Brexit discussion thread XII (Please read OP before posting)

Rjd2

Rjd2 wrote: »

He has been officially re selected so its highly unlikely he would flee now.


I clicked on James Melville's twitter page, doesn't seem to be a journalist and somehow he seems to have got this scoop. Coincidentally all his other tweets are tory and Brexit bashing. I think we can wait a little while on this "exclusive".

The "exclusive" has been deleted. SHOCKED. :eek:

lawred2

Bit cynical wrote: »

I think the voters can see that if Labour were to go ahead with their plans, the EU could insist on any terms they wanted knowing that the worst that would happen is that the UK would have to revoke A50. What would most likely happen is that the EU would insist on freedom of movement if the UK were to be granted a customs union with the EU. This deal, if Labour accepted it, would then be rejected by the electorate in the subsequent referendum.

Ah I see. So they are going to tap the side of their nose and wink at the camera when they see say "we're going to renegotiate a better deal"

Enzokk

theological wrote: »

I think you're being overly optimistic about Corbyn's prospects here. This forum has a particular slant but when you look at things domestically in Britain you'll see it is a much harder fight for Corbyn than some suggest. Theresa May who shot herself in the foot because her advisors Fiona Hill and Nick Timothy thought it'd be a great idea to say that old aged pensioners would have to pay for social care in the election and Corbyn still only managed to get a hung parliament.

Then you have the Liberal Democrats campaigning on a clear remain platform to simply revoke Article 50.

Most people in Britain are deeply sceptical of Corbyn and the Momentum group within the Labour party. A lot of people are simply lethargic about Brexit and just want it done and dusted including a lot of remainers.

The polls are suggesting that Johnson is starting off with a big lead also.

I could be, but it is because of the last election. I gave Labour no chance to even remain at the same number of seats as before but they surpassed that by a lot. So this time I will wait and see how the leaders perform and how the public react to them before proclaiming one side dead.

The challenges Labour and Corbyn face has been clear and apparent for a long time, but the notion that Johnson will easily stroll to victory when there is still so much time left and he faces so many challenges himself is very risky.

coastwatch wrote: »

I think this will be easy for Boris, "Brexit, Let's get it done"
Even soft remainers wont be able to resist that.

All other issues, economy, NHS, re-negotiate, all way too complicated at this stage.

Where is the economic impact assessment of his Brexit plan? Why has it not been released? Once the questions begin to be asked it will not be as simple for Johnson, why else did he try to ram it through so quickly without scrutiny?

fr336

Voters "fed up" of Brexit need to get a grip. This is supposed to be Britan, the bulldog of the world (ha), who have staying power and do things properly. What are they going to vote for, Boris and his crap deal? And not only Boris and his crap deal but five whole years of Boris doing whatever he likes in every other area? The Tories are bad enough short of a majority, acting like one party rulers, if they get a majority they'll cause untold damage (again).

Bit cynical

lawred2 wrote: »

Ah I see. So they are going to tap the side of their nose and wink at the camera when they see say "we're going to renegotiate a better deal"

I think they know that what they are saying does not make a lot of sense. Their plan may be to try to attract both sides of the brexit divide however I don't see it working. It is a very roundabout way of saying we'll revoke A50.

Enzokk

Rjd2 wrote: »

The "exclusive" has been deleted. SHOCKED. :eek:

Was this the exclusive that he is not standing in his own constituency? The problem he has now is that he either has to face his constituents who he lied to about Heathrow, or he will move to a safer seat and be seen for the coward he is.

Joe_ Public

The point about spending pledges is:

Labour are targeting the wealthiest to pay more tax to pay for them.

The tories are, if johnsons leadership campaign is to be trusted, going to give tax breaks to the well off. So magic money tree it has to be then.

fr336

Bit cynical wrote: »

I could see a lot of Labour people voting Tory in the upcoming election just to get Brexit over with then reverting back to Labour in subsequent elections.

Voting Tory isn't getting Brexit done. It's May's crap deal with a fudge. If anyone voting for Boris didn't vote for May, they are unbelievably stupid. Also what kind of idiot votes to "get something done" in 2019 and then still be living with the consequences of a Tory government five years down the line?

Enzokk

Bit cynical wrote: »

I think they know that what they are saying does not make a lot of sense. Their plan may be to try to attract both sides of the brexit divide however I don't see it working. It is a very roundabout way of saying we'll revoke A50.

The EU would be wise to tell Labour they will not renegotiate the deal but if they want they can change the PD to reflect that they will be open to grant the UK access to the SM and to be in the customs union. This would be a win-win for the EU, either Brexit is revoked or the public votes for a soft Brexit.

jimmycrackcorm

L1011 wrote: »

Cyprian Brady. Got under 1000 first preferences.

Its really never happened to quite as extreme a level anywhere else. Wiki lead me to DeV transferring en masse to a running mate who got barely over 100 votes - in 1923!

I don't see any problem with this. Its the reason why we have two healy-raes in the Dail. It accurately represents what the people actually want.

Bit cynical

fr336 wrote: »

Voting Tory isn't getting Brexit done. It's May's crap deal with a fudge. If anyone voting for Boris didn't vote for May, they are unbelievably stupid. Also what kind of idiot votes to "get something done" in 2019 and then still be living with the consequences of a Tory government five years down the line?

Probably the best deal that can be obtained though if brexit is to go ahead. Really only that or no deal at this stage.

ArmaniJeanss

Deleted User wrote: »

Many in the north of England and south of Wales would rather vote for the Brexit Party.

That's why a pact could prove advantageous between BP and the Torys. Many Labor voters would never consider voting for a Conservative government, but would be willing to vote for the Brexit Party.

Theoretically true, but the key thing is they wouldn't actually be voting for The Brexit Party. They'd be voting for the candidate who is standing for TBP, and that subtle difference is huge imo.

Said candidate will likely be someone from out of the constituency, potentially with a dodgy enough background, who has never done any work for the people in that constituency, has little understanding of the local issues, and few people on the ground working for them. It's not the sort of thing the people of Yorkshire or South Wales will go for.

In the Euros election with the dHondt list system, it's much easier for these 'new' parties to gain traction.

Enzokk

This tweet has an interesting graph showing how the parties have done in the polls since July 2017. We can see it was quote predictable for most of the time but all of this changed when May's government started falling apart. Since then and with the EU elections and the rise of the Brexit Party it changed. So I guess the only conclusion we can draw is that everything is in flux right now.

https://twitter.com/harrytlambert/status/1189175533701128192?s=20

coastwatch

Enzokk wrote: »

Where is the economic impact assessment of his Brexit plan? Why has it not been released? Once the questions begin to be asked it will not be as simple for Johnson, why else did he try to ram it through so quickly without scrutiny?

That's my point, the white, older voters in NE England dont care about economic impact assessments, thats just too complicated.
They voted leave and they are pi$$ed off it hasn't happened, whatever the consequences. Soft Remainers dont care anymore, they just want it to end

It will be an uphill struggle for Labour to win them over. They will need a simple message, but they dont have one.

Joe_ Public

An observation not based on figures, just from general reading and viewing. A major factor for leave vote were rare or first time voters who wouldnt usually bother with GEs. Will that vote turn out again? Have a feeling not in huge numbers. Even in labour leave seats, they say the actual labour vote was majority remain. Could be wrong but im not sure tories will do as well as they hope in those areas.

hometruths

Joe_ Public wrote: »

It's the one thing i have to admit does boil my blood a bit in this whole saga, the wilful obscuring of the labour position that you'd imagine you'd need mensa level brain capacity to grasp it the way some go on about it. No one has to like it or vote for it, but to portray it as in any way complex seems disingenuous to me. Vote labour and you vote for a second referendum in all circumstances. That seems fairly plain to me at least. Do i really need to worry unduly about how individual labour politicians stand afterwards? I get the vote and so vote accordingly.

Agreed it seems a plain and simple message. But Labour's problem is all parties have a simple message:

Vote Tory and you vote for Brexit in all circumstances.
Vote Lib Dems and you vote for Remain in all circumstances.
Vote Labour and you vote for a second referendum in all circumstances.

You don't need Mensa level brain capacity to grasp any of the above. But Labours position is clearly more ambiguous than the other two, because party policy is completely unknown never mind unclear.

I agree that how individual Labour politicians stand afterwards is not a big deal, but party policy should a big deal if you care one way or another about Brexit.

If I was a Remain Labour voter I would feel pretty sore if the second referendum was a close win for Leave and Labour did not campaign for Remain. I wouldn't risk it and I'd vote Lib Dem instead.

If I was a Labour Brexiteer I would vote BXP or Tory for obvious reasons.

Sure if I was a voter who does not actually have a strong opinion either way on Brexit, but felt that the most important thing was that the country had a second referendum I'd vote Labour.

I just don't think there are enough of these voters to win an election which is why I think it is a nice policy in theory, but daft in practice.

coastwatch

coastwatch wrote: »

That's my point, the white, older voters in NE England dont care about economic impact assessments, thats just too complicated.
They voted leave and they are pi$$ed off it hasn't happened, whatever the consequences. Soft Remainers dont care anymore, they just want it to end

It will be an uphill struggle for Labour to win them over. They will need a simple message, but they dont have one.

The last thing that voters in the UK want to hear is:

- For 6 months, a new deal will be negotiated.
- After, a referendum on that deal will be held, lasting another 6 months.
- Said referendum will be "Remain versus Remain-Light" - no Leave option.
- In fact, let's throw in a referendum on Scotland, too.

But that's precisely what Labour are offering.

They are so out of touch with the UK population, it's quite literally staggering.

I sincerely hope that the Labour Party experience a political oblivion on December 12.

Joe_ Public

schmittel wrote: »

Agreed it seems a plain and simple message. But Labour's problem is all parties have a simple message:

Vote Tory and you vote for Brexit in all circumstances.
Vote Lib Dems and you vote for Remain in all circumstances.
Vote Labour and you vote for a second referendum in all circumstances.

You don't need Mensa level brain capacity to grasp any of the above. But Labours position is clearly more ambiguous than the other two, because party policy is completely unknown never mind unclear.

I agree that how individual Labour politicians stand afterwards is not a big deal, but party policy should a big deal if you care one way or another about Brexit.

If I was a Remain Labour voter I would feel pretty sore if the second referendum was a close win for Leave and Labour did not campaign for Leave. I wouldn't risk it and I'd vote Lib Dem instead.

If I was a Labour Brexiteer I would vote BXP or Tory for obvious reasons.

Sure if I was a voter who does not actually have a strong opinion either way on Brexit, but felt that the most important thing was that the country had a second referendum I'd vote Labour.

I just don't think there are enough of these voters to win an election which is why I think it is a nice policy in theory, but daft in practice.

Thats very fair comment. It is obviously problematic which is unfortunate for them. My question for the lib dems would be: if we may discount your oh so very realistic revoke position for a second, how would you go about arranging a PV? My suspicion is they would fudge and turn it back to revoke. That is quite disingenuous to my eyes but hey, if it works for them, then good for them. Thats politics!

Capt'n Midnight

Sam Russell wrote: »

But it is possible to win a seat on less than 35%, and if this was repeated in just over 50% of constituencies, a majority could be obtained by as small as 18% of the popular vote. However, that is based on the most unlikely of events

My point was that you are guaranteed to win with 25% of the voters and 326 plus one votes.

Yes in practice you need a lot less since you don't need 50% to win any constituency. And you can save a lot of votes if you could target areas with lower turnouts and smaller number of voters.

Bit cynical

The problem is that Labour's disingenuous tactics in parliament are a turn off for voters in an election.

Joe_ Public

Bit cynical wrote: »

The problem is that Labour's disingenuous tactics in parliament are a turn off for voters in an election.

Too much humbug?

jimmycrackcorm

Deleted User wrote: »

Labor aren't sitting on the fence, though.

It's to re-negotiate a deal "economically close" to the Single Market and Customs Union, then put that deal to the public versus Remain.

It couldn't be clearer.

It's not the clarity that's missing, it's the logic and sense of it.

There's no brexit in that message. Just more dithering over it and it's goung to go down like a lead balloon.

Labour really need to sideline Brexit by focusing on the tories weakness in delivering brexit, their austerity, the lies and lack of keeping any promises.

Labour don't need to focus on the answers to brexit, those amswers are only achievable by a another referendum with clear actionable choices in an STV manner.

But their central message should be the basics about what affects people's lives. Brexit doesn't.

Bit cynical

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Too much humbug?

Well, for example, insisting that "no deal" be taken off the table in negotiations. That's fine if you want to throw the spanner in the works for the Tory's attempt at negotiation but is a disingenuous position in real life. The average punter knows you can't negotiate with that constraint especially if it is known to the other side.

Joe_ Public

Bit cynical wrote: »

Well, for example, insisting that "no deal" be taken off the table in negotiations. That's fine if you want to throw the spanner in the works for the Tory's attempt at negotiation but is a disingenuous position in real life. The average punter knows you can't negotiate with that constraint especially if it is known to the other side.

They got the deal though, didnt they? The "great" deal Johnson talks about. So doesnt seem to have done much harm at all.

Kermit.de.frog

I have said it many times but Johnson's core argument of the deal they secured means the UK leaves in January if they get a majority.

I think the Tories will get that majority.

Most want to move on.

Bit cynical

Joe_ Public wrote: »

They got the deal though, didnt they? The "great" deal Johnson talks about. So doesn't seem to have done much harm at all.

Of course it is not that great in reality and Johnson only got it by hinting that he was going to go to whatever lengths fair or foul to leave on the given date despite being forced to ask for an extension. But I would still maintain that most people know that Labour was making it difficult for Johnson to get a deal for the UK.

Rather than Labour being against brexit (which might alienate pro-Brexit Labour supporters), Labour's tactic was to try to make Boris fail at Brexit. Fair enough in parliament but may not play well in an election. It's the sort of thing you might do at the beginning of a term in opposition but then let some time pass.

Joe_ Public

Bit cynical wrote: »

Of course it is not that great in reality and Johnson only got it by hinting that he was going to go to whatever lengths fair or foul to leave on the given date despite being forced to ask for an extension. But I would still maintain that most people know that Labour was making it difficult for Johnson to get a deal for the UK.

Rather than Labour being against brexit (which might alienate pro-Brexit Labour supporters), Labour's tactic was to try to make Boris fail at Brexit. Fair enough in parliament but may not play well in an election. It's the sort of thing you might do at the beginning of a term in opposition but then let some time pass.

You're right in the sense that tory spin is all about labour holding up the get brexit done mantra, all that annoying "dither and delay" mantra. The hilarious thing is that johnson paints corbyn as an arch remainer while jo swinson damns him as a hard brexiteer. Its all absurd but it is hurting corbyn from both sides so well done to them.

Strazdas

Enzokk wrote: »

This tweet has an interesting graph showing how the parties have done in the polls since July 2017. We can see it was quote predictable for most of the time but all of this changed when May's government started falling apart. Since then and with the EU elections and the rise of the Brexit Party it changed. So I guess the only conclusion we can draw is that everything is in flux right now.

https://twitter.com/harrytlambert/status/1189175533701128192?s=20

Interestingly this seems to coincide with the chaos in Parliament from Jan 2019 onward and the failure to leave the EU on March 29th.

hometruths

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Thats very fair comment. It is obviously problematic which is unfortunate for them. My question for the lib dems would be: if we may discount your oh so very realistic revoke position for a second, how would you go about arranging a PV? My suspicion is they would fudge and turn it back to revoke. That is quite disingenuous to my eyes but hey, if it works for them, then good for them. Thats politics!

I think the Lib Dem policy is actually very clever given their particular circumstances.

The only unrealistic thing about their revoke position is that nobody believes they will win a majority - if they won it, then de facto their position is realistic.

Realistically their best bet is to hold balance of power in next parliament supporting Labour. By campaigning for Revoke they can present themselves as compromising by agreeing to second referendum, and can encourage their coalition partners to throw government weight behind remain in that referendum.

If by some miracle they manage to convince electorate not to get into widescale tactical voting then they could end up in opposition! Yes I accept this is unlikely but if they had gone for a Second referendum policy then there is no reason to vote for Lib Dems over Labour, and they would not have made any gains.

Revoke policy provides a strong reason to vote Lib Dem for both Labour and Tory voters.

It also helps them in Scotland to defend against rising SNP vote. The current Tory seats are up for grabs, and there will be plenty of Scots who would like to vote to stay in EU and UK. Vote for Lib Dems so. Indeed if I was a Lib Dem strategist I would be tempted to run in all seats in Northern Ireland. Allow those who want to remain in EU a clear voting opportunity to do so, not tied up in sectarian politics.

As I have mentioned in other posts, one thing that boils my head is the idea that a Revoke policy is somehow undemocratic or unrealistic. It makes perfect sense from both a democratic point of view and party policy point of view. I just cannot get my head around why it has riled up so many people.

The Lib Dems biggest problem is their leader, not their policy.

jimmycrackcorm

Bit cynical wrote: »

Of course it is not that great in reality and Johnson only got it by hinting that he was going to go to whatever lengths fair or foul to leave on the given date despite being forced to ask for an extension. But I would still maintain that most people know that Labour was making it difficult for Johnson to get a deal for the UK.

Rather than Labour being against brexit (which might alienate pro-Brexit Labour supporters), Labour's tactic was to try to make Boris fail at Brexit. Fair enough in parliament but may not play well in an election. It's the sort of thing you might do at the beginning of a term in opposition but then let some time pass.

Labour could take a leaf out of the tories bill and go with the Upton to offer the choice of Boris's deal vs remain but with extras.
Extras being the focus on the NHS and policing that the tories are doing, and which ensures want to do.
But if remain is a referendum choice then they'd address immigration and EU FoM problems by introducing the rules that are allowed.
I.e. No turning up at the door, with no work and expecting to be housed.

They could also point out that the immigration problems are what the tories introduced.