum is the only way to do it. Yes, it would be divisive and toxic, but it’s the only way to ask the electorate to specify what they want done with Brexit.

If the Lib Dems won a majority, how would they be implementing the result of an advisory referendum that was held four years ago by another party? They didn't hold the referendum and didn't seek the electorate's advice on anything.

CelticRambler

Varta wrote: »

Know your audience and target your audience and ideally have several audiences, all of whom know little about the other audiences. That is how the clever tacticians will try to manipulate this election.

Yep - but don't assume that the clever tacticians are all/only on the Tory/BP/Leave side. Remember Cummings is supposed to be one of them and look at the mess he created. That is why I think any predictions this far out are pointless and likely to be way off the mark - it'll take a few weeks at least for the different parties to refine their strategies, attempt to read the minds of the other parties and appropriately target the right audiences

In today's unstable landscape, if they mess things up along the way (get the timing wrong, misjudge the audience's appetite for a particular policy position, overlook some tangential issue that suddently takes centre stage, have candidate that looks sideways at the wrong blogger ... ) that could spiral out of control.

Even though I don't believe there's a snowball's chance of the Lib Dems achieving a majority, the notion that every GE is effectively Tory vs Labour (in England, obviously) is well and truly dead and buried now. Leave vs Remain sealed its fate, and the by-elections have shown that people will abandon their old allegiances if there's a reasonable alternative. Unless there are pacts to avoid it, I think we'll see an awful lot of four-way contests that are "too close to call" on the night.

It should make for a great Christmas Special ! :cool:

Rjd2

Varta wrote: »

And the the members of the Labour party give each other chocolates and flowers each day.

This thread looks like its going to be Tory bashing and Labour loving non stop for the next six weeks. :P

Rudd's relationship with Boris is very complicated, they have been pally for last few years while also tearing each other apart, Rudd especially has hit him with a few low blows. Rudd despite been a remainer was paid of numerous times to do May's dirty work regarding Brexit and then stuck the knife in Boris last minute.

prawnsambo

Varta wrote: »

For example, she is happy to use threatening and abusive language to others but cries foul when it comes her way. She once threatened to knife Corbyn... or maybe that was just a metaphor. Except it wouldn't have been seen as a metaphor if it had been said about her. If there's one thing that getting older has taught me, it's not to be blinded by ideology or loyalty and to apply the same critique to all sides.

She didn't "threaten to knife Corbyn". She was asked would she knife him in the back and replied using the same metaphor, that she would knife him in the front. It was a metaphor that she was given and replied to in kind. But it's been running around the internet in meme form without the context. I'd agree that it was ill-judged, but the response to that kind of question would always be questionable when portrayed in the kind of light that internet memes like to use.

And you clearly knew the context, by your 'metaphor' allusion.

Strazdas

Rjd2 wrote: »

This thread looks like its going to be Tory bashing and Labour loving non stop for the next six weeks. :P

Rudd's relationship with Boris is very complicated, they have been pally for last few years while also tearing each other apart, Rudd especially has hit him with a few low blows. Rudd despite been a remainer was paid of numerous times to do May's dirty work regarding Brexit and then stuck the knife in Boris last minute.

The Tories are deeply unpopular in Ireland for the way they've treated the country for the last three and a half years.

I'm no fan of Corbyn's though. I think he's a disaster of a political leader.

hometruths

Another way of thinking about this Lib Dem thing!

Whether or not you think the Lib Dem's policy on Revoke is undemocratic, I think all are agreed that the chances of them winning a majority in the GE are to all intents and purposes currently non existent.

If they did win, (and it is a big if) then surely the only possible explanation for such a shock victory is that there has been a massive and undeniable swing to Remain in the will of the people?

Thus if you agree that a massive and overwhelming swing to Remain is the only chance of a Lib Dem majority, then how can you possibly argue it is undemocratic to cancel Brexit with that majority?

Shelga

schmittel wrote: »

I agree that a second referendum is logical proposition, but plenty of people don't including most importantly the majority of democratically elected MPs in the current parliament. So there is no point going on about a solution that is not currently only the table.

What is currently on the table is a general election.

And I really fail to see how if (assuming they stick to their manifesto commitments) any party gets a majority in the House of Commons somehow this outcome can be described as undemocratic.



In this scenario, are you suggesting that it would be undemocratic because the results implies 60% of the electorate favour Brexit?

I really don't understand why you (and so many others) think it would be undemocratic. Can you explain why?

I thought I had explained why. People vote in a general election on a whole host of issues. There will be people who vote for the Tories and the Lib Dems who couldn’t care less about Brexit one way or the other.

If you want an answer on Brexit, ask about only Brexit. Simples.

quokula

schmittel wrote: »

In this scenario, are you suggesting that it would be undemocratic because the results implies 60% of the electorate favour Brexit?

I really don't understand why you (and so many others) think it would be undemocratic. Can you explain why?

There was a referendum. Leave won. 48% voted remain. If an even smaller number than 48% vote for the Lib Dems, how does that override the referendum? All it would prove is that a subset of the existing remain voters managed to vote tactically.

I totally believe Brexit is a bad idea, but reversing it without a mandate that equals the original referendum would be an even worse idea and would open a can of worms that could do far more damage to the UK in the long run.

All of this is of course academic because there's no chance in hell of the Lib Dems even being the second largest party, never mind getting a majority, and it's just a campaigning tactic for them to get a couple of dozen extra seats. But it's the reason why such a policy would be unthinkable for either of the two large parties.

Tea Shock

Joe_ Public wrote: »

No fan of Amber Rudd, windrush just for one, but way they are treating her speaks volumes. Give her the whip back and let her go out with dignity, but no, they wont do that. A warning to others, i suppose. The "nasty" party eating its own.

Johnson didn't even give any tribute to Ken Clarke today and Bercow had to do it, to the applause of all, except the Tory front bench!

Zubeneschamali

Shelga wrote: »

If you want an answer on Brexit, ask about only Brexit. Simples.

That isn't how democracy works in the UK - Parliament is sovereign, referendums are not binding.

So the result of a General Election is well defined, and the result of a Referendum is an unholy mess.

Varta

CelticRambler wrote: »

Yep - but don't assume that the clever tacticians are all/only on the Tory/BP/Leave side. Remember Cummings is supposed to be one of them and look at the mess he created. That is why I think any predictions this far out are pointless and likely to be way off the mark - it'll take a few weeks at least for the different parties to refine their strategies, attempt to read the minds of the other parties and appropriately target the right audiences

In today's unstable landscape, if they mess things up along the way (get the timing wrong, misjudge the audience's appetite for a particular policy position, overlook some tangential issue that suddently takes centre stage, have candidate that looks sideways at the wrong blogger ... ) that could spiral out of control.

Even though I don't believe there's a snowball's chance of the Lib Dems achieving a majority, the notion that every GE is effectively Tory vs Labour (in England, obviously) is well and truly dead and buried now. Leave vs Remain sealed its fate, and the by-elections have shown that people will abandon their old allegiances if there's a reasonable alternative. Unless there are pacts to avoid it, I think we'll see an awful lot of four-way contests that are "too close to call" on the night.

It should make for a great Christmas Special ! :cool:

Oh I don't assume any such thing. I was referring to the 'Get Brexit done' slogan. I'm looking forward to what could and should be very creative media campaigns by all parties - particularly Labour and Tory. I think the hype around Lib/Dem is just that, hype. They appeal to a very small portion of the electorate and Swinson has all the bearing and composure of a student union candidate. But in terms of how the campaigns are run we could see a number of exciting new developments.

Joe_ Public

Varta wrote: »

And the the members of the Labour party give each other chocolates and flowers each day.

As far as i know jeremy corbyn didnt respond to division in his party by threatening mps with losing the whip and expelling them from the party. Lots of people think he should.

Shelga

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

That isn't how democracy works in the UK - Parliament is sovereign, referendums are not binding.

So the result of a General Election is well defined, and the result of a Referendum is an unholy mess.

Not when you have a specific piece of legislation in front of you, and you want to know if the public want to enact it, or to remain in the EU.

I know a referendum is not going to happen, but it would be pretty boring round here if we only discussed what’s directly in front of us!

Tell me how

Joe_ Public wrote: »

As far as i know jeremy corbyn didnt respond to division in his party by threatening mps with losing the whip and expelling them from the party. Lots of people think he should.

Don't think the Labour party could be used as an example of unity given the anti-semetism conversation and also kicking out someone who although not an MP, was and is a significant voice on UK politics, Alistair Campbell.

hometruths

Shelga wrote: »

If you want an answer on Brexit, ask about only Brexit. Simples.

Sure. That worked out well last time.

Zubeneschamali

Shelga wrote: »

Not when you have a specific piece of legislation in front of you, and you want to know if the public want to enact it, or to remain in the EU.

That isn't how legislation gets passed in the UK.

Which is why Brexit is such a mess - they had a half assed referendum asking a stupid question, lots of cheating, crap campaigning by the remain side, and they are now trying to implement a mandate which is either impossible, pointless or hugely damaging, depending on which version you pick.

Joe_ Public

Tell me how wrote: »

Don't think the Labour party could be used as an example of unity given the anti-semetism conversation and also kicking out someone who although not an MP, was and is a significant voice on UK politics, Alistair Campbell.

I didnt think i was doing any such thing tbh. Divisions within labour are clear for anybody to see, i was only making a point in relation to amber rudd. AS is another issue entirely, one they need to do more on.

quokula

Tell me how wrote: »

Don't think the Labour party could be used as an example of unity given the anti-semetism conversation and also kicking out someone who although not an MP, was and is a significant voice on UK politics, Alistair Campbell.

Campbell publicly announced voting for another party, which was a straightforward convention of their rules.

The antisemitism row is something that a small number of MPs who were unhappy with the direction of the party tried to turn into a controversy, and largely succeeded with the UK media, but the leadership was never involved and certainly never kicked anyone out. There has never been shown to be any genuine examples of anti-semitism from major figures within the party (there are some examples that get held up from random twitter accounts who claim to be Labour supporters but have nothing directly to do with the party) - but that's all way off topic for a Brexit discussion.

Shelga

schmittel wrote: »

Sure. That worked out well last time.

The referendum last time was 2 words. This would be a vote on a very specific 600-word document, detailing how Leave would be enacted. If it passed this time, it would legitimise Brexit and shut Remainers up for once and for all.

If it didn't pass, then yay! Brexit is over and maybe the country can begin to recover from this humiliating farce. No, Farage's groupies wouldn't be happy, but they're going to be angry no matter what.

Zubeneschamali

Shelga wrote: »

If it passed this time, it would legitimise Brexit and shut Remainers up for once and for all.

No it wouldn't, the Rejoin campaign would start the next day.

hometruths

quokula wrote: »

There was a referendum. Leave won. 48% voted remain. If an even smaller number than 48% vote for the Lib Dems, how does that override the referendum? All it would prove is that a subset of the existing remain voters managed to vote tactically.

And if there is a second referendum and the result is 52% Remain vs 48% Leave
can that override the first referendum if that 52% is less than 17.4 million voters?

Or if Labour win with less than 52% of the electorate is it undemocratic for them to campaign for Remain in the second referendum?

Podge_irl

quokula wrote: »

I totally believe Brexit is a bad idea, but reversing it without a mandate that equals the original referendum would be an even worse idea and would open a can of worms that could do far more damage to the UK in the long run.

What can of worms? Seriously, what would it actually impact? It could undermine the legitimacy of referendums but they are not an inherent part of the UK constitutional system anyway and frankly, appear to be handled quite poorly.

prawnsambo

Jo Maugham has picked up on something that might be an issue. There's also (iirc) a requirement for the new exit date to be inserted in the Withdrawal Act by means of Statutory Instrument. At least that's what was done the last time. Not sure if that's been done yet either.

Twister2

I reckon anything could happen later depending on what way the wind is blowing,

Johnson could swing completely and end up backing a peoples vote if he gets the majority

He's got what he wants for now,
A provisional deal and an election

CelticRambler

Varta wrote: »

I'm looking forward to what could and should be very creative media campaigns by all parties - particularly Labour and Tory. I think the hype around Lib/Dem is just that, hype. They appeal to a very small portion of the electorate and Swinson has all the bearing and composure of a student union candidate. But in terms of how the campaigns are run we could see a number of exciting new developments.

The nature of the Labour and Tory campaigns will indeed be crucial to the outcome, but perhaps not in the way their masters intend. If they decided to adopt a US-style negative strategy (I think the Tories are more likely to do this than Labour, but it might be just too tempting for Labour not to keep pointing out the Tories' failure to govern) then that could push voters to boycott both parties and either abstain or give their vote to one of the minor parties instead. It is in this circumstance that I see some (maybe even several) safe seats being lost by the Old Guard and constituency maps becoming ever more multicoloured as election night progresses.

Strazdas

Podge_irl wrote: »

What can of worms? Seriously, what would it actually impact? It could undermine the legitimacy of referendums but they are not an inherent part of the UK constitutional system anyway and frankly, appear to be handled quite poorly.

Cameron said "We will implement whatever you decide" : 'we' being the Tory government.

He never said anything about a future Lib Dem or Labour govt having to implement the result. He couldn't do, they didn't hold the referendum and it was nothing to do with them.

Ihatewhahabies

shatners bassoon wrote: »

I'll preface this by saying a massive thank you to all who post in this thread. I've been lurking since its fifth or sixth iteration and it really has been invaluable.

The vitriol towards the Labour stance does surprise me I have to say. I appreciate the difficulty in selling it to your average Joe on the street and the results may well reflect that but it's by far the most sensible option so far imo in that it makes an attempt to respect the referendum result while offering the public another opportunity to have a say.

However much I would like to see the UK remain, the Libdem policy is profoundly undemocratic. The fact that it can be distilled into an easily digestible soundbite doesn't make it any more reasonable/admirable.

I won't profess to know a great deal about Corbyn prior to the Brexit fiasco but to those who repeatedly call him out as useless and often, 'as bad as Boris', what could he have done differently that would change your opinion? That's a genuine question btw I have no allegiance to the guy.

Poor Corbyn, I am annoyed that he seems to be isolated within his own party and he has enabled the Blairites to smeer him and others that they were anti-semetic and racist...How that took hold I find it hard to fathom. Let us hope they can deselect many of the Blairite traitors.

My take is that the establishment through their acolytes in the media , integrity initiative etc have carried on a relentless demonisation of Corbyn as they are terrified of him which puts him in saintly territory as far as I am concern. If all the people I hate hate/fear him so much there must be something good about him. He would get my vote no doubt regardless of his Brexit stance.

My belief is that he / Labour party are trying to ensure that the blame for Brexit will be put on the Tories....Unsure if that is successful especially as i listen too much to the LBC and there is a preponderance of attempts to try and blame labour and specifcally Corbyn for the lack of progress in exiting the EU. They must believe we have no memories it was Teresa's red lines that complicated the issue ....perhaps on purpose. See how Boris's deal is not too far from May's...this is the max that they will be able to sell to the UK's public as an acceptable break from EU which is much worse than the deal they already have.

Unless Boris is a brilliant campainer I think it is Corbyn's to lose. Perhaps the loses labour will have in North England will be balanced by gains in Scotland I think they or the SNP will gain all conservative seats in Scotland

prawnsambo

Ihatewhahabies wrote: »

My belief is that he / Labour party are trying to ensure that the blame for Brexit will be put on the Tories....Unsure if that is successful especially as i listen too much to the LBC and there is a preponderance of attempts to try and blame labour and specifcally Corbyn for the lack of progress in exiting the EU. They must believe we have no memories it was Teresa's red lines that complicated the issue ....perhaps on purpose. See how Boris's deal is not too far from May's...this is the max that they will be able to sell to the UK's public as an acceptable break from EU which is much worse than the deal they already have.

There's a fatal flaw in that logic. To get the blame, brexit has to happen. That's going to hit Labour supporters hardest. Kind of a pyrrhic victory if you ask me.