/ General Election

Please Register as a New User in order to reply to this topic.
what the hex 29 Oct 2019

The interactive season finale looks set for some time in December!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-50221856

Report
colinakmc 29 Oct 2019
In reply to what the hex:

The slow motion train wreck smashes on.....

Report
yesbutnobutyesbut 29 Oct 2019
In reply to what the hex:

JC4PM

Report
Pedro50 29 Oct 2019
In reply to yesbutnobutyesbut:

> JC4PM

IYDLOL

Report
Richard Horn 29 Oct 2019
In reply to what the hex:

To all the younger generation, make sure you are registered to vote!

Report
Lord_ash2000 29 Oct 2019
In reply to what the hex:

Well, I think we all knew it was coming, but it's going to be a difficult one to call I think. 

Most polls put the Tory's ahead but only if they are to be trusted, May trusted the polls and that was a disaster for her if it wasn't for that early election her deal probably would have gone through ages ago.

Obviously Boris is wanting a majority so he can push through Brexit on tory terms rather than getting tied in knots by other parties putting one bill or another in the way or voting down everything in sight.  
 

But yeah, a tricky one to call, I think the LibDems will get a huge boost, labour will take a big hit and the Tory's will do okay but not as good as they wanted. Should make for an interesting night seeing the results come through. 

Report
The Lemming 29 Oct 2019
In reply to what the hex:

I'm confused. What am I voting for this time?

Governing party

Brexit

Referendum

Report
Pursued by a bear 29 Oct 2019
In reply to what the hex:

I suspect that one of the dominant trends this time will be people not voting for what they want, but against what they don't want. You might call it tactical voting but I suspect that's what follows on from the first urge.

For example, my MP is Jacob Rees-Mogg, and I really don't want him to get back in. My predominantly leftwards tendencies will take a back seat and I'll vote for whomever stands the greatest chance of defeating him; so yes, a tactical vote but one following on from me standing against everything in politics I believe that my current MP stands for.

T.

Report
MonkeyPuzzle 29 Oct 2019
In reply to yesbutnobutyesbut:

> JC4PM

NE1BUTBOJO

Report
Will Hunt 29 Oct 2019
In reply to Lord_ash2000:

What we need now is for Boris Johnson to come out and publicly state that he supports the stashing of pads at the Bowderstone. Then all will be well.

And if Trump can get on Twitter and start banging on about how many times he's done Picnic Sarcastic then we're laughing.

Post edited at 15:28
Report
hokkyokusei 29 Oct 2019
In reply to The Lemming:

> I'm confused. What am I voting for this time?

You're actually voting for who you would like to be your MP.

Report
freeflyer 29 Oct 2019
In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

> NE1BUTBOJO

Isn't he DIAD?

Report
Tony Jones 29 Oct 2019
In reply to Lord_ash2000:

>

> Most polls put the Tory's ahead but only if they are to be trusted

I suspect you're probably referring to the polls here as I'm not sure that Johnson's band of rogues could be trusted to pay you back the change for the car park ticket they'd just asked you to pay because they had no cash on their persons.

Unless I'm missing something obvious, an opportunity to bury Boris has been missed. He'll be back, and stronger too, as a result of this.

Report
pasbury 29 Oct 2019
In reply to hokkyokusei:

I'll be voting for whoever seems most likely to beat my MP.

Report
The Lemming 29 Oct 2019
In reply to hokkyokusei:

> You're actually voting for who you would like to be your MP.


Its really that straight forward?

Report
bouldery bits 29 Oct 2019
In reply to Pedro50:

> IYDLOL

LRYGMTEPQLF

Report
bouldery bits 29 Oct 2019
In reply to Will Hunt:

> And if Trump can get on Twitter and start banging on about how many times he's done Picnic Sarcastic then we're laughing.

And I'll tell you now. I'll tell you. I'm going to build a ladder. A magnificent, special ladder. The Greatest ladder. 

Report
Tim Davies 29 Oct 2019
In reply to what the hex:

ABC 

Report
Pete Pozman 29 Oct 2019
In reply to yesbutnobutyesbut:

> JC4PM

Fingers crossed that Scotland will vote Labour again. 

Report
Pete Pozman 29 Oct 2019
In reply to what the hex:

Our only chance is that the Brexit Party Ltd will split the Tory vote. I think Cummings may steer clear of targeting the "people who knew what they were voting for" with a no deal promise as that will push many Tories towards the LibDems. In which case Fartarse can tell them they've been betrayed (or whatever) again and they should trust him. After all he's never let them down... 

Report
NathanP 29 Oct 2019
In reply to Pete Pozman:

I thought Cummins' contract expired on 31 October and he'd reluctantly agreed to delay an operation until November 1st on that basis? 

Tory election campaign supremo, somebody Johnson can totally trust: Michael Gove.

Report
MonkeyPuzzle 29 Oct 2019
In reply to Pete Pozman:

Not the only hope. They'll be losing seats to the SNP in Scotland, the LDs in the South West plus they can't rely on the DUP necessarily, seeing how angry/jittery they got to Tory Brexit endgame. Lib Dems could potentially take Remain seats in the South as well. Balance that against the hyped Northern Leave Seats (TM) and it's not clear how it's going to land.

Tories basically have to have a majority. Everyone else just needs to stop them.

Report
Philip 29 Oct 2019
In reply to Pursued by a bear:

> I suspect that one of the dominant trends this time will be people not voting for what they want, but against what they don't want. You might call it tactical voting but I suspect that's what follows on from the first urge.

> For example, my MP is Jacob Rees-Mogg, and I really don't want him to get back in. My predominantly leftwards tendencies will take a back seat and I'll vote for whomever stands the greatest chance of defeating him; so yes, a tactical vote but one following on from me standing against everything in politics I believe that my current MP stands for.

You'd think that, but a quick look at the close Lab Vs Con seats and the LD votes are rarely decisive but the UKIP votes (2017) are. Many tight Con seats are tight because of UKIP.

So maybe the most tactical approach is to campaign for UKIP/Brexit wherever they stand.

Report
MonkeyPuzzle 29 Oct 2019
In reply to what the hex:

Heh. Results on Friday the 13th.

Report
Offwidth 29 Oct 2019
pasbury 29 Oct 2019
In reply to Pete Pozman:

They’re going to go for tactics ‘Straight outta Trump-ton’; appeal to the base in the right places to secure a majority.

Report
what the hex 29 Oct 2019
In reply to what the hex:

What's with the Totally Weird Acronym Talk Shown on this thread?

Report
MargieB 29 Oct 2019
In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

It's stripped out politics- if you can work out who will be slaughtered we'll be left with a winner. Sorry- without a referendum ultimately the electorate loses out but there we are.

Post edited at 23:01
Report
pasbury 29 Oct 2019
In reply to Philip:

> You'd think that, but a quick look at the close Lab Vs Con seats and the LD votes are rarely decisive but the UKIP votes (2017) are. Many tight Con seats are tight because of UKIP.

> So maybe the most tactical approach is to campaign for UKIP/Brexit wherever they stand.

That would work in my constituency (Forest of Dean - 40% voted Brexit party in EU elections). They’re so dumb that enough Brexit party votes taking away from our incumbent tory MP might just allow Labour to win here.

Report
Le Sapeur 29 Oct 2019
In reply to The Lemming:

> I'm confused. What am I voting for this time?

> Governing party

> Brexit

> Referendum

Welcome to Scottish politics (for a few weeks). 

Report
hokkyokusei 29 Oct 2019
In reply to The Lemming:

> Its really that straight forward?

Well, yes, it is. Though how you make you decide who you want to be your MP can be as complicated as you want to make it. But that's ultimately what you are voting for.

Report
Lord_ash2000 30 Oct 2019
In reply to Tony Jones:

> I suspect you're probably referring to the polls here as I'm not sure that Johnson's band of rogues could be trusted to pay you back the change for the car park ticket they'd just asked you to pay because they had no cash on their persons.

Yes the polls, trust wise it depends on what you're putting trust in. Word for word what they say they are going to do an how? I'd probably take it with a pinch of salt like any party really. If you're a Tory voter then you're probably trusting they'll do what Tory's do, despite all the crap they are coming out with, offering money for this that and the other. 

> Unless I'm missing something obvious, an opportunity to bury Boris has been missed. He'll be back, and stronger too, as a result of this.

Yes I think that was the plan really, the government is, as we've seen in recent months none functional at the moment. The ruling party doesn't have a majority and so can't realistically pass any useful bills in parliament, nothing can get done. Whether you're for or against Brexit I think everyone can agree that being perpetually on the brink of leaving but not doing it isn't doing anyone any favours, we either need to leave and have done with it or just call the whole thing off. As it stands we can't do either because noone can pass anything.

So a general election as been enviable for some time as it's the only way to restore a functioning government. Let the people decide who should be representing them as the current lot are out of date.

Report
captain paranoia 30 Oct 2019
In reply to hokkyokusei:

> You're actually voting for who you would like to be your MP.

What, again...?

Surely, asking the people to keep making these choices is a betrayal of democracy...? Blah blah blah. Or asking MPs to vote for a GE for a fourth time, or voting on a WA for a third time, or...  I believe the phrase is 'you lost, Boris/May, get over it'...

I'm afraid that this election will be entirely about Brexit, and nothing to do with any other policies. It will be a proxy referendum, but distorted via the lens of FPTP. Why not just have another referendum, FFS...?

Post edited at 00:48
Report
tom_in_edinburgh 30 Oct 2019
In reply to Pete Pozman:

> Fingers crossed that Scotland will vote Labour again. 

https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/labour-surrender-scotland-1-6327163

Report
MargieB 30 Oct 2019
In reply to Le Sapeur:

Yes In Scotland we are voting on all three if Brexit wins!

Post edited at 07:51
Report
MargieB 30 Oct 2019
In reply to what the hex:

This is not to ask people's actual party choice but have people, like myself, already decided a choice,so in a sense, the next month's pre-electioneering is redundant? simple yes or no.{ deja vu!!}

And if people have, given the diversity of political party choice that UK climbing posts have previously displayed, I'd put my bet on a hung Parliament and we are going to be exactly in the same position as before the election.

Post edited at 08:49
Report
john arran 30 Oct 2019
In reply to MargieB:

This site may be of great help in choosing how to vote wisely to have the best chance of preventing Johnson from gaining enough power to ruin things for all of us:

https://tactical.vote/

For the purposes of this election, I would urge voters to set aside ordinary party politics and their like/dislike of party leaders - such things can be changed within 5 years - and focus on preventing something that will be plaguing us for at least a generation if we don't make sure it doesn't happen. Whichever opposition party is most likely to take the seat should be the one that gets your vote - however unpalatable a prospect that may be.

Report
galpinos 30 Oct 2019
In reply to NathanP:

> I thought Cummins' contract expired on 31 October and he'd reluctantly agreed to delay an operation until November 1st on that basis? 

> Tory election campaign supremo, somebody Johnson can totally trust: Michael Gove.

I thought Johnson had got in a fracking/shale gas lobbyist? Help him win the progressive/left/green vote....

Report
galpinos 30 Oct 2019
In reply to Lord_ash2000:

> Yes I think that was the plan really, the government is, as we've seen in recent months none functional at the moment*. The ruling party doesn't have a majority and so can't realistically pass any useful bills in parliament, nothing can get done. Whether you're for or against Brexit I think everyone can agree that being perpetually on the brink of leaving but not doing it isn't doing anyone any favours, we either need to leave and have done with it or just call the whole thing off. As it stands we can't do either because noone can pass anything.

I know this is the "party line" but I can't help feel Johnson has had the biggest hand in stopping us leaving, repeatedly voting against May's deal and then pulling his deal when the programme was voted down. We could have been out this summer with May's deal or looking at a mid Nov exit with Johnson's. Unfortunately, we are looking at more delay and an unwanted general election.

*I also feel this government isn't functioning but parliament is, it's holding the minority government to account. The only way you can govern as a minority government is to compromise and Johnson and his cronies have shown none of that.

Report
stevieb 30 Oct 2019
In reply to MargieB:

I've not chosen yet. I need to choose between the party that was a clear second last time in my constituency, or the party which will definitely gain votes.

Re the GE result, I think there are only 3 possible outcomes; Tory majority, Tory minority - no one can form a majority govt (the DUP may keep their distance now) or a Lib/Lab/Nat pact. There is absolutely no chance of a Corbyn majority.

Report
David Riley 30 Oct 2019
In reply to captain paranoia:

> Surely, asking the people to keep making these choices is a betrayal of democracy...?

Yes.

> Why not just have another referendum, FFS...?

Because the MP's want remain, not the voters.  That's what we have to change.

Report
MargieB 30 Oct 2019
In reply to john arran:

That site is interesting but doesn't necessarily work for my Inverness constituency if you take into account referendum result on independence which in my constituency's case, voted to not be independent. And that now is a factor!! Told you there are tooo many issues playing in contradiction to one another!!!!!!!!!

Report
WaterMonkey 30 Oct 2019
In reply to john arran:

I normally read all 3 main party manifestos and decide based on their promises. Last time round I voted tories, mainly due to the Labour promise to give gypsies more rights and increase my already way too high income tax.

This time though, Tories are are a no no due to them trying to f*ck the country with the EU ref and then their hardline on brexit. Labour may get a look in, I like the idea of a confirmatory referendum but if their manifesto mentions more rights to gypsies or changing inheritance tax to £125k threshold then they will lose out probably to the Lib dems.

Labour would have it in the bag if they weren't so far left. Such a shame.

So Libe dems for me

Report
neilh 30 Oct 2019
In reply to David Riley:

I am not sure you can in all honesty say that,  MPs voted in favour of BJ's WA!!!

If BJ had decided to accept that the HofC wanted to scrutinise the WA, then it may have had consent by now.

Report
subtle 30 Oct 2019
In reply to WaterMonkey:

> Last time round I voted tories, mainly due to the Labour promise to give gypsies more rights and increase my already way too high income tax.

> This time though, Tories are are a no no due to them trying to f*ck the country with the EU ref and then their hardline on brexit. Labour may get a look in, I like the idea of a confirmatory referendum but if their manifesto mentions more rights to gypsies or changing inheritance tax to £125k threshold then they will lose out probably to the Lib dems.

So, errrr, you don't like gypsies then?

Would you care to explain why you are against an ethnic minority?

Report
neilh 30 Oct 2019
In reply to subtle:

Probably like me he has had a local run in with them buying up local  land and thenrapidly moving lots of mobile homes on contrary to local plannign rules. All blatantly done in a couple of days so that the local council does not have the time to do enforcement notices to stop a  breach.

Not the sort of thing alot of people have expereince of, but when it happens a 100 yards or so from you, it makes you a bit more aware of rights etc.

Report
Pete Pozman 30 Oct 2019
In reply to NathanP:

> I thought Cummins' contract expired on 31 October and he'd reluctantly agreed to delay an operation until November 1st on that basis? 

> Tory election campaign supremo, somebody Johnson can totally trust: Michael Gove.

There is that 

Report
Pete Pozman 30 Oct 2019
In reply to pasbury:

> They’re going to go for tactics ‘Straight outta Trump-ton’; appeal to the base in the right places to secure a majority.

But Fartrage is maybe better at that than Cummings? August poppy wearers are more likely to go BP Ltd?

Report
MonkeyPuzzle 30 Oct 2019
In reply to captain paranoia:

>It will be a proxy referendum, but distorted via the lens of FPTP. Why not just have another referendum, FFS...?

Because Johnson wants the distortion of the FPTP system. Because 35% vote for the only main pro-Brexit party could deliver a supposed landslide for Brexit.

Report
David Riley 30 Oct 2019
In reply to neilh:

> I am not sure you can in all honesty say that,  MPs voted in favour of BJ's WA!!!

What's that got to do with it ?    Most MP's voted remain in the referendum.  Parliament is not representative of the country, as it is required to be.

Report
Lemony 30 Oct 2019
In reply to David Riley:

> as it is required to be.

[Citation Needed]

Report
jbrom 30 Oct 2019
In reply to john arran:

My issue with tactical voting is that last election I voted tactically (not that it was going to make much difference in my constituency, a Tory stonghold). I voted Labour as the next biggest party, I have previously voted both Labour and Lib Dem.

Since then I have repeatedly heard politicians and commentators say that over 80% of voters voted for leave supporting parties (42% Con, 40% Lab and 2% UKIP).

This is a complete misrepresentation of my vote, something that is going to make it very hard to vote Labour this time.

Report
mullermn 30 Oct 2019
In reply to what the hex:

I realise this is not a very original observation, but can we just take a moment to consider how Labour would be utterly smashing it if they had a remotely competent leader?

Look at the current polls - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49798197 - the Tories have a significant lead despite having an unpopular policy platform (with the arguable exception of Brexit, where the country is divided) and an unpopular and ineffectual leader and off the back of a multi-year debacle that is mostly or entirely their fault depending on your perspective?

How far have Labour fallen that they aren’t totally clearing up against this shambles? The mind boggles. 

Report
David Riley 30 Oct 2019
In reply to Lemony:

Do you not require parliament to represent you ?

Report
Rob Exile Ward 30 Oct 2019
In reply to David Riley:

No, delegates would be. We elect representatives to look after our interests in the way that they see fit.

You may not like it but that's pretty much how it has always worked.

Report
WaterMonkey 30 Oct 2019
In reply to subtle:

Because they camp wherever they want without permission and without paying any rates. They don't contribute to society, pay no taxes yet use the NHS and schools.

They crap in bushes rather than in their caravans, leave their rubbish behind when they move on and are generally anti-social parasites.

They are not an Ethnic minority! 

Post edited at 09:58
Report
David Riley 30 Oct 2019
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:

No.  We elect on the manifesto the candidate puts forward.

Report
subtle 30 Oct 2019
In reply to WaterMonkey:

ooookaaay, hmm

Have a look at this which discusses most of your preconceived prejudices

https://www.flintshire.gov.uk/en/PDFFiles/Policy-and-Performance/MythsandFactsGypsiesand-travellers.pdf

Report
tom_in_edinburgh 30 Oct 2019
In reply to David Riley:

> What's that got to do with it ?    Most MP's voted remain in the referendum.  Parliament is not representative of the country, as it is required to be.

It's a referendum result from 2016 which is not representative of the country as it is now.

The MPs were elected after the referendum and in 2019 they have access to information which was not available in 2016.  They should vote according to what they see as the best interests of their constituents.

Report
WaterMonkey 30 Oct 2019
In reply to subtle:

Yep, that pretty much backs up what I said. There aren't enough authorised sites around so they rock up and camp wherever they want, thereby not paying rent or rates.

Have you seen the way they treat their horses too? When I say their horses I mean the ones they liberated from a nearby field.

The police are too scared to pay a visit to gypsy camps around here yet you still defend them and Labour wants to give them more rights

Report
neilh 30 Oct 2019
In reply to David Riley:

I think you need to do a bit more homework .There are plenty of remain MPs who have voted for the WA agremement, there are plenty of Leave MPs who have voted against the WA agreement. There are plenty of MPs who have just toed a party  line.

Its exactly how the country sees the issue, there is no clear cut answer.

You might not like it, but tough, that ios the way it is. There are just too many variants for a clear agreement. There are ardent leavers, midlde of the road leavers and so on.

And I predict another hung parliament, and then another referendum.

Post edited at 10:12
Report
subtle 30 Oct 2019
In reply to WaterMonkey:

> Yep, that pretty much backs up what I said. There aren't enough authorised sites around so they rock up and camp wherever they want, thereby not paying rent or rates. 

Provide more authorised sites then

> Have you seen the way they treat their horses too? When I say their horses I mean the ones they liberated from a nearby field.

Speculation

> The police are too scared to pay a visit to gypsy camps around here yet you still defend them and Labour wants to give them more rights

More rights - or provide more authorised sites?

Anyway, lets not digress from the main thrust of this thread, the GE

Report
galpinos 30 Oct 2019
In reply to john arran:

That website give the wrong constituency for my postcode. That doesn't give me that much confidence in whatever algorithm is telling me how to vote.

Report
thomasadixon 30 Oct 2019
In reply to neilh:

> I am not sure you can in all honesty say that,  MPs voted in favour of BJ's WA!!!

Sort of.

> If BJ had decided to accept that the HofC wanted to scrutinise the WA, then it may have had consent by now.

What do you mean by scrutinise?  As I understand it what they wanted was significant amendments, not just to examine the deal.  If so they didn’t accept the deal at all.

Report
WaterMonkey 30 Oct 2019
In reply to subtle:

> Speculation

No first hand observation

> Anyway, lets not digress from the main thrust of this thread, the GE

I agree. But pop along to Appleby for the gypsy fair and see what you think to them in person.

Post edited at 10:30
Report
neilh 30 Oct 2019
In reply to thomasadixon:

They asked for a few days to examine the WA. Not unreasonable and is part of the normal process.Those amendments should have been at least debated and tested.

Its rather like Mays deal, in both case the WA phase could have been up and running easliy by now if the govt was prepared to compromise.

So close and yet so far.

Report
fred99 30 Oct 2019
In reply to Pete Pozman:

> Fingers crossed that Scotland will vote Labour again. 


I'd rather every single constituency returned either SNP or LibDem - at least then they'd be sure which way the MP's would vote if we got a chance at a PROPER referendum on Brexit (or better still just quash A50).

Report
thomasadixon 30 Oct 2019
In reply to neilh:

> They asked for a few days to examine the WA. Not unreasonable and is part of the normal process.

Not unreasonable if honest.

> Those amendments should have been at least debated and tested.

Amendments like adding a customs union mean renegotiation.  If you want that you need a new PM, and you have not in all honesty approved the deal.  You’ve rejected it but you’re playing politics and want it to look like acceptance.

> Its rather like Mays deal, in both case the WA phase could have been up and running easliy by now if the govt was prepared to compromise.

Mays deal was rejected, and at that time the EU were saying no changes were possible, no other deal was possible.  Turns out that was BS but that’s not what was said at the time.

Post edited at 11:03
Report
fred99 30 Oct 2019
In reply to MargieB:

> This is not to ask people's actual party choice but have people, like myself, already decided a choice,so in a sense, the next month's pre-electioneering is redundant? simple yes or no.{ deja vu!!}

What we need is for the Remain side to point out all the lies and complete fiction that Leave came up with, and also just how badly off the ordinary electorate will be if Brexit is allowed to go through.

This means "indian fighting" of the worst kind, but it'll be necessary, as you can bet your cotton socks that the Tories/Leave will already have their lies ready to go.

Report
neilh 30 Oct 2019
In reply to thomasadixon:

Well in the end Mays deal did not have a customs border down the Irish Sea so was probably a better WA for the UK as a whole..It ticked a better series of boxes, the only one it did not tick was BJ being PM ( lol).

At the time I thought that it was a the big missed opportunity for Leavers- Leave in effect came and went- and was thrown away by the ERG.

Report
stevieb 30 Oct 2019
In reply to thomasadixon:

> What do you mean by scrutinise?  As I understand it what they wanted was significant amendments, not just to examine the deal.  If so they didn’t accept the deal at all.

The Boris deal gave away £7bn. Either as the price for a quick deal for political gain, or because he’s not good on the detail. I think a bit of scrutiny is well justified. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/uk-gives-up-7bn-windfall-from-european-investment-bank-tq0qskgfc

Report
galpinos 30 Oct 2019
In reply to thomasadixon:

> Mays deal was rejected, and at that time the EU were saying no changes were possible, no other deal was possible.  Turns out that was BS but that’s not what was said at the time.

Well, if I was the EU and had said I wouldn't re-open the withdrawal agreement, but then Johnson came up to me and said,"You know that proposal about a border in the Irish Sea you came up with at the start of 2018 but I said "No Way!" as it was one of our red lines, well, I want that now" then I would have re-opened the WA.

Why the EU not reopen the WA when it was change that was favourable to them*?

*inc the extra £7 billion the EU saved as per stevieb's post above

Post edited at 11:17
Report
David Riley 30 Oct 2019
In reply to fred99:

> just how badly off the ordinary electorate will be if Brexit is allowed to go through.

This is opinion.  But remainers claim it is fact.

Leavers opinion is it will be a minor disruption, as any change would be.  This amounts to lies according to remainers.  An opinion is not a lie.  Claiming an opinion is a fact is a lie.

Report
john arran 30 Oct 2019
In reply to David Riley:

> This is opinion.  But remainers claim it is fact.

> Leavers opinion is it will be a minor disruption, as any change would be.  This amounts to lies according to remainers.  An opinion is not a lie.  Claiming an opinion is a fact is a lie.

My usual response to this kind of nonsense reasoning is to ask whether you'll get badly hurt from jumping from a third floor balcony. Sure, nobody can ever say in advance with 100% certainty. Doesn't stop it being true though.

Report
Eric9Points 30 Oct 2019
In reply to jbrom:

> My issue with tactical voting is that last election I voted tactically (not that it was going to make much difference in my constituency, a Tory stonghold). I voted Labour as the next biggest party, I have previously voted both Labour and Lib Dem.

> Since then I have repeatedly heard politicians and commentators say that over 80% of voters voted for leave supporting parties (42% Con, 40% Lab and 2% UKIP).

> This is a complete misrepresentation of my vote, something that is going to make it very hard to vote Labour this time.


I'm sorry but I'm baffled.

Why would you change the way you vote just because some reporters talked bollocks?

What matters is who ends up winning your seat, that's all.

Report
MargieB 30 Oct 2019
In reply to Eric9Points:

Well, I've gone simple, treating a GE like a referendum. The Cons versus Lib Dem {clear revocation of article 50}

And I can hear everyone going NOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!

Report
David Riley 30 Oct 2019
In reply to john arran:

> nonsense reasoning

What a silly response.

Report
Sir Chasm 30 Oct 2019
In reply to David Riley:

> This is opinion.  But remainers claim it is fact.

> Leavers opinion is it will be a minor disruption, as any change would be.  This amounts to lies according to remainers.  An opinion is not a lie.  Claiming an opinion is a fact is a lie.

Cor, another person claiming to know what 17 million people think. Is that your opinion or just another lie?

Report
RomTheBear 30 Oct 2019
In reply to MargieB:

> Well, I've gone simple, treating a GE like a referendum. The Cons versus Lib Dem {clear revocation of article 50}

> And I can hear everyone going NOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!

That’s exactly why the tories will win big time.

Prepare for a hard right parliament and a hard WTO Brexit.

Report
pasbury 30 Oct 2019
In reply to RomTheBear:

> That’s exactly why the tories will win big time.

> Prepare for a hard right parliament and a hard WTO Brexit.

That's what I fear - I am utterly dreading the consequences of this election.

Report
RomTheBear 30 Oct 2019
In reply to David Riley:

> Leavers opinion is it will be a minor disruption, as any change would be. 

Given the events of the past three and a half years it’s safe to say that this “opinion” (or rather fantasy) has already been utterly demolished.

Report
David Riley 30 Oct 2019
In reply to RomTheBear:

> Given the events of the past three and a half years it’s safe to say that this “opinion” (or rather fantasy) has already been utterly demolished.

By endless repetition of the minority that voted remain ?   Can you find many examples of leavers that agree ?

Report
jbrom 30 Oct 2019
In reply to Eric9Points:

The way I vote will make no difference to who represents me and my constituency in parliament, never has and never will. A 13,400 majority Con seat returning an ardent Leave at all costs MP, who's voting record in other areas such as climate change, equality and social justice also are far from the values I hold. That's the joy of the first past the post system. Therefore in the absence of another voting system the only way I can have be represented in any way shape or form at a general election is in the national share of the vote. My vote last time was misrepresented by both politicians and reporters as support for leaving the EU.

If I lived in a constituency where my vote would count and make a difference to who represented me in parliament then things would be different.

Report
RomTheBear 30 Oct 2019
In reply to David Riley:

> By endless repetition of the minority that voted remain ?   Can you find many examples of leavers that agree ?

It’s not up to disagreement, it’s already history. Brexit has already caused massive disruption and damage.

I think you’ll find plenty of leavers who’d think it’s been an utter total fuck up so far.

Post edited at 11:59
Report
David Riley 30 Oct 2019
In reply to RomTheBear:

Yes.  Because of those trying to stop it.

Report
Ian W 30 Oct 2019
In reply to David Riley:

> Yes.  Because of those trying to stop it.

No, because of those trying to get their own version of it. It was tory MP's who voted against mays deal (specifically the ERG members). If it wasnt for the "my way or no way" spoiled brats then we would have been 6 months into the transition period now.

Report
neilh 30 Oct 2019
In reply to David Riley:

At my work the leavers have woken upto the Irish issue and realised remaining is really the only practical option. They do not like it but recognise that it’s not worth reopening old wounds. 

Imho quite a few voters voted leave to give a b###y nose to Cameron.  They have quietly recognised this and realised the consequences.

Iam also surprised by how many business owners I come across who voted leave . Unsurprisingly they have also changed their mind.

Of course the most ardent of leavers do not recognise this. But it’s there, festering away. 

Report
David Riley 30 Oct 2019
In reply to Ian W:

Having decided we were leaving the EU.  Only those that voted for it should have had a say in its implementation. That is normal.  You vote in a Labour government and only Labour voters are in government.

Report
Siward 30 Oct 2019
In reply to pasbury:

You may be right but a hung Parliament is a distinct possibility and with it another 3 years of deadlock. That would be (almost) as bad.

Report
mullermn 30 Oct 2019
In reply to David Riley:

> By endless repetition of the minority that voted remain ?   Can you find many examples of leavers that agree ?

Even if all 17m 2016 leavers still feel that way they only make up 25% of the UK population, so there’s plenty of scope for a majority to disagree with them. 

Report
neilh 30 Oct 2019
In reply to David Riley:

That is all well and good, but you have to carry the rest of the country with you and when the voting difference was a few % it is almost inevitable that it was going to lead to the current position.

Anybody can work that out. And bullying/crowbaring your way through it, gets exactly nowhere, which is what has happened so far.

Either side needed close to 60% to carry this through seriously and kill the issue.

Its tough, but that is the reality.

Report
Eric9Points 30 Oct 2019
In reply to MargieB:

> Well, I've gone simple, treating a GE like a referendum. The Cons versus Lib Dem {clear revocation of article 50}

> And I can hear everyone going NOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!


If you're in a seat currently held by the SNP or Labour then fine, I can't see the Tories picking up any votes in Scotland. If you're in a Tory seat then you need to vote for whichever of the PV/revoke parties has the best chance of winning.

Report
mullermn 30 Oct 2019
In reply to David Riley:

> Having decided we were leaving the EU.  Only those that voted for it should have had a say in its implementation. That is normal.  You vote in a Labour government and only Labour voters are in government.

That analogy doesn’t really work though, does it? Any government has to keep its eye on the whole electorate because they know there will always be another election to fight. I wonder if Maybot would have used the last 3 years differently if she knew she had to sell one specific Brexit to the population via a confirmatory referendum at the end of it. 

Report
David Riley 30 Oct 2019
In reply to mullermn:

> That analogy doesn’t really work though, does it?   

Yes. Notice I'm saying the government only consists of Labour voters.  Not that they can ignore the rest of the population.

Post edited at 12:45
Report
Xharlie 30 Oct 2019
In reply to Ian W:

> No, because of those trying to get their own version of it.

That, of course, is because there was no official "version" of Brexit in the first place. In a way, the 2016 referendum was a non-vote because what won was a label for a wishy-washy concept and not a plan, an endeavour or a strategy. "Brexit" was so vaguely defined that it's no wonder that the following years were spent fighting over everyone's favoured "version" of what that label meant.

And that, by the way, is why I think that the masterminds behind it already won. They actually couldn't care less about who's "version" of Brexit the UK ended up with. What they wanted was the opportunity to ride the turmoil, manipulate the resulting chaos and effectively seize complete control over the democratic system by playing the ensuing games.

I just wish they'd be brazen and feckless enough to give it up, now, and do an about-turn -- abandoning the entire concept and letting us all get back to life before all this. They've surely taken their winnings off the table by now!

A general election is pointless, at this time, because the entire political landscape is so heavily distorted by these games that any vote that is neither tactical nor directly in favour of some Brexit-related outcome will simply be lost in the noise.

Would you vote for someone who's stance is strong on topics affecting your real life in the real world? Perhaps something related to doctors or hospitals or education or equality or housing or taxing corporations or farming or essential services? Perhaps something that affects your home constituency in a unique way and therefore requires that your locality receives fair representation in parliament? Congratulations, then -- barring fortuitous coincidence, that would simultaneously be the proper behaviour for the responsible citizen in a democracy and a meaningless gesture in December, 2019.

That is NOT democracy. This will NOT be a democratic vote. This will, at best, be another move in someone's game -- a game that lay common-folk like you and me have no hope of really understanding because we simply do not count among that "ruling" class -- if it, indeed, has any shred of meaning at all.

Report
mullermn 30 Oct 2019
In reply to David Riley:

edited because the post I replied originally to has been edited significantly. 

> > That analogy doesn’t really work though, does it?   

>Yes. Notice I'm saying the government only consists of Labour voters.  Not that they can ignore the rest of the population.

But Brexit is different. The referendum as conducted was a once-off, so where is the opportunity for non-leavers to hold the ‘leaver designed Brexit’ to account? Under your proposal they absolutely can ignore the rest of the population. 

Post edited at 13:08
Report
MargieB 30 Oct 2019
In reply to Eric9Points:

SNP or Liberal has got in previously in various types of election. No Con challenge in this seat.

Report
Offwidth 30 Oct 2019
In reply to john arran:

I think its best to look over a few tactical voting sites and the best won't be clear yet. I'd also only advise tactical voting in marginal seats.

The Lib Dems, Greens and Plaid are already moving on this (subject to local constituency party agreement)

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/oct/30/election-pact-pursued-by-lib-dems-plaid-cymru-and-greens

The most important thing at the moment for the progressive side is to campaign for young votors to register

Post edited at 12:54
Report
tom_in_edinburgh 30 Oct 2019
In reply to David Riley:

> Having decided we were leaving the EU.  Only those that voted for it should have had a say in its implementation. That is normal.  You vote in a Labour government and only Labour voters are in government.

The Brexiters should have needed to get a pro-Brexit government elected before they got to hold their referendum.  That way the governing party can set out their intentions about what Leave would mean and take responsibility for carrying them out.  Having a referendum without defining what Leave would mean was a complete failure of democracy and complete incompetence from the Electoral Commission in not strongly arguing against it.

We had a GE *after* the referendum and we didn't give the Tories a majority.

Report
Sir Chasm 30 Oct 2019
In reply to David Riley:

> Having decided we were leaving the EU.  Only those that voted for it should have had a say in its implementation. That is normal.  You vote in a Labour government and only Labour voters are in government.

On the face of it that seems a remarkably stupid idea. How do envisage it would have worked? How would you find out who voted for brexit in a secret ballot? Or would you rely on people being honest? How would you pick a team to deal with the eu? Would this sit outside parliament? Why am i taking you seriously?

Report
fred99 30 Oct 2019
In reply to David Riley:

> This is opinion.  But remainers claim it is fact.

> Leavers opinion is it will be a minor disruption, as any change would be.  This amounts to lies according to remainers.  An opinion is not a lie.  Claiming an opinion is a fact is a lie.


NO. Leavers claim it to be opinion, but it actually is fact.

You only have to look at the pile of bureaucratic paperwork that has to be gone through for those outside the EU when importing/exporting or just going for a holiday.

And I say to you, so that there is absolutely ZERO chance of confusion;

YOU ARE A LIAR. BREXIT IS A CON.

Report
fred99 30 Oct 2019
In reply to David Riley:

> Having decided we were leaving the EU.  Only those that voted for it should have had a say in its implementation. That is normal.  You vote in a Labour government and only Labour voters are in government.

What planet do you come from ?

Report
WaterMonkey 30 Oct 2019
In reply to David Riley:

> Yes. Notice I'm saying the government only consists of Labour voters.  Not that they can ignore the rest of the population.

But it's not just the government that votes on policies, it's the whole house. 

Are you leavers aware that thousands of people have actually already lost their jobs as a direct result of brexit? That's not an opinion that's a solid, undeniable fact.

I find you clinically fascinating.

Post edited at 13:49
Report
neilh 30 Oct 2019
In reply to WaterMonkey:

Can you back that up and give specific examples? Its the sort of woolly project fear statement that does the remain argument no good unless both sides can see the evidence.

Report
Ian W 30 Oct 2019
RomTheBear 30 Oct 2019
In reply to David Riley:

> Yes.  Because of those trying to stop it.

Always someone else’s fault when it goes tits up. Classic. Easier to do that than to admit the whole thing wasn’t thought through for sure.

Post edited at 14:22
Report
WaterMonkey 30 Oct 2019
In reply to neilh:

> Can you back that up and give specific examples? Its the sort of woolly project fear statement that does the remain argument no good unless both sides can see the evidence.

What do you want the names of every person?

Get your head out of the sand and research it yourself. I'm absolutely fed up arguing about brexit now. People's livelihoods are already being affected. A good mate of mine has lost his job as a direct result of brexit and can't get another one whilst Brexit is looming, he is now selling his carbon roadbike and mountain bike to support his family. That's just one example, there are thousands in the car industry that have lost their jobs. 

Report
Ian W 30 Oct 2019
In reply to David Riley:

> Having decided we were leaving the EU.  Only those that voted for it should have had a say in its implementation. That is normal.  You vote in a Labour government and only Labour voters are in government.

Quite apart from how others have responded to this comment, you seem remarkably unaware of how the parliamentary system works, especially with respect to committees and working groups.

Report
WaterMonkey 30 Oct 2019
In reply to Ian W:

Thanks Ian.

I really can't be bothered arguing with them anymore. It's like arguing with a flat earther!

Report
Ian W 30 Oct 2019
In reply to neilh:

And without trying to labour the point; these are all reported facts after the event. No opinions involved at all.

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/financial-services/brexit-almost-30-financial-groups-move-operations-from-london-to-dublin-1.4023599

https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies/relocation-london-agencies-brexit/

https://home.kpmg/lu/en/home/insights/2019/03/managing-brexit.html

The latter gives the names of some 227 companies that have transferred or are in process of transferring operations. Some minor, some are household names. Some are massive. Goldman Sachs for eg are relocating well over 1,000 employees to frankfurt in the short term, and assuming they are all higher rate taxpayers (fairly safe as their average pay is around £300k per year), this will cost the exchequer a bare minimum of £200m pa in lost PAYE contributions.

Post edited at 14:34
Report
Ian W 30 Oct 2019
In reply to WaterMonkey:

no sweat; weren't you also involved in the shift rotation we had to operate dealing with Baron's worst excesses of ignorance?

And he was one of the more lucid ones.......

Report
neilh 30 Oct 2019
In reply to Ian W:

More than happy. Like to see hard facts. 

Of course the counter argument that David will put is that unemployment rate over the last 3 years has been falling and is at an all time low. 

So at the moment - even I as a fervent remainer say the jury is out on this one  - you need to put up a better view. 

Better to stick to less refutable evidence like the rate of capital investment has been decimated post Brexit referendum. That is a hard fact.

Post edited at 14:35
Report
Ian W 30 Oct 2019
In reply to neilh:

> More than happy. Like to see hard facts. 

You can be even happier by googling it yourself. Actually don't , happier is not the emotion i would associate with such an extensive list.

> Of course the counter argument that David will put is that unemployment rate over the last 3 years has been falling and is at an all time low. 

Woopee doo for him. I'm afraid he and his arguments hold very little in the way of credibility. We are still full members. The fall in employment will happen when economic output falls (dont forget the 5 - 8% fall in GDP forecast over the coming few years), the car types start transferring production to europe and/or japan, and belts start getting tightened. Dont forget the news this morning that credit card debt and spending is at record levels.

> So at the moment - even I as a fervent remainer say the jury is out on this one  - you need to put up a better view. 

not sure i understand you on this one - a better view of what?

> Better to stick to less refutable evidence like the rate of capital investment has been decimated post Brexit referendum. That is a hard fact.

And that is the hard fact that will depress economic output in the coming years and contribute to the downturn / recession and hence unemployment and lack of national income, and hence further borrowing or austerity.

Report
krikoman 30 Oct 2019
In reply to RomTheBear:

> It’s not up to disagreement, it’s already history. Brexit has already caused massive disruption and damage.

£100 million on an ad campaign telling us things will change after Oct 31st, for one. In the words of Ian Dury, What a Waste!!

> I think you’ll find plenty of leavers who’d think it’s been an utter total f*ck up so far.

And a good number who what to change their minds, but can't!!

Report
JLS 30 Oct 2019
In reply to Ian W:

I'm now wondering if leaving leavers to sort out Brexit might not be as daft as it sounds. We could have a No-deal Brexit, everything goes to sh!t quickly, Boris, et al, are booted out and within 3 year we are back in the EU and on the road to recovery.

As it is, we might limp on in sh!tty compromise exit deal that sees us on a downward path for the next ten years.

Post edited at 15:27
Report
Oceanrower 30 Oct 2019
In reply to JLS:

Except we'd lose our rebates and would have to rejoin with the Schengen agreement and join the Euro...

Post edited at 15:32
Report
MargieB 30 Oct 2019
In reply to what the hex:

If  there is some horse trading between other parties  and  Lib Dems in constituencies in Wales and England, I suspect there could be issues raised such as constitutional change/Proportional representation as the price?

Report
mullermn 30 Oct 2019
In reply to Oceanrower:

> Except we'd lose our rebates and would have to rejoin with the Schengen agreement and join the Euro...

In some ways this would be worth it for the sight every gammon having a simultaneous heart attack. 

Report
Ian W 30 Oct 2019
In reply to JLS:

> I'm now wondering if leaving leavers to sort out Brexit might not be as daft as it sounds. We could have a No-deal Brexit, everything goes to sh!t quickly, Boris, et al, are booted out and within 3 year we are back in the EU and on the road to recovery.

with most of the financial services industry located in Frankfurt / Paris / Dublin......it wont come back. But yes, maybe the "best" way is to let everyone witness / experience the reality, and then see how the happy the rejoiners are with the new terms of membership.......fewer opt outs, possible Euro membership, giving away control.....

If that comes to pass, however, at least we will have seen the last of the tory party, unless they somehow manage to convince daily heil readers that it was all Corbyn's fault for not opposing them well enough.

Report
Ian W 30 Oct 2019
In reply to mullermn:

> In some ways this would be worth it for the sight every gammon having a simultaneous heart attack. 

Thats no problem though; the record investments the Tories are making in the NHS (someone remind me of the number, i don't travel by bus so often these days...) will mean they can all be treated simultaneously wherever they happen to be.

Report
Blunderbuss 30 Oct 2019
In reply to fred99:

> What planet do you come from ?

Farageanus

Report
JLS 30 Oct 2019
In reply to Oceanrower:

>"and join the Euro..."

Once the Pound is at parity with the Dollar that might not seem so bad.

Report
pasbury 30 Oct 2019
In reply to Ian W:

Indeed, in the first of your examples I know someone affected - they now have to commute weekly to Amsterdam causing severe disruption to their whole family. One small effect that will be multiplied millions of times over the coming years if this idiotic project isn't stopped.

Report
pasbury 30 Oct 2019
In reply to neilh:

> More than happy. Like to see hard facts. 

> Of course the counter argument that David will put is that unemployment rate over the last 3 years has been falling and is at an all time low. 

I think that's smoke and mirrors too though:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/aug/14/the-guardian-view-on-record-unemployment-not-the-whole-picture

Report
wercat 30 Oct 2019
In reply to David Riley:

> Having decided we were leaving the EU.  Only those that voted for it should have had a say in its implementation. That is normal.  You vote in a Labour government and only Labour voters are in government.


Ha!  Now you show your colours as you drive off singing "Tomorrow belongs to me ..."

Report
MG 30 Oct 2019
In reply to David Riley

A) You don't vote in a goverment

B) I seem to remember some Lib Dems in government recently

C) the Dup seem influential

D) We pretty much have a brexiteer government and they have f*cked it up. Again. 

Report
bouldery bits 30 Oct 2019
In reply to what the hex:

Planet's on fire and were squabbling about passports.

Might aswell join Nero with his violin practice. 

Report
Jon Stewart 30 Oct 2019
In reply to David Riley:

> Having decided we were leaving the EU.  Only those that voted for it should have had a say in its implementation. That is normal.

You would have to be a complete idiot to believe that.

Report
NathanP 30 Oct 2019
In reply to David Riley:

> Having decided we were leaving the EU.  Only those that voted for it should have had a say in its implementation. That is normal.  You vote in a Labour government and only Labour voters are in government.

There ought to be some sort of prize for achieving the most stupid and unreasonable post ever. 

Report
MargieB 30 Oct 2019
In reply to Offwidth:

These local party agreements for say a  "minority " [ as defined by FPTP system} Green candidate to step aside for a liberal democrat is most interesting. But what I fail to understand is what could be extracted policy wise as exchange for such a move eg" if you get in ,you definitely introduce PR cause that would progress politics from our point of view"- but what guarantee is there and why isn't it  "thanks mate for stepping aside - we won and FPTP now suits us".??

Post edited at 21:50
Report
FactorXXX 30 Oct 2019
In reply to what the hex:

Have anyone else noticed that Corbyn seems to have given up on his 'Richard Cranium from Town X' type questions?
Is that because even his imaginary supporters have lost faith in what he says?

Report
Ian W 30 Oct 2019
In reply to FactorXXX:

> Have anyone else noticed that Corbyn seems to have given up on his 'Richard Cranium from Town X' type questions?

> Is that because even his imaginary supporters have lost faith in what he says?


No, nobody else has noticed, predominantly because you appear to be enjoying an "enhanced imagination", or have you just started the typical Tory negative campaigning a bit early......

Report
HansStuttgart 30 Oct 2019
In reply to fred99:

> What we need is for the Remain side to point out all the lies and complete fiction that Leave came up with, and also just how badly off the ordinary electorate will be if Brexit is allowed to go through.

> This means "indian fighting" of the worst kind, but it'll be necessary, as you can bet your cotton socks that the Tories/Leave will already have their lies ready to go.

Remain should make an actual case of convincing people about the merits of the EU as opposed to whining about what vote leave said.

Report
pasbury 31 Oct 2019
In reply to HansStuttgart:

> Remain should make an actual case of convincing people about the merits of the EU as opposed to whining about what vote leave said.

This is where the remain campaign failed in 2016.

Report
Jon Stewart 31 Oct 2019
In reply to HansStuttgart:

> Remain should make an actual case of convincing people about the merits of the EU as opposed to whining about what vote leave said.

I disagree. 

I'm with Jonathan haidt who's concluded from a great deal of evidence that human beings are fundamentally governed by instinct, emotion and identity ("system 1") and what we think are rational decisions are actually post-hoc justification.

If you want to win an election, you need to tap into people's basic gut emotions. Make them feel fear, disgust, or in-group loyalty. 

Setting out good reasons is a total waste of time. 

Report
mullermn 31 Oct 2019
In reply to Jon Stewart:

> I'm with Jonathan haidt who's concluded from a great deal of evidence that human beings are fundamentally governed by instinct, emotion and identity ("system 1") and what we think are rational decisions are actually post-hoc justification.

> If you want to win an election, you need to tap into people's basic gut emotions. Make them feel fear, disgust, or in-group loyalty. 

That must be an over simplification though. People clearly do change their mind based on new information, and we all have to make decisions on many topics that are far too dull to inspire an emotional connection to your choice.

Assuming you’ve planned for your retirement (for example) then you chose between a pension, or buying some property or burying gold in your garden. You could say that you did that based on an instinctual assessment of the options and justified your choice to yourself later, but how does that differ in practice from making a rational choice based on information?

Report
Snyggapa 31 Oct 2019
In reply to HansStuttgart:

I agree with the sentiment, however it's actually very hard to make a campaign case about "things will be just as they are now" because people don't know what they have until they have lost it.

However it is very easy to make a campaign case for "things will be better if you vote for us" even if they won't - because promising the world is easy. Delivering it after is much harder.

In that way, I feel that any referendum is biased against the status quo

Report
neilh 31 Oct 2019
In reply to Ian W:

Some of us remember the very high unemployment rates at the time of deindustrialisation in the 80's.

At that time the New Channels- ITV and BBC - ran an analysis week by week of the companies that were closing and the number of people who were losing their jobs. It was pretty hardhitting.It would say ABC company closing with the loss of 600 jobs and break it down into regional areas.Some other people on here may remember that.

The Remain campaign  or one of the news channels should be doing this now if there are thousands  losing their jobs.It would be pretty hard hitting and may change Leavers minds. My view is to why they are not doing it is that there are  low  numbers to report.

There are of course some closures like Redcar etc ,but most people recognise that the steel industry is faced with wider issues than Brexit.

Personally I consider that Brexit will be devastating to manufacturing, but it  is going to be a very slow decline. Big manufactuting investment will creep into Europe, not the UK.It will be drip drip away over 10 /20 years. I would not like to be in a VW, BMW, Nissan,Toyota , Ford, etc plant in the UK.Short time OK, medium/long term- very poor.

Report
David Riley 31 Oct 2019
In reply to Snyggapa:

Nothing obvious changed when we joined the EEC. The only thing I was aware of was the price of French wine reduced. Although wine from elsewhere went up.  We still needed passports and travel insurance.

Before joining we used to travel around Europe regularly, without any difficulty.  When at school I went to stay with a family in Belgium on an exchange.  Europe was not seen any differently to how it is now..

Report
Jon Stewart 31 Oct 2019
In reply to mullermn:

> That must be an over simplification though. People clearly do change their mind based on new information, and we all have to make decisions on many topics that are far too dull to inspire an emotional connection to your choice.

Well yes. You can be faced with a decision that just doesn't trigger System 1 thinking, where you have no gut instinct to drive you, and all you can do is think through the reasons. Voting in an election is pretty much the opposite of this.

You might think that buying a lawnmower would be like that, but if you actually go to a garden centre and buy one, you'll be bombarded by marketing trying to manipulate your System 1 into buying this rather than that lawnmower. 

> Assuming you’ve planned for your retirement (for example) then you chose between a pension, or buying some property or burying gold in your garden. You could say that you did that based on an instinctual assessment of the options and justified your choice to yourself later, but how does that differ in practice from making a rational choice based on information?

In this case I did what I thought suited me, what felt right. Am I a gambling type guy who can play the odds and win? Do I want to take matters into my own hands, or would I rather trust an expert? What do people like me normally do, and what did my parents and peers do? 

No, that's another bad example of rational decision making. It's an illusion.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kI1wQswRVaU

Post edited at 09:16
Report
wurzelinzummerset 31 Oct 2019
In reply to Ian W:

> ... The fall in employment will happen when economic output falls (dont forget the 5 - 8% fall in GDP forecast over the coming few years), the car types start transferring production to europe and/or japan, and belts start getting tightened. Dont forget the news this morning that credit card debt and spending is at record levels.

The ten year loss of GDP currently forecast is equivalent to c. 0.3 or 0.4% per year. The estimated loss of GDP per year since the Brexit vote is actually higher due to uncertainty affecting business decision making -- you can get those figures from the daily most favoured by the UKC demographic, The Guardian. Now, those figures are obviously not good news, but they aren't some catastrophe -- assuming external factors aren't too negative the economy still grows. On those forecasts I expect most people in ten years time won't actually be able to say "yes, I'm poorer because of Brexit because of x,y,z". Some will, naturally, those in the car industry for example, but most people won't.

Post edited at 09:26
Report
Ian W 31 Oct 2019
In reply to neilh:

> Some of us remember the very high unemployment rates at the time of deindustrialisation in the 80's.

indeed we do - if your profile age is correct, i am not far behind you......the repercussions of this are still being felt, and will be for years to come. Brexit will accelerate and amplify the effects in communities that can least afford it. People will also then realise that Ken Loach's "I Daniel Blake" and "Sorry we missed you" are just as much documentary as drama.

> At that time the New Channels- ITV and BBC - ran an analysis week by week of the companies that were closing and the number of people who were losing their jobs. It was pretty hardhitting.It would say ABC company closing with the loss of 600 jobs and break it down into regional areas.Some other people on here may remember that.

Yup.

> The Remain campaign  or one of the news channels should be doing this now if there are thousands  losing their jobs.It would be pretty hard hitting and may change Leavers minds. My view is to why they are not doing it is that there are  low  numbers to report.

If only. However broadcasting guidelines require balance, so both sides get to give their story - even if it is a tissue of lies. There have been many industrialists on TV telling us what they are going to do. The CEO of Nissan said quite clearly that a no deal brexit will "make our European manufacturing model unsustainable". Given that their manufacturing base is Sunderland, and they have a partnership and shared platforms with Renault, who have spare capacity at plants throughout France, I find it incredible that Sunderland is still very much a leave hotbed.

> There are of course some closures like Redcar etc ,but most people recognise that the steel industry is faced with wider issues than Brexit.

The wider issues with  steel seem to me to be based around a government that dont see it as a strategic industry, unlike any other major trading nation you could mention.

> Personally I consider that Brexit will be devastating to manufacturing, but it  is going to be a very slow decline. Big manufactuting investment will creep into Europe, not the UK.It will be drip drip away over 10 /20 years. I would not like to be in a VW, BMW, Nissan,Toyota , Ford, etc plant in the UK.Short time OK, medium/long term- very poor.

I agree, it will be a (not so) slow creep until its too late. Given all the companies you mention (and more besides) will already have contingency plans for all eventualities. These will not be reversed once in place, and then who will the non-EU countries we will be able to strike mega superb best in class trade deals with go to - it wont be the UK as we will have no influence, once financial services and manufacturing have gone.

And to add another can of petrol onto the fire, the EU will be able to actively support (financial incentives or otherwise) businesses wishing to relocate from the UK. 

Post edited at 09:43
Report
wercat 31 Oct 2019
In reply to David Riley:

Have you forgotten the insane difference in car prices before the EU intervened?  People were actually importing continental cars for conversion for our roads because of the price difference!  Soldiers had a great deal via Natocars of course, much envied.  Selective editing of history again

You lot are going to bugger us up big time and are still lying by omission about the EU

The only thing that would let me endure any of you in theyears to come if Brexit comes about is if you get a significant (clearly above noise) vote in favour in a referendum.  I'll accept it then as a proper decision but when we leave on the basis of the flawed and screw skewed plebiscite that showed a divided nation as a result of all of the misdeeds of the tories over the past 10 years I will never never have peace in my time with brexiteers.

The idea that the final outcome should be handled by the greased piglet under the advice of the Mekon is abhorrent

Post edited at 10:07
Report
Ian W 31 Oct 2019
In reply to wurzelinzummerset:

> The ten year loss of GDP currently forecast is equivalent to c. 0.3 or 0.4% per year. The estimated loss of GDP per year since the Brexit vote is actually higher due to uncertainty affecting business decision making -- you can get those figures from the daily most favoured by the UKC demographic, The Guardian. Now, those figures are obviously not good news, but they aren't some catastrophe -- assuming external factors aren't too negative the economy still grows. On those forecasts I expect most people in ten years time won't actually be able to say "yes, I'm poorer because of Brexit because of x,y,z". Some will, naturally, those in the car industry for example, but most people won't.

But they will be able to say with some certainty that they are poorer than they would have been had we not left the EU. By 6.7% on average after 15 years according to the grauniad.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/oct/25/how-has-brexit-vote-affected-uk-economy-october-verdict

Report
David Riley 31 Oct 2019
In reply to wercat:

> Have you forgotten the insane difference in car prices before the EU intervened? 

I bought cars before we joined the EEC.  But no I was not aware of the prices in Europe.

Large numbers were smuggled in after we joined to avoid VAT.

Is that the only difference you can think of ?

Now that we buy Nissan, Toyota, Kia, Mitsubishi, Daewoo, Ford, Tesla, Suzuki, Hyundai, Honda, cars will probably get cheaper out of the EU.

Report
HansStuttgart 31 Oct 2019
In reply to Snyggapa:

> I agree with the sentiment, however it's actually very hard to make a campaign case about "things will be just as they are now" because people don't know what they have until they have lost it.

> However it is very easy to make a campaign case for "things will be better if you vote for us" even if they won't - because promising the world is easy. Delivering it after is much harder.

> In that way, I feel that any referendum is biased against the status quo

campaign for further european integration! Time to shift the overton window...

Report
fred99 31 Oct 2019
In reply to mullermn:

> In some ways this would be worth it for the sight every gammon having a simultaneous heart attack. 


And because of the restrictions on foreign workers, we'd "unfortunately" not have the medical staff to treat them (or maybe even the labourers to dig their graves ).

Report
HansStuttgart 31 Oct 2019
In reply to Jon Stewart:

> I disagree. 

> I'm with Jonathan haidt who's concluded from a great deal of evidence that human beings are fundamentally governed by instinct, emotion and identity ("system 1") and what we think are rational decisions are actually post-hoc justification.

> If you want to win an election, you need to tap into people's basic gut emotions. Make them feel fear, disgust, or in-group loyalty. 

> Setting out good reasons is a total waste of time. 

but there is also a positive case about the EU based on instinct (brotherhood, together we are stronger), emotion (love without boundaries) and identity (european identity). It doesn't all have to be negative....

The radical love book that was the base for Imamoglu's election victory against the AKP in Istanbul is a good example.

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2019/06/ex-istanbul-mayor-imamoglu-fights-erdogan-radical-love/591541/

Post edited at 11:02
Report
fred99 31 Oct 2019
In reply to HansStuttgart:

> Remain should make an actual case of convincing people about the merits of the EU as opposed to whining about what vote leave said.


Agreed, and not have Corbyn dishing out the same crap as last time with his extremely iffy "support" of the EU.

Report
DancingOnRock 31 Oct 2019
In reply to Jon Stewart:

You have to factor in Mazlo’s Heirachy of needs. The further up the hierarchy you are, the less emotional and more objective you become. 
 

There’s a lot of people halfway up who think they’re at the bottom, but that’s another argument. What they feel is what matters. 
 

Hence you have to both appeal to people’s basic instincts and present logical argument if you want to maximise your votes.

Report
fred99 31 Oct 2019
In reply to David Riley:

> Now that we buy Nissan, Toyota, Kia, Mitsubishi, Daewoo, Ford, Tesla, Suzuki, Hyundai, Honda, cars will probably get cheaper out of the EU.

But if people haven't got jobs, how will they be able to afford cars ?

Report
HansStuttgart 31 Oct 2019
In reply to fred99:

> Agreed, and not have Corbyn dishing out the same crap as last time with his extremely iffy "support" of the EU.

It is quite telling about the weakness of UK's political leadership for remain that they did not manage to oust Corbyn after he voted for a carte blanche a50 notification.

Report
DancingOnRock 31 Oct 2019
In reply to fred99:

Have Labour actually made a decision yet?

Their website claims they’re going to spend 6 months negotiating a better deal and then hold another referendum. 
 

Their spokesman on the TV this morning said they’re going to “let the people decide” but wouldn’t elaborate any further. ie no mention of a second referendum. 
 

So the choice seems to be:

cons - leave with the deal

Libs - withdraw A50

Lab - another 6 months of arguing and no guarantee of any better deal. 

If I was Farage I’d be only be contesting Labour leave constituencies. 

So I predict another hung parliament only this time with Cons and Brexit party. 

Post edited at 11:10
Report
David Riley 31 Oct 2019
In reply to fred99:

> But if people haven't got jobs, how will they be able to afford cars ?

> And because of the restrictions on foreign workers, we'd "unfortunately" not have the medical staff to treat them (or maybe even the labourers to dig their graves ).

Report
Sir Chasm 31 Oct 2019
In reply to DancingOnRock:

> You have to factor in Mazlo’s Heirachy of needs. The further up the hierarchy you are, the less emotional and more objective you become. 

> There’s a lot of people halfway up who think they’re at the bottom, but that’s another argument. What they feel is what matters. 

> Hence you have to both appeal to people’s basic instincts and present logical argument if you want to maximise your votes.

Assuming you're referring to Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs, i think you've got it a bit arse about face. Satisfying the needs at the bottom is the stuff that needs addressing logically, have I got enough to eat, shelter etc. The higher up stuff is less tangible and far more open to emotional arguments. 

Report
Eric9Points 31 Oct 2019
In reply to DancingOnRock:

The Labour position is perfectly simple.

Labour gets a better deal then asks people whether they want it ir would rather stay.

You might argue whether "better" is actually better but that's another argument.

Anyway, their campaign launch is happening today with Jeremy widening the debate to all the other issues we should have been addressing in the three years we've lost since voting to leave.

Report
DancingOnRock 31 Oct 2019
In reply to Sir Chasm:

My point was they think they’re at the bottom but they’re in the middle and hence are open to emotional argument, But they don’t have enough time to sit around and analyse the logical arguments as they’d too busy staying in the middle. The basic needs at the bottom are satisfied by instinct, not complex thought patterns. The people at the top, with good jobs, hobbies and free time have loads of time to mull over the arguments logically. 

Report
DancingOnRock 31 Oct 2019
In reply to Eric9Points:

Except it’s not that simple because even if they get a majority, the MPs will still have to vote on accepting the deal. 

So in another 8 months time expect this still to be rumbling on. No matter whether Labour, Lib or Conservative  win. 

 

Report
neilh 31 Oct 2019
In reply to Eric9Points:

I reaaly had to laugh at todays Corbyns statment of sorting Brexit in 6 months. Yet again another vacous bland statement on Brexit.He is getting as bad as Boris.Does  not help his credibility.

God help us all.

Post edited at 11:56
Report
neilh 31 Oct 2019
In reply to David Riley:

Why will they get cheaper?

Report
jezb1 31 Oct 2019
In reply to neilh:

> I reaaly had to laugh at todays Corbyns statment of sorting Brexit in 6 months. Yet again another vacous bland statement on Brexit.He is getting as bad as Boris.Does  not help his credibility.

I'm not particularly pro Corbyn, but what would you expect him to say? He can't stand there and say "no I really don't know what to do to solve Brexit". 

Report
David Riley 31 Oct 2019
In reply to neilh:

Are they not taxed entering the EU ?

Report
neilh 31 Oct 2019
In reply to Ian W:

Dead easy. Immigration.Leavers are so fixed on ending free movement, they ignore the downside.

Report
Ian W 31 Oct 2019
In reply to David Riley:

> I bought cars before we joined the EEC.  But no I was not aware of the prices in Europe.

> Large numbers were smuggled in after we joined to avoid VAT.

> Is that the only difference you can think of ?

> Now that we buy Nissan, Toyota, Kia, Mitsubishi, Daewoo, Ford, Tesla, Suzuki, Hyundai, Honda, cars will probably get cheaper out of the EU.

Once again, very wrong.

Prices will increase because of tariffs, until we get a zero tariff deal. Prices have already increased because of the exchange rate movement. 

You'll have to help me on this one - what evidence do you have for your smuggling accusation, and how would that work practically, given that VAT is payable on registration of the vehicle? I think you are possibly making this one up, but i'm open minded enough to discuss it.

Report
DancingOnRock 31 Oct 2019
In reply to neilh:

That’s because he’s always been anti EU but now has to oppose the Conservatives. There’s nowhere else he can position himself and remain attractive to labour voters who voted in and out. 
Boris has staked out his claim. Corbyn can’t do the opposite so has done the next best thing. 

Post edited at 12:26
Report
DancingOnRock 31 Oct 2019
In reply to neilh:

I think leavers are more fixated with controlling immigration and stopping what they see as meddling from the EU. 
 

Whatever final deal is done on movement of goods and services will have to include movement of people. Because you can’t move goods and services without moving people. It’s impossible. 

Report
David Riley 31 Oct 2019
In reply to Ian W:

> Once again, very wrong.

Your opinion.  But you state it as fact.

> Prices will increase because of tariffs, until we get a zero tariff deal. Prices have already increased because of the exchange rate movement. 

Who will charge this tariff and where does the money go ?   I believe the tariff goes to the EU at present.

> You'll have to help me on this one - what evidence do you have for your smuggling accusation, and how would that work practically, given that VAT is payable on registration of the vehicle? I think you are possibly making this one up, but i'm open minded enough to discuss it.

I know someone very well that used to do it for a long period using false documents.  Customs and Excise eventually caught up with him.  He pretty much got away with it.   Having made a considerable amount doing so.

Report
galpinos 31 Oct 2019
In reply to David Riley:

> Before joining we used to travel around Europe regularly, without any difficulty.  When at school I went to stay with a family in Belgium on an exchange.  Europe was not seen any differently to how it is now..

Europe is not the same as it was in the late 60s/early 70s, life now isn't the same and why are we wanting to go back to then?

You've got a good 20 years on me as I don't remember a time before we were in the EU. What was so great about it?

Report
David Riley 31 Oct 2019
In reply to galpinos:

>  I don't remember a time before we were in the EU. What was so great about it?

Nothing.    It was the same as being in the EU.

Report
Ian W 31 Oct 2019
In reply to David Riley:

> Your opinion.  But you state it as fact.

Ok, its my opinion based on a number of years working in the automotive industry in the UK, france and germany, within the finance and commercial functions, and my ability to read and add up. What do you base your opinion that they will fall on?

> Who will charge this tariff and where does the money go ?   I believe the tariff goes to the EU at present.

The tariff will be paid to the importing country. that paid to EU countries is split between that country and the EU central funds.

> I know someone very well that used to do it for a long period using false documents.  Customs and Excise eventually caught up with him.  He pretty much got away with it.   Having made a considerable amount doing so.

So this extensive smuggling was based on one acquaintance working in organised crime who was caught. Well done him. There are criminals in all walks of life defrauding people / organisations / nations. Some of whom get caught, some of whom I suspect don't. One anecdote doesnt however provide much evidence. A name and approximate date of being caught would help; at least i could do some googling, given that you dont seem capable of providing evidence.

Report
neilh 31 Oct 2019
In reply to David Riley:

Depends on trade agreements and the country of origin( not the brand name).

Report
David Riley 31 Oct 2019
In reply to Ian W:

> The tariff will be paid to the importing country. that paid to EU countries is split between that country and the EU central funds.

So either we won't have that tariff, or all the money will go to the UK.  We can use it for the electric vehicles subsidy.

Report
Ian W 31 Oct 2019
In reply to David Riley:

Post brexit, it will all go to the uk. But thats not really a good thing, as it will be uk consumers paying the tariff. We can then give it to the french to provide the power infrastructure for the EV's.

You remembered any more details about your smuggly mate?

Post edited at 13:11
Report
David Riley 31 Oct 2019
In reply to Ian W:

> Post brexit, it will all go to the uk. We can then use it to pay the french and the chinese to build the infrastructure to power the EV's that we import from China.

Sounds good to me.

Post edited at 13:14
Report
Jon Stewart 31 Oct 2019
In reply to DancingOnRock:

> You have to factor in Mazlo’s Heirachy of needs. The further up the hierarchy you are, the less emotional and more objective you become. 

Why do you think that? I see no reason to believe it. I think Maslow's theory is woolly to begin with.

> There’s a lot of people halfway up who think they’re at the bottom, but that’s another argument. What they feel is what matters. 

> Hence you have to both appeal to people’s basic instincts and present logical argument if you want to maximise your votes.

This doesn't ring true to me. I think you have to present some arguments that *appear* logical to appeal to some fairly small proportion of the electorate - people like me for whom rationality is central to their identity (we're pretty deluded, but at least we try). But in politics, there's rarely any evidence to support a particular position. For example, no one actually knows whether austerity has been a help or hindrance to the economy because there is no counterfactual. You can make a logical-sounding argument both for or against cutting public spending. People will believe one side or the other depending on their self-interest and identity.

So, if you want to win votes, appeal to people's self-interest and identity, but if you're talking to well-educated people, dress it up as a logical argument. 

Post edited at 13:13
Report
fred99 31 Oct 2019
In reply to HansStuttgart:

Unfortunately there are (Labour Party) rules regarding getting rid of a "leader".

Report
what the hex 31 Oct 2019
In reply to Jon Stewart:

Austerity was required after the banking crisis - it was the form that it took that bothers me - making the most vulnerable pay; it made me want to vomit.

Report
fred99 31 Oct 2019
In reply to David Riley:

> I know someone very well that used to do it for a long period using false documents.  Customs and Excise eventually caught up with him.  He pretty much got away with it.   Having made a considerable amount doing so.

So does this mean that you knew all the time that he was smuggling, yet kept quiet about it - isn't this "aiding and abetting", or at the very least implies you have a rather cavalier regard for the law. How many other vehicle (and other) crimes have you been (and still are ?) involved with/in ??

Report
David Riley 31 Oct 2019
In reply to fred99:

I met him after he stopped.    How many crimes are you involved in ?    This is a friendly climbing forum.

Report
David Riley 31 Oct 2019
In reply to fred99:

> So does this mean that you knew all the time that he was smuggling, yet kept quiet about it - isn't this "aiding and abetting", or at the very least implies you have a rather cavalier regard for the law.

I also knew about large scale drug smuggling.  But that was because I was writing a report for New Scotland Yard.

Report
DancingOnRock 31 Oct 2019
In reply to Jon Stewart:

Totally agree. Logical argument doesn’t have to be provable. It’s not science it’s politics, there’s no way to prove a theory, it’s all hypothesis. 

Report
Ian W 31 Oct 2019
In reply to David Riley:

would you rather not keep it in the uk to develop our own infrastructure.......?

I'd really love to be proven wrong regarding my pessimism for the future of the UK outside the EU, but i dont think i will be. I've also been looking at the efforts various EU countries are making to identify and target uk business to relocate to the EU. They have already succeeded in 227 cases, the combined turnover of which exceeds the trade we do with the nations the UK has agreed trade deals / extensions with so far. 

Report
pasbury 31 Oct 2019
In reply to David Riley:

> Nothing.    It was the same as being in the EU.

Well why are you getting your knickers in a twist about leaving then!

Report
David Riley 31 Oct 2019
In reply to Ian W:

> would you rather not keep it in the uk to develop our own infrastructure.......?

There are a lot of conflicting ideas.  Do you object to trade ?

Investment into the UK is a good thing, even though the profit from that investment will go back to the country it came from ?   But buying from other countries is a bad thing, even when they can make them much cheaper than we can  (and need jobs to make them)  ?

We will suffer job losses to the EU.  But won't have people to fill those jobs without EU migration.

Report
David Riley 31 Oct 2019
In reply to pasbury:

> Well why are you getting your knickers in a twist about leaving then!

I'm happy about leaving.  It's you going insane about it.

Report
In reply to DancingOnRock:

> If I was Farage I’d be only be contesting Labour leave constituencies. 

unfortunately I think Farage is a bit more savvy.

There will be Brexit candidates in as many seats as they can arrange in time.

Despite FPTP the popular vote still has a little bit of meaning for the smaller parties.

1 Seat accompanied by 15% of the popular vote provides a much better backdrop to future political grandstanding than  2 seats with only 5% of the popular vote.

Report
Ian W 31 Oct 2019
In reply to David Riley:

> There are a lot of conflicting ideas.  Do you object to trade ?

Eh? ridiculous notion. i am very much in favour of trade, and membership of the worlds biggest free trade association.

> Investment into the UK is a good thing, even though the profit from that investment will go back to the country it came from ?   But buying from other countries is a bad thing, even when they can make them much cheaper than we can  (and need jobs to make them)  ?

I'm afraid you aren't making sense here. (but see my response to your next point).

> We will suffer job losses to the EU.  But won't have people to fill those jobs without EU migration.

I think i understand your point here; "we will have lower output and employment, but its ok because there will be a smaller workforce as a result of lower migration"

If that is the case, then it'll take more than a simple climbing forum discussion to increase your knowledge base adequately.

I note you still haven't provided evidence to the queries above, but have started to resort to off tangent comments and some general whataboutery. Are you going to provide anything beyond anecdotes and odd questions and obfuscation?

Post edited at 14:38
Report
pasbury 31 Oct 2019
In reply to David Riley:

As obtuse as ever.

Report
David Riley 31 Oct 2019
In reply to Ian W:

"We will suffer job losses to the EU.  But won't have people to fill those jobs without EU migration."

> I think i understand your point here; "we will have lower output and employment, but its ok because there will be a smaller workforce as a result of lower migration"

No. That is not my point.  Since there is no chance of the workforce not continuing to grow.

My point was the contradiction of the claim that the end of EU migration would cause serious damage due to shortage of employees, and the claim there will be massive unemployment from jobs lost to the EU.

Report
Ian W 31 Oct 2019
In reply to David Riley:

> "We will suffer job losses to the EU.  But won't have people to fill those jobs without EU migration."

> No. That is not my point.  Since there is no chance of the workforce not continuing to grow.

> My point was the contradiction of the claim that the end of EU migration would cause serious damage due to shortage of employees, and the claim there will be massive unemployment from jobs lost to the EU.

A-ha! thats better. Much clearer. But much more complicated than that, unsurprisingly, so those two potential conflicts can co-exist. We aren't just importing EU citizens to fill an excess of vacancies, that will happily fall into balance on our departure. 

Anyway, I'll keep the responses brief so you can concentrate on providing the evidence to your claims as requested previously.

Report
mullermn 31 Oct 2019
In reply to David Riley:

> My point was the contradiction of the claim that the end of EU migration would cause serious damage due to shortage of employees, and the claim there will be massive unemployment from jobs lost to the EU.

You can’t genuinely be making the case that a redundant car factory worker or finance professional can pick up seasonal fruit picking or nursing work, because that’s so dumb I refuse to believe that can be it. Could you expand on your argument, please?

Report
DancingOnRock 31 Oct 2019
In reply to Nempnett Thrubwell:

That depends on what he is trying to achieve. Fielding a Brexit candidate in a marginal Conservative constituency that voted leave risks splitting the leave vote and allowing Labour in and potentially a second referendum. 
So, the big question is; does he want Brexit or not?

Report
MargieB 31 Oct 2019
In reply to bouldery bits:

This really caught my eye today because there is a huge irony in us focusing on so many issues but this one doesn't have the priority it deserves.

And having had a Green candidate actually voted in from my constituency into the Scottish Parliament, I recognise the frustration of the by-pass political system that puts Green aside.

Again, from my hung constituency point of view{ between SNP, Lib Dem and Green voting histories}, I feel the Greens should exert huge leverage and make demands on policy and constitutional reform { PR specifically}But can they?? Is this their chance??

And there is nothing more annoying than hearing half baked green -washing ideas or false, to-be-later ignored ,promises!

Post edited at 17:01
Report
RomTheBear 31 Oct 2019
In reply to David Riley:

> My point was the contradiction of the claim that the end of EU migration would cause serious damage due to shortage of employees, and the claim there will be massive unemployment from jobs lost to the EU.

There is no contradiction. The evidence suggests skills of EU migrants are for the most part complementary of that of native workers. Therefore an increase in U.K. unemployment would most likely not alleviate shortages of EU workers. The evidence suggests also that the complementary skills brought by EU workers actually contributes to increase the productivity - and therefore employability and wages - of native workers.

Report
Offwidth 31 Oct 2019
In reply to MargieB:

I agree with your concerns but there is a Maslow heirarcy here: avoiding what will certainly with a working majority become the most damaging and reactionary tory government ever is the priority.

Report
HansStuttgart 31 Oct 2019
In reply to fred99:

> Unfortunately there are (Labour Party) rules regarding getting rid of a "leader".

Similar for the Tories. But the ERG managed to install Johnson. Remain did not affect a change in LAB leadership.

Report
MargieB 31 Oct 2019
In reply to Offwidth:

There are these local constituency agreements for say a green candidate to step aside. However, if  a party, {say Labour}  uses the few green MPs to form a working majority - if that situation occurs, I think the price of that support should be major constitutional reform, as well as policies of a green nature economically. Our politics cannot meet the requirements of the 21st century without a basic structure change that doesn't stymy solutions by strangling diverse political opinion.   I hope the green party exerts major leverage, especially in constitutional reform because Brexit has had the only benefit of exposing the inadequacies of the system which should not be forgotten in the detail of the normal range of policy interests -NHS etc..Labour would not on its own do this change, IMO.

Post edited at 21:52
Report
FactorXXX 31 Oct 2019
In reply to HansStuttgart:

> Similar for the Tories. But the ERG managed to install Johnson. Remain did not affect a change in LAB leadership.

The ERG didn't install Johnson, he became PM in an election contest after May resigned.
Corbyn has won a leadership battle and there was/is nothing to stop a similar process happening again. 

Report
Offwidth 31 Oct 2019
In reply to MargieB:

I forgot to add that one of the great things about tactical voting is that it can be used, if voters so choose, to give the greens a big boost in the majority of seats that are safe constituencies. Even mybe saving a few deposits.

Report
krikoman 31 Oct 2019
In reply to fred99:

> Unfortunately there are (Labour Party) rules regarding getting rid of a "leader".


Why unfortunately?

Report
pasbury 01 Nov 2019
In reply to FactorXXX:

> The ERG didn't install Johnson, he became PM in an election contest after May resigned.

With a franchise of ~160,000 people. Actually 92,153 people voted for him. The parliamentary Conservative party had given him to them on a plate.

Post edited at 00:14
Report
HansStuttgart 01 Nov 2019
In reply to FactorXXX:

> The ERG didn't install Johnson, he became PM in an election contest after May resigned.

> Corbyn has won a leadership battle and there was/is nothing to stop a similar process happening again. 

And which group of the CON party forced May to resign by withholding support for her brexit deal in the sure knowledge that the members would choose someone more to their liking?

In contrast, remain LAB MPs continue to support Corbyn so he does not face enough pressure to resign yet. I am not of fan of Corbyn, but he is more competent than remain LAB MPs in one of the basic rules of politics: fight for and control power in your party. (For the fun of it, just imagine if someone like Angela Merkel would have been in LAB in 2016/17. Corbyn and McDonnell would have resigned with a huge mea culpa by now.)

Report
MargieB 01 Nov 2019
In reply to what the hex:

Thanks Trump. You have now really told us that Boris' majority will ultimately require the WTO rules based economy to work with American economy. Now that is as legitimate to tell us as Obama saying if we leave EU we will be bottom of the list for a deal with America. Its conditional.

Personal statements about a particular opposition party are obviously undiplomatic and not de rigeur.

It's Boris who should have told Trump to keep his nose out and spoiling his obfuscating strategy!

Post edited at 09:19
Report
neilh 01 Nov 2019
In reply to MargieB:

Its already very interesting. with JC naming Duke of Westminster, Mike Ashley and Jim Ratcliffe as " persons of interest" if you like. Considering Ashley is about the only one trying to save the High Street and Ratcliffe has lots of highly skilled and well paid employees, I wonder if JC's comments are a bit off target.Both self made.We need these type of wealth generators , although Ashley is not everyones cup of tea at least he puts his money where his mouth is.

Duke of Westminster-- take it or leave it with him.

Report
cb294 01 Nov 2019
In reply to neilh:

That is interesting way of rephrasing MAs exploitative business practises. The less said about JR the better. Monaco should anyway be bulldozed into the sea, ideally including all its millionaire tax dodgers from the rest of Europe.

CB

Report
neilh 01 Nov 2019
In reply to cb294:

Well if you are a salaried employee of MA its well known that he pays big bonuses and there is an excellent profit share scheme. And yes he is about the only one doing something on the High Street.All the big players are retracting and closing down, at least he is taking a risk.

And JR as an example - saved Belstaff and bought the closed down Land Rover to kickstart the brands- so yes he also puts his money down in business.

Double edge sword.

Report
Harry Jarvis 01 Nov 2019
In reply to neilh:

> Well if you are a salaried employee of MA its well known that he pays big bonuses and there is an excellent profit share scheme.

Is that the same Mike Ashley who imposes working practices described as Victorian and which have been the subject of a Parliamentary Select Committee enquiry, and who has been found to be paying warehouse workers at less than the statutory minimum wage? 

Report
cb294 01 Nov 2019
In reply to Harry Jarvis:

Precisely my point.

CB

Report
neilh 01 Nov 2019
In reply to Harry Jarvis:

Yes.As I said not my cup of tea.And that story is what 2 years old .

Upto you if you want somebody to have a go and resecue retailers that have gone bust. Nobody else doing it.

Your choice.Do you want House of Fraser employees in jobs etc etc, as an example?

Tough decision.

Report
Harry Jarvis 01 Nov 2019
In reply to neilh:

> Upto you if you want somebody to have a go and resecue retailers that have gone bust. Nobody else doing it.

> Your choice.Do you want House of Fraser employees in jobs etc etc, as an example?

Is it not possible to try to rescue retailers and also treat staff with dignity and respect, and to pay them properly? 

Report
fred99 01 Nov 2019
In reply to HansStuttgart:

> Similar for the Tories. But the ERG managed to install Johnson. Remain did not affect a change in LAB leadership.


May had to deal with losing numerous votes in Parliament, which affected her standing.

Corbyn has not had the same problem.

Report
fred99 01 Nov 2019
In reply to krikoman:

> Why unfortunately?


Because those very rules have been the reason Corbyn has remained in place, and we haven't had a competent Opposition in Parliament.

Report
Deleted bagger 01 Nov 2019
In reply to Offwidth:

There are some signs of tactical voting. The Green Party have told it's supporters to vote Labour.

Meanwhile in the Colne Valley it's going to be really hard to return the sitting Labour candidate. Less than a thousand majority and up against the former Tory incumbent. After two days out on the stump I'm sure it'll come down to how the younger people vote. This is going to be hard slog.

Anyone else here doing any campaigning for political parties?

Report
cb294 01 Nov 2019
In reply to Harry Jarvis:

Never mind properly. Lawfully would do for a start.

CB

Report
neilh 01 Nov 2019
In reply to Harry Jarvis:

Are there businesses queuing up to do what MA has done? No.

Its a really tough brutal market retail.

Not saying JC is wrong, he just should never have personalised his comments.

Post edited at 11:23
Report
cb294 01 Nov 2019
In reply to neilh:

Why? Both MA and JR have repeatedly and publicly involved themselves in politics, both by giving opinion and by donating money. They are fair game during an election campaign.

CB

Report
Eric9Points 01 Nov 2019
In reply to HansStuttgart:

Labour MPs can't get rid of Jeremy unless the Unions and the membership vote the same way as they do in an election contest.

..and no, they can't just get him to resign by being nasty to him. They tried that.

Anyway, the die is cast, it's too late for change.

Post edited at 11:44
Report
neilh 01 Nov 2019
In reply to cb294:

I am not sure I have ever heard MA involve himself in politics . He comes across as not liking any politician and considers them all useless

You can attack them in a better way by setting out your policies. If elected that is the way to do it.

Cannot find anything on JR's financial donations to political parties..do you know of any?

Post edited at 11:51
Report
Rob Exile Ward 01 Nov 2019
In reply to neilh:

FFS if JC thinks the problem with our economy - and the systemic lack of opportunity there is for millions of workers white collar, blue collar or whatever - is down to the actions of a few greedy individuals - then he is not fit to take part in a 6th form debate, let alone an election. This is the politics of envy, as opposed to a politics underpinned by rational analysis of the issues, leading to policies that will actually achieve desired outcomes.

Anyway folks it's clear what we should all be doing - voting for whichever Remain candidate in each of constituencies is the most likely to win. For me, I'd even vote for a Tory remainer, if there was such a thing nowadays; otherwise it's likely to be a toss up between LibDem and Plaid.

Report
Lusk 01 Nov 2019
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:

Have you read his speech? Those individuals were just examples of what's wrong with this country and what needs changing.  I notice you omit to mention Murdoch and Odey.

The way you and your ilk bang on about JC, just go and vote Tory, you know you want to.

Post edited at 12:22
Report
Bob Kemp 01 Nov 2019
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:

> FFS if JC thinks the problem with our economy - and the systemic lack of opportunity there is for millions of workers white collar, blue collar or whatever - is down to the actions of a few greedy individuals - then he is not fit to take part in a 6th form debate, let alone an election. This is the politics of envy, as opposed to a politics underpinned by rational analysis of the issues, leading to policies that will actually achieve desired outcomes.

A rational analysis of the issue would tell you that we are living in an oligarchy. This doesn't just mean that too few people have too much wealth, but that they also have too much power, to the extent that they have undermined our democracy. And the vote for Brexit has roots in that. If you want to move past that you have to remove the oligarchy. Whether Corbyn is capable of addressing that is another issue - I suspect not, but then, as I've said here before, I am no fan. Apart from anything else he doesn't appear to be able to articulate the issues in ways that don't open him up to criticisms like your 'politics of envy' (that well-known right-wing cliche).

Report
neilh 01 Nov 2019
In reply to Bob Kemp:

Have the likes of JR and MA really undermined democracy? Its a sound bite.

Report
Bob Kemp 01 Nov 2019
In reply to neilh:

Cherry-picking your capitalists there Neil... 

Report
Ramblin dave 01 Nov 2019
In reply to Eric9Points:

> Labour MPs can't get rid of Jeremy unless the Unions and the membership vote the same way as they do in an election contest.

> ..and no, they can't just get him to resign by being nasty to him. They tried that.

In fact, you can't help but wonder whether Labour wouldn't be in power now if their MPs had unshakingly backed JC from day one rather than undermining him and angling to replace him with someone more "electable"...

Report
neilh 01 Nov 2019
In reply to Bob Kemp:

Which shows how complicated it is. Broad brush sweeping statements get you nowhere in a mature democratic country like the UK.

If you say there is an issue with the concept of rental capitalism and there not being enough innnovation and dynamism in the economy as a result, then I would agree with you.But the likes of JR and MA, christ we should be listening to them to create jobs and welath for the taxes we need for the future. As MA has said to the HofC when they look at the problems in retail- why on earth are you not listening to what he is saying.he has got more balls/bravery with his money  in this area than anyone else at the moment.He is part of the solution. You might not like his attitude, but he is well worth listening to.

Post edited at 14:13
Report
cb294 01 Nov 2019
In reply to neilh:

In the case of JR, not f*cking off to Monaco precisely to avoid paying taxes would be a start. As I said above, the place should be razed, as it only lives off taxes evaded elsewhere. But everybody moving there for tax purposes while using the infrastructure of other countries to make their money should similarly be treated with contempt .

CB

Report
Offwidth 01 Nov 2019
In reply to Deleted bagger:

Best wishes on your efforts... Colne must be in the middle of top 10 of the 40 odd seats the tories need to win from Labour, so if you win you can feel very pleased. If everyone stopped being miserable about the fake news that Boris is very likely to get his majority and worked towards stopping it, what I already see as (just) a more likely Labour minority government, would be come very likely.  For the poor brexit voters of Colne valley do they really think that a dishonest old etonian who initially voted against Mays brexit deal (which for a Colne perspective is close to identical to his deal, and lied that we would be out of the EU now, no ifs no buts), will fix the struggling local hospitals, social services, and schools.

On top of Prof Curtice's expert predictions we now have quite a few more positive articles, backing his position of Boris acheiving a tory majority as being hard work, for example:

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2019/10/11-reasons-be-excited-about-britain-s-christmas-election

For the hard nosed types, even the betting sites are reducing odds of a hung parliamaent (very similar odds now to a Boris win)

https://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/next-uk-general-election/overall-majority

Post edited at 15:25
Report
Bob Kemp 01 Nov 2019
neilh 01 Nov 2019
In reply to Bob Kemp:

Losing £1m a week on funding Hof F.

And there are lots of people queuing up to invest in the stuff he does. Queues of entrepreneurs wanting to take the risk he does at the moment.

I do not think so.

 From the same paper a different article on him

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2014/jan/17/sports-direct-mike-ashley-newcastle-united-profile

And the HofF deal cost 6000 jobs but also saved alot more ( which would have vanished if he had not done his deal). Tough decisions not to be made by the feint hearted.

Get some perspective.

Post edited at 15:44
Report
DancingOnRock 01 Nov 2019
In reply to Nempnett Thrubwell:

> unfortunately I think Farage is a bit more savvy.

> There will be Brexit candidates in as many seats as they can arrange in time.

> Despite FPTP the popular vote still has a little bit of meaning for the smaller parties.

> 1 Seat accompanied by 15% of the popular vote provides a much better backdrop to future political grandstanding than  2 seats with only 5% of the popular vote.

It appears he has offered a ‘Brexit alliance’ with Boris. 

Report
Bob Kemp 01 Nov 2019
In reply to neilh:

> Losing £1m a week on funding Hof F.

> And there are lots of people queuing up to invest in the stuff he does. Queues of entrepreneurs wanting to take the risk he does at the moment.

Good luck to them...

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2019/10/31/profits-plunge-80m-mike-ashleys-investment-business/

> I do not think so.

?

>  From the same paper a different article on him

You haven't been keeping up have you?

> And the HofF deal cost 6000 jobs but also saved alot more ( which would have vanished if he had not done his deal). Tough decisions not to be made by the feint hearted.

Ashley claimed over 3500 jobs were saved, not more than 6000

> Get some perspective.

What does that mean, apart from being a vague and pointless insult?

Report
Harry Jarvis 01 Nov 2019
In reply to neilh:

> Get some perspective.

An alternative perspective might be that everyone else recognises that the writing is well and truly on the wall for those parts of the retail sector that Ashley is involved with and that there are solid structural reasons as to why so many High Street retailers are going to the wall. Of course the operating environment is tough and there are severe headwinds in the form of an adverse business rates environment and rapacious landlords, but it may be that no-one else is so stupid as to invest in such marginal operations.

It's not as if he's making a sparkling success of his undertakings - £21m profit on sales of £3.5bn does not speak to me of any great magic touch or unique ability. 

Report
Bob Kemp 01 Nov 2019
In reply to Harry Jarvis:

> It's not as if he's making a sparkling success of his undertakings - £21m profit on sales of £3.5bn does not speak to me of any great magic touch or unique ability. 

Absolutely. Interestingly, when you start looking it's noticeable that most entrepreneurs don't have any special ability or magic touch. There's a lot of myth-making around the idea of the entrepreneur. Most of the hugely successful ones seem to owe their success to an ability to contrive some kind of monopoly or near-monopoly situation - Gates, Murdoch, Bezos. 

Post edited at 16:40
Report
Blunderbuss 01 Nov 2019
In reply to Harry Jarvis:

> An alternative perspective might be that everyone else recognises that the writing is well and truly on the wall for those parts of the retail sector that Ashley is involved with and that there are solid structural reasons as to why so many High Street retailers are going to the wall. Of course the operating environment is tough and there are severe headwinds in the form of an adverse business rates environment and rapacious landlords, but it may be that no-one else is so stupid as to invest in such marginal operations.

> It's not as if he's making a sparkling success of his undertakings - £21m profit on sales of £3.5bn does not speak to me of any great magic touch or unique ability. 

And if he made massive profits he'd be damned for that... 

Report
Harry Jarvis 01 Nov 2019
In reply to Blunderbuss:

> And if he made massive profits he'd be damned for that... 

It would depend on how he made those massive profits. If he made then by exploiting his workers, a la Bezos, then I wouldn't be surprised if he were damned for that. If he made them by dint of a brilliant market strategy, or by the development of a brilliant new product, I would hope he might be congratulated. 

However, since he doesn't produce massive profits, the question doesn't really arise. 

Report
msp1987 02 Nov 2019
In reply to what the hex:

Vote Labour. 

Nothing will change whilst the Tories are in power. Does not matter if we are in or outside the EU.

Report
MargieB 02 Nov 2019
In reply to what the hex:

Farage is aiming to take Labour seats and even if the Cons don't get a full majority, he's angling for a position where he provides the working majority like the DUP does at the moment.

He won't dent the Con vote but he will dent the Labour vote and also restore the dynamic of the campaign to Brexit which is contrary to Corbyn who wants to prioritise domestic policy. This could be a game changer and really create a Leave Parliament with a bigger power base than before, imo. 

Post edited at 09:11
Report
neilh 02 Nov 2019
In reply to Harry Jarvis:

The difference is possibly that he spots an opportunity where others do not. There are after all plenty of businesses which make money etc long after their “ sell by date” .

there is an air of English middle class professional intellectual snoberism against people like MA.

Report
Bob Kemp 02 Nov 2019
In reply to neilh:

> there is an air of English middle class professional intellectual snoberism against people like MA.

I think you made that up. People don’t like him because of his behaviour and projected persona, not his class background (which isn’t clear but seeing as he’s an ex-grammar school boy squash player who started with a £10000 loan from his family is probably pretty middle class anyway).

Report
MargieB 02 Nov 2019
In reply to MargieB:

Farage is also playing on the word "independence" in all its forms to divide further and gain a foothold as the kingmaker of the Cons.He is conveying the idea that England doesn't care about Scotland as a tactic. Stoking it. Pretty nasty.

My personal hope is for a massive swing to one other party.

Post edited at 11:15
Report
Bob Kemp 02 Nov 2019
In reply to MargieB:

> He won't dent the Con vote but he will dent the Labour vote and also restore the dynamic of the campaign to Brexit which is contrary to Corbyn who wants to prioritise domestic policy. This could be a game changer and really create a Leave Parliament with a bigger power base than before, imo. 

I'm not convinced that he will do as much damage to Labour as you (and a large chunk of Labour MPs) think. This is an interesting analysis:

http://theconversation.com/why-labours-remainer-mps-have-less-to-fear-from-brexit-voters-than-they-think-117140

This may be a bit over-optimistic - I'd never be quite as categorical as they are based on what happened in the last election as I think the electorate are very volatile at the moment, but there's a case there. 

Report
MargieB 02 Nov 2019
In reply to Bob Kemp:

Interesting article.

One aspect of Farage is that he is making the pre-electioneering very high profile on  Brexit  as a major issue which may prompt a massive floating conservative electorate to focus on Brexit a bit more  and decide staying in the EU is more beneficial or rather Brexit is very unbeneficial.

I presume that the Lib Dems are waiting for the Brexit discussion to hang itself and then come in with the rational solution at the end.

Post edited at 11:37
Report
HansStuttgart 02 Nov 2019
In reply to Bob Kemp:

> I'm not convinced that he will do as much damage to Labour as you 

Farage's involvement focusses the topic of discussion on brexit as opposed to all the other issues LAB would rather talk about. This is good for the LIB DEMs because of their clear brexit stance, not so much for LAB. 

Report
DancingOnRock 02 Nov 2019
In reply to MargieB:

> My personal hope is for a massive swing to one other party.

I’m surprised that the millions of people who voted remain aren’t all out on force telling everyone to vote LibDem. Although it’s fairly early days. 

Report
MargieB 02 Nov 2019
In reply to Bob Kemp:

I don't know your age but I remember a surge of English Nationalism of a very nasty variety in Labour strongholds where I lived. Don't you think Farage is tapping into this under current in Labour constituencies? I do. English Nationalism in another guise?

Report
Bob Kemp 02 Nov 2019
In reply to DancingOnRock:

That will depend on individual constituency situations won't it? 

Report
DancingOnRock 02 Nov 2019
In reply to Bob Kemp:

If you want to remain, there’s only one party offering that solution. Labour want to leave but can’t say that as it would split their voters. It would also look like they agree with the Conservatives . Heaven forbid!

Report
Bob Kemp 02 Nov 2019
In reply to DancingOnRock:

As the Lib-Dems are not going to form a government themselves they are not offering any solution in that sense. They may be coalition partners, which if they form a coalition with Labour will mean they can hold Labour to their policy of a second referendum with remain as an option. So it's still a case of voting according to local situations. 

Report
Bob Kemp 02 Nov 2019
In reply to MargieB:

I don't know if Farage's English nationalism actually plays that well. If he seriously wanted some kind of political power he'd moderate his stance a little and get all those Tory Brexiters to defect. But he's just an annoying chancer who's more interested in self-advancement. A peerage or an embassador position would do. 

Report
krikoman 02 Nov 2019
In reply to DancingOnRock:

> I’m surprised that the millions of people who voted remain aren’t all out on force telling everyone to vote LibDem. Although it’s fairly early days. 


Because you need to look at the figures, surely you don't think it's that easy.

My constituency 54% Tory, 42% Labour and 3% LibDem and that was a good year for Labour, every other year Tory landslide. So, with a little common sense, who's the best party to vote for to stop the Tory Brexit steamroller?

It still needs some Tories to change sides, but those that do and vote LibDem are pissing away their vote.

Report
krikoman 02 Nov 2019
In reply to DancingOnRock:

> If you want to remain, there’s only one party offering that solution. Labour want to leave but can’t say that as it would split their voters. It would also look like they agree with the Conservatives . Heaven forbid!


Are you totally deaf?? Or does you hatred of the Labour party help you to make shit up?

Here's Labour party policy, I'll try to make it simple for you, "We'll negotiated a deal, and put it to the people to vote on, once we know what they're voting for"

It's been like this for at least 3 years, but you simply refuse to accept it.

Report
Offwidth 02 Nov 2019
In reply to MargieB:

Your analysis seems backwards to me on this point. Every Brexit vote won in a Labour 'leave' seat  is a conservative vote lost, so ironically favours Labour.  If Boris agrees a pact it will likely be a step too far for most voters and although more 'leave' seats will go it will cause more problems elsewhere and post election. If there is no pact and Brexit is stong I think Brexit will struggle to win a single seat (as UKIP did at its peak) and a minority Labour government is by far the most likelly outcome.

Report
DancingOnRock 02 Nov 2019
In reply to krikoman:

I just make shit up. I made up the fact that Corbyn has been against the EU since 1975. I made up the fact that no polls indicate the result of a second referendum would be significantly different to the first. I made up the fact that the Labour Party aren’t backing a withdrawal of A50. 
 

I don’t hate the Labour Party any more than I hate the Conservative party or any other party. They all have their ideals and all are dogmatically and blindly followed  by their believers. 
 

Sure it’ll depend on the make up of the constituencies. In constituencies where LibDems have a chance then leave voters are going to be better off switching to LibDem from Lab or Cons. But you won’t get entrenched leave Labour voters switching because they blindly believe that a second referendum will result in a Remain situation. 

Report
tom_in_edinburgh 02 Nov 2019
In reply to krikoman:

> Here's Labour party policy, I'll try to make it simple for you, "We'll negotiated a deal, and put it to the people to vote on, once we know what they're voting for"

> It's been like this for at least 3 years, but you simply refuse to accept it.

There are three consistent policies they could have:

a. Vote for us and we will revoke article 50.  The GE is your second referendum.

b. We will ask for an extension for a Boris Deal vs Remain referendum.

c. We will negotiate an EEA style deal.

The EU have said they will not reopen the WA, now Labour expect them to reopen it and negotiate yet another deal which Labour will then hold a referendum on and recommend it is rejected in favour of Remain.   Why would the EU waste its time negotiating a deal that the UK government doesn't want?

Report
Bob Kemp 02 Nov 2019
In reply to DancingOnRock:

> I don’t hate the Labour Party any more than I hate the Conservative party or any other party. They all have their ideals and all are dogmatically and blindly followed  by their believers. 

You only have to look at the splits, the fights, the dissent and the abuse in the major parties and their followers to see that this isn't true.

Report
Andy Hardy 02 Nov 2019
In reply to krikoman:

So Labour's policy is to leave the EU.

Thanks for clarifying that.

Report
Dr.S at work 02 Nov 2019
In reply to MargieB:

> Farage is also .... conveying the idea that England doesn't care about Scotland as a tactic. Stoking it. Pretty nasty.

aye, SNP and Brexit party, two sides of the same coin.

Report
DancingOnRock 02 Nov 2019
In reply to Andy Hardy:

It’s difficult to really know what Labour’s real position is. I’m not even sure they have one. Corbyn was a Eurosceptic when it comes to federalism and business but seems to want  to keep the nice warm cuddly bits. Be interesting to see what a Labour deal would look like. The manifesto isn’t out yet but I’ve been given loads of different versions of who the many and who the few are, by the Facebook massive. Everyone seems to have a different definition.

You can’t keep letting the people decide over everything. You’ll end up with Trump style populist governance. Which is presumably completely against Labour’s intentions. 
 

Just a quick browse through my Facebook friends shows a large number of labour voters with extreme right wing views when it comes to crime and punishment. We’d end up with a caring sharing society, until you do something wrong m, at which point the punishment beatings start. 

Report
MargieB 02 Nov 2019
In reply to Dr.S at work:

Also the English region may not yet have really woken up to the fact that, in a sense they are now closer to being part of an independence nationalism culture as Scotland has acquired over the years  because the latter automatically creates the former -  and it is the hard edgy politics  that creates this dynamic for us all., as it ping pongs off each other.

And English Nationalism has a particularly nasty dimension as I once witnessed on a bus as a school girl.

A lot does ride on English politics, in this moment in time. It seems firmly in the English court to sort it.

Post edited at 19:16
Report
Andy Hardy 02 Nov 2019
In reply to DancingOnRock:

If they're negotiating a deal, they want to leave, surely?

Report
Dr.S at work 02 Nov 2019
In reply to MargieB:

I had a long chat with my MP on the doorstep about this last week (John Penrose, nice chap, good MP, wont be voting for him).

Certainly the effect of the SNP tactics over the last 10-20 years has been to stoke a "well F**k off then" attitude in a subset of the English population, and to stoke English Nationalism. The English gutter press dont help in this regard.

Report
MargieB 02 Nov 2019
In reply to Bob Kemp:

Some would see his egoism, even realise the hypocrisy that if his Brexit power play fails he's lined up an American audience and probably a very highly paid USA lecture tour to substitute his political life- quite in line with his honest view that he would leave UK if Brexit didn't happen and quite in line with his self centredness and raw capitalist outlook

But many see him as only locally interested and his party is very well organised.

I can see the contradiction but many may not . Even one or two MPs could have gravitas in a hung Parliament and disproportionate influence. A serious influence in politics  of  a different nature to the DUP influence that was exerted over the Cons.I seriously hope they are not kingmakers.

Post edited at 22:19
Report
cumbria mammoth 02 Nov 2019
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:

> The EU have said they will not reopen the WA, now Labour expect them to reopen it and negotiate yet another deal which Labour will then hold a referendum on and recommend it is rejected in favour of Remain.   Why would the EU waste its time negotiating a deal that the UK government doesn't want?

They barely need to renegotiate. As they are the opposition they have already been in talks with the EU without May's daft red lines and they have a different deal ready made. Of course the EU will reopen talks for a deal that is more sensible for all sides.

https://newsagog.com/brexit-live-donald-tusk-ignores-mays-demands-and-backs-corbyns-customs-union-plan/ 

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/brexit-labour-welcome-leo-varadkars-14277538 

And Corbyns letter to May shows what the Labour deal looks like.

https://labour.org.uk/press/jeremy-corbyn-lays-labours-five-brexit-demands-letter-theresa-may/ 

Labour will then put that deal, one that can be implemented without economic harm, to a public vote alongside remain and carry out whatever the people decide. They haven't said that they will back remain in those circumstances.

Post edited at 22:22
Report
krikoman 03 Nov 2019
In reply to DancingOnRock:

> Sure it’ll depend on the make up of the constituencies. In constituencies where LibDems have a chance then leave voters are going to be better off switching to LibDem from Lab or Cons.

But that wasn't what you said in your original post.

>But you won’t get entrenched leave Labour voters switching because they blindly believe that a second referendum will result in a Remain situation. 

I'm not sure I follow your logic there, you seem to think only Labour voters can be entrenched. There are Tory voters who want to remain by the way too, and probably LibDem voters who want to leave!

Putting a deal back to a referendum, without Corbyn recommending either option, is surely the best option to solve the Brexit "problem" and to finally move on, because it should be truly the "will of the people" based on a real outcome and not on unicorns and rainbows which we were promised the first time around.

Report
krikoman 03 Nov 2019
In reply to Andy Hardy:

> So Labour's policy is to leave the EU.

> Thanks for clarifying that.


I don't see how you come to that conclusion, but if that's what you want to think then knock yourself out.

Report
krikoman 03 Nov 2019
In reply to Andy Hardy:

> If they're negotiating a deal, they want to leave, surely?


WTF? If I'm negotiating to buy a house, I might decide it's too expensive and I can't afford it and stay in the house I'm in now, or I might decide, this new house is something that is worth taking the risk of buying even though it might stretch my budget a bit, OR it might be a real bargain and it'll be the best thing for me to do.

Until I know all the details and how much the real price of buying it is, I can't make that decision.

I negotiate deals all the time in business, quoting for work that people can either accept or decline, negotiating isn't the be all and end all, it's a time to work out what's best for both parties.

Sometimes I don't want the job and put in a higher price than I think it's worth paying, even then it sometimes ends up with us winning the job! That's Brexit in a nutshell surely.

Depending on your own perceptions, we're either paying too much or getting a real bargain, but we really don't know what the terms are yet, so how does anyone know? Without some negotiations we're all making choices based on what?

Report
tom_in_edinburgh 03 Nov 2019
In reply to Dr.S at work:

> aye, SNP and Brexit party, two sides of the same coin.

That is absolute bollocks.   Look how the SNP have been governing Scotland for the last decade.  Then look at the policies Farage, Johnson, Gove etc have imposed on England.

The SNP want a tolerant, modern, European democracy.   They aren't isolationist, they want to be full members of the EU.  What they are doing is simplifying the hierarchy of government from and removing a costly, inefficient and increasingly unpleasant intermediate layer. 

Scotland -> UK -> Europe

becomes

Scotland -> Europe.   

Report
Andy Hardy 03 Nov 2019
In reply to krikoman:

But brexit is not analogous to buying a house, is it? 

Brexit is a Ukip/Tory idea, and the Labour party would have been more successful in the last lot of EU elections if they had simply said so. Of course people will still vote labour, but to think there is a "labour brexit" that will be better than the deal we have now is just ridiculous.

Report
rogerwebb 03 Nov 2019
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:

> The SNP want a tolerant, modern, European democracy.   They aren't isolationist, they want to be full members of the EU.  What they are doing is simplifying the hierarchy of government from and removing a costly, inefficient and increasingly unpleasant intermediate layer. 

> Scotland -> UK -> Europe

> becomes

> Scotland -> Europe.   

If SNP policy did not involve an intention to join the EU would you still support the SNP and/or independence?

(it is a question not the opening of an assault although as I am sure you are aware we differ on independence) 

Report
MargieB 03 Nov 2019
In reply to rogerwebb:

If one remains in EU and substantial constitutional reform occurs? Jo Swinson, a lot rides on your shoulders to bridge matters and much expectation.

Post edited at 11:02
Report
wbo2 03 Nov 2019
In reply to what the hex:I see Nigel isnt standing... sacrificing himself for the cause...

Wants that MEP salary as long as.. 

Report
MonkeyPuzzle 03 Nov 2019
In reply to wbo2:

Not standing after charging prospective candidates £100 for the "selection process" which turned out to be picking the highest profile person they could find in every constituency. He's not a politician he's a grifter.

Report
tom_in_edinburgh 03 Nov 2019
In reply to rogerwebb:

> If SNP policy did not involve an intention to join the EU would you still support the SNP and/or independence?

More like stay in the EU than join it.

If the SNP was anti-EU I wouldn't want to vote for it but I might as a tactical vote if the alternative was an equally anti-EU unionist party.  I would still support independence and vote YES in an indyref.

After independence my guess is the SNP will fracture and we will eventually get a Scottish left of centre, right of centre and green party none of which wish to return to the UK. 

Report
Doug 03 Nov 2019
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:

there already is a Scottish Green Party, with a handful of MSPs

Report
krikoman 03 Nov 2019
In reply to Andy Hardy:

> But brexit is not analogous to buying a house, is it? 

Are you saying Brexit and house buying have nothing to do with negotiations?

And since NO ONE knew what we were going to get out of Brexit three years ago, WHO knew what we'd end up with?

Labour have been steadfast since day one, as much as people like to think and say otherwise, "If  Brexit meant a poorer standard of living for the British people, they wouldn't support it"

Your assertion, "If they're negotiating a deal, they want to leave, surely?",  means Labour are choosing one side, or the other for that matter, is ludicrous in the extreme.

In any negotiations, both parties have the choice of walking away.

Report
DancingOnRock 03 Nov 2019
In reply to krikoman:

The problem with the house buying or business negotiation analogy is what happens if you don’t get any work, or there are no other houses to buy? 
Brexit isn’t like buying a house or quoting to paint someone’s bedroom. 
 

Whether or not there are entrenched conservative voters doesn’t really matter. The conservatives are proposing leave. Full stop. The entrenched remain conservative voters know exactly where they stand. 
 

Again it’s the same with LibDem Entrenched leavers. They know where they stand. 
 

Labour are hedging their bets. I just find it funny that the Labour leavers are thinking, great, Labour will get a better deal and the Labour remainers are thinking great, second referendum and no one is stupid enough to vote leave. They’re both being played and both are deluded. The Labour Party are a party of opposition.

Post edited at 14:18
Report
climbingpixie 03 Nov 2019
In reply to DancingOnRock:

> Labour are hedging their bets. I just find it funny that the Labour leavers are thinking, great, Labour will get a better deal and the Labour remainers are thinking great, second referendum and no one is stupid enough to vote leave. They’re both being played and both are deluded.

As a remainer, being given a choice between leaving the EU with a softer Brexit negotiated by Labour vs staying in the EU means whatever the result it'll be preferable to the Tory Brexit deal. Remain would obviously be a far better result but I could live with a Norway type option, especially one that had been given a democratic mandate in a second vote.

Post edited at 14:46
Report
tom_in_edinburgh 03 Nov 2019
In reply to Doug:

> there already is a Scottish Green Party, with a handful of MSPs

I know, and I'd expect them to do a bit better after Indy than they do now.

Report
krikoman 03 Nov 2019
In reply to DancingOnRock:

> Labour are hedging their bets. I just find it funny that the Labour leavers are thinking, great, Labour will get a better deal and the Labour remainers are thinking great, second referendum and no one is stupid enough to vote leave. They’re both being played and both are deluded. The Labour Party are a party of opposition.

Like many things though, you've already made your mind up on a number of issues, without any evidence.

That Labour won't get a better deal, or that a second referendum, when people know what's on offer will definitely go one way instead of the other. You seem to think that a second referendum is a sure fire way to stop Brexit, it's not it's a chance to vote on the offer, or to put it in terms of buying a house, whether you going to make the move based on price and affordability.

Report
krikoman 03 Nov 2019
In reply to climbingpixie:

What you said

Report
krikoman 03 Nov 2019
In reply to DancingOnRock:

> The problem with the house buying or business negotiation analogy is what happens if you don’t get any work, or there are no other houses to buy? 

> Brexit isn’t like buying a house or quoting to paint someone’s bedroom. 

What happens if I don't get any work is I lower my prices, and the people I'm negotiating with get a better deal. That's how negotiations work. Saying there are no houses to buy, doesn't come into the negotiation analogy, because there are things to negotiate with the EU, doing nothing of course is one of the options, but that doesn't preclude any negotiations OR that the people shouldn't know that, doing f*ck all isn't really an option.

Report
Offwidth 03 Nov 2019
In reply to MargieB:

"Even one or two MPs could have gravitas in a hung Parliament and disproportionate influence. A serious influence in politics  of  a different nature to the DUP influence that was exerted over the Cons.I seriously hope they are not kingmakers."

As I said above, this kingmaker issue is unlikely if the tories don't do a deal with Brexit, as they probably won't win any seats (last time UKIP came close the tories were more centrist so an easier target), and even if they do, they will have already have guarenteed a Labour minority government by splitting the leave votors. It could happen if there is a deal and Labour campaign better than expected. This really is a topsy turvy election in England if often four (and in some places like Brighton five) main parties are in play, unlike in 2017.

Post edited at 17:13
Report
rogerwebb 03 Nov 2019
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:

> More like stay in the EU than join it.

> If the SNP was anti-EU I wouldn't want to vote for it but I might as a tactical vote if the alternative was an equally anti-EU unionist party.  I would still support independence and vote YES in an indyref.

And if the alternative was a pro EU pro UK party what then? Your answer implies that membership of or aspiration to join the EU is not central to your belief desire for independence. 

I was trying to think of what the circumstances would be for me to vote for independence. I think they would be the cessation of elections, democratic government and the rule of law.

(in which case we probably wouldn't be getting a vote...) 

Report
tom_in_edinburgh 03 Nov 2019
In reply to krikoman:

The problem with the 'buying a house' and 'buying a car' analogies with Brexit negotiations and the fundamental mistake that the Brexiteers make is that they don't see the difference between a transactional negotiation with someone you never have to deal with again and a partnership negotiation with someone you expect to cooperate closely with for decades.

You don't set out to f*ck people over for short term gains or make stupid threats if you want to be in a long term partnership.

Report
Andy Hardy 03 Nov 2019
In reply to krikoman:

> Are you saying Brexit and house buying have nothing to do with negotiations?

I'm saying my local estate agents have loads of houses for sale. The house buying process is understood by the general public, there are laws about how to buy a house, and a in a million other ways brexit is not comparable.

> And since NO ONE knew what we were going to get out of Brexit three years ago, WHO knew what we'd end up with?

> Labour have been steadfast since day one, as much as people like to think and say otherwise, "If  Brexit meant a poorer standard of living for the British people, they wouldn't support it"

So presumably they think a brexit exists that will make us richer?

> Your assertion, "If they're negotiating a deal, they want to leave, surely?",  means Labour are choosing one side, or the other for that matter, is ludicrous in the extreme.

They have to enter negotiations in good faith, the assumption has to be that you are negotiating because you want to leave.

> In any negotiations, both parties have the choice of walking away.

Not really in this case, unless we revoke A50 we're out.

Your loyalty to the party position is laudable, but there is no middle way with brexit. As I said upthread the labour party would do much better to distance itself from what is an extreme right wing project.

Report
Dr.S at work 03 Nov 2019
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:

In terms of their rhetoric, and in terms of the policy of making England resent scotland - which you suggested a couple of days ago - they are.

Report
Lusk 03 Nov 2019
In reply to DancingOnRock:

What is it that you don't get with Labour policy on this matter?

Even a moron like me gets it.

Like it or not, right or wrong, there was a vote, the Leave won.

Call it a 50/50 split between Labour supporters, you can't please all the ........

It's simple, a non crippling deal (now we have so much more information) or vote to remain?

It's so glaringly obvious, how could one not go for it?!?!

Report
wercat 03 Nov 2019
In reply to krikoman:

Brexit is not the same as any commercial/market negotiation.  There can be only two specific parties and there is no alternative party with whom to negotiate.

A suitable analogy might be a family negotiating within itself over whether to dismantle the family home/business/farm that has been an essential part of its existence.  In that case the analogy of one of the interested parties walking away would be fairer.

Post edited at 19:33
Report
Eric9Points 03 Nov 2019
In reply to what the hex:

 I think I'd like to change the record.

I'll be voting Labour because I want a government that going to end this shit.

https://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/news/18008193.glasgow-foodbank-needs-suicide-support-service-people-despair/

https://metro.co.uk/2019/01/31/165-increase-homelessness-since-tories-took-power-8419274/?ito=cbshare&fbclid=IwAR3btP6Dd_jIFZu4Vb7ye2AHL74cw9GoTaBg9vyBXFphIES6IvFQb2Fg9z0

It simply isn't acceptable to have a society in which people can't put a roof over their heads or afford to eat.

I'll also be voting Labour because so far they seem to be the only party that is serious about doing something about climate change. Unlike the current lot who are all talk and no action.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-48929632

Post edited at 20:39
Report
Lusk 03 Nov 2019
In reply to Eric9Points:

I'll be voting Labour because I want a government that going to end this shit.

That's my kind of argument!

Report
tom_in_edinburgh 03 Nov 2019
In reply to Dr.S at work:

> In terms of their rhetoric, and in terms of the policy of making England resent scotland - which you suggested a couple of days ago - they are.

That's not SNP policy.  In fact their policy is quite the opposite.   

It's a policy that I suggested because I am nothing like as nice as the current leaders of the SNP.

Report
Dr.S at work 04 Nov 2019
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:

More politically savvy than you, not nicer! 
it’s never going to be declared policy of the SNP, but Salmond and Sturgeon have been quite good at quietly winding up sections of the English population. Partly this is the stuff they use to argue that Scots differ from the English, which often ends up implying that the English are not as wise or socially conscious as Scots. 
 

Report
MargieB 04 Nov 2019
In reply to Dr.S at work:

A constitutional change would better reflect the social, environmental and economic consciences of both regions. It is the distortion of the system that is at the root cause and causing division.  Fundamentally there would have to be changes otherwise it is like a hurricane feeding in the resentments on all sides. Austerity is also a factor. Changing the structure should be a priority.{ I belong to no party but will scrutinise the manifestos on this.}

Post edited at 09:21
Report
krikoman 04 Nov 2019
In reply to Andy Hardy:

>They have to enter negotiations in good faith, the assumption has to be that you are negotiating because you want to leave.

I don't see why you still can't negotiate a leave deal, since that's what they were mandated to do, and then vote on whether that's a good deal or not. We don't need to negotiate a staying put deal, do we?

Negotiating a leave deal isn't the same as wanting one, and having no option to say fuck it, which is where we are with Labour.

> Not really in this case, unless we revoke A50 we're out.

And that isn't a choice?

Post edited at 09:32
Report
tom_in_edinburgh 04 Nov 2019
In reply to Dr.S at work:

> it’s never going to be declared policy of the SNP, but Salmond and Sturgeon have been quite good at quietly winding up sections of the English population.

It's the Tories and the Tory media like the Mail and the Telegraph which are winding up large sections of the English population against Scotland with continuous propaganda that their readers lap up as eagerly as anti-EU stories.   The underlying message is that the hard working salt-of-the-earth English Tory voters are subsidising the lazy Europeans and Scots.

The Tory press keep banging on about Barnet and GERS to try and persuade the Scots we can't afford independence and make the English feel superior.   Making the their supporters in England want rid of Scotland is a consequence of that message and one which the independence movement should exploit, in the same way a judo player turns their opponents momentum against them.

Report
Andy Hardy 04 Nov 2019
In reply to krikoman:

To me it just looks like labour have bought into a Tory problem/project. 

And revoke is not Labour's position in the event of a deal which is worse than remain, is it? 

Report
DancingOnRock 04 Nov 2019
In reply to Lusk:

In the business world we would call this a conflict of interests. Are they for a deal, or for leaving. The presumption is, as they are negotiating a deal, then they are for leaving. 

When it comes to a referendum, are they going to sit back and not campaign either way?

Publish the deal, don’t declare whether it’s good or bad? Don’t counter any criticism, don’t say why it’s good or bad? 

It just doesn’t work does it? 
 

Report
krikoman 04 Nov 2019
In reply to Andy Hardy:

> To me it just looks like labour have bought into a Tory problem/project. 

> And revoke is not Labour's position in the event of a deal which is worse than remain, is it? 


I don't see how, Labour have said they'll put any deal back to the people, obviously this could go wrong (from a remaining point of view), but at least it's a chance for people to vote on facts not rainbows and unicorns, we were promised last time.

Voting on actualities has got to be better than what we voted on last time, and if it goes against what I particularly want, then I'm prepared to accept the decision, if that's what the majority want.

Report
krikoman 04 Nov 2019
In reply to DancingOnRock:

> In the business world we would call this a conflict of interests. Are they for a deal, or for leaving. The presumption is, as they are negotiating a deal, then they are for leaving. 

Why do you keep saying this?

We could enter into negotiations and decide the deal isn't good enough, show the people what they can get and let them sort it out. You keep saying the same thing over and over doesn't make it true. Negotiations go on every day, that don't end up going through, look at take over bids on companies, there are many times where the merger / take over doesn't happen, because the shareholders don't think it's a good idea, that doesn't prevent the negotiations taking place.

Report
DancingOnRock 04 Nov 2019
In reply to krikoman:

Yes, but usually if you’re entering negotiations it’s because you want to sell in the first place. In which case you will do your best to get a deal. The only way you can do this effectively is if you are invested in selling. If you’re not really invested in selling then you have a conflict of interests. 
 

How can you do an effective deal if your position is to walk away from the very beginning?

It wouldn’t even be presented to the shareholders if the board weren’t behind it. 

Post edited at 12:42
Report
Andy Hardy 04 Nov 2019
In reply to krikoman:

Another analogy that doesn't work. We couldn't enter into any negotiations about leaving until we triggered article 50, declaring our intention to leave. 

And I keep coming back to my point which is this is a total Tory shitshow and Labour should have nothing to do with it - by which I mean they should have opposed it properly, no whipping to trigger A50, and a position of revoking A50 if elected. However it's obvious that the leadership want brexit even if the majority of the membership oppose it, which is why he's been sitting on the fence.

Anyway I will be voting tactically to oust the Cons, if I lived in a Lab/Con marginal I'd hold my nose and vote Labour, despite JCs brexiter tendencies

Report
Eric9Points 04 Nov 2019
In reply to Andy Hardy:

Simply revoking article 50 is undemocratic.

If elected Labour will negotiate a new deal then ask the electorate if they want it or would rather stay.

That seems fair to me.

...and curiously enough, if you check the 2015 Tory manifesto that's just what they said they would do.

Report
In reply to Eric9Points:

> Simply revoking article 50 is undemocratic.

Depends if it's done by a party voted in with an overwhelming* majority who said they would do it in their manifesto.

*overwhelming...….- shall we say 52.5%?

Report
Eric9Points 04 Nov 2019
In reply to Nempnett Thrubwell:

Possibly, but if there's a "normal" majority and the campaign did cover a variety of topics then a GE result is not clear cut on any particular issue and will lead to no end I'd whingeing from those who ended up on the wrong side.

Report
Andy Hardy 04 Nov 2019
In reply to Eric9Points:

> Simply revoking article 50 is undemocratic.

How? If they put "vote Labour to cancel brexit" on a manifesto, and then they won the GE, surely revoke becomes the "settled will of the People"

Report
DancingOnRock 04 Nov 2019

It doesn’t matter what a party says they’ll do in their manifesto, it still has to be passed by Parliament. 
An election won’t change the outcome of the referendum. Conservatives won’t automatically pass the deal and LibDems can’t automatically revoke A50.

After an election we are in exactly the same position as before, just with different politicians. It’s as if the cards have gone back and the pack has been shuffled and dealt again.

Report
Dr.S at work 04 Nov 2019
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:

Yes, both the SNP and the gutter press fuel the division - as I think I said upthread.

Report
Rob Exile Ward 04 Nov 2019
In reply to Dr.S at work:

WTF is Farage up to? Is it a) a cunning plan to simply get Johnson to bottle it and agree to rescind his WA, and might it work (sticking to his word  is definitely not one of Johnsons defining characteristics) b) a cunning plan of unimaginable subtlety that we can't discern yet or c) the moment his project implodes as a result of his hubris, as the Brexit vote is split and a rag tag and bobtail coalition force the Labour solution of a People's vote...

Report
In reply to DancingOnRock:

Can you imagine if the next parliament is even more hung than the current one? [ ;) ] Even more parties with even more Brexit viewpoints to argue forevermore. How stupid will each leader look, not learning from May's mistakes and having argued AGAIN for a general election to solve a non-party-specific single issue. 

Report
DancingOnRock 05 Nov 2019
In reply to purplemonkeyelephant:

With people voting tactically I think it’s likely to be a Labour LibDem alliance. Even with a slim majority to Cons or Lab there’s enough MPs that won’t follow the whip to keep this dragging on for a while yet. 

Report
WaterMonkey 05 Nov 2019
In reply to DancingOnRock:

> With people voting tactically I think it’s likely to be a Labour LibDem alliance. Even with a slim majority to Cons or Lab there’s enough MPs that won’t follow the whip to keep this dragging on for a while yet. 

Why didn’t they just form an alliance in the first place once the Tories lost their majority?

Report
summo 05 Nov 2019
In reply to purplemonkeyelephant:

> Can you imagine if the next parliament is even more hung than the current one? 

It's called normal in many countries, where a coalition forms, parties converse more and form a consensus of opinion. 

Report
DancingOnRock 05 Nov 2019
In reply to WaterMonkey:

There was no requirement to. It would have meant compromising on policies. The MPs did vote on it several times by way of a no confidence vote. 

A GE would force the issue.  

Report
DancingOnRock 05 Nov 2019
In reply to summo:

British people and our systems are much more adversarial than other countries. 
 

Just look at phase 1 of the Grenfell inquiry. The inquiry hasn’t even finished, let alone any trail to apportion guilt, and people are calling for resignations. 

Report
krikoman 05 Nov 2019
In reply to Andy Hardy:

> How? If they put "vote Labour to cancel brexit" on a manifesto, and then they won the GE, surely revoke becomes the "settled will of the People"


Can you please tell me how they do this and not lose a massive amount of votes?

You seem to forget a large number of "Labour" voters voted to leave, what are you going to do about them, if you need them to win the election.

Look what happened in Sunderland and Hartlepool if you need some evidence. I believe this was partly a two fingers up to Cameron, but unless you let people choose themselves rather along party lines you're going to have a massive split.

Are you confusing, membership, party and constituents? They're not all the same thing and they don't all think the same either.

Post edited at 08:43
Report
krikoman 05 Nov 2019
In reply to DancingOnRock:

> After an election we are in exactly the same position as before, just with different politicians. It’s as if the cards have gone back and the pack has been shuffled and dealt again.

You don't think the proposal of a second referendum, when people know and realise what is actually going to happen is very very different?

I'm quite willing to stick by any decision of a further referendum, provided it's carried out based on facts and truth, not £350 a week bullshit and WW3.

Report
DancingOnRock 05 Nov 2019
In reply to krikoman:

It’s still a proposal. Just because it’s in a manifesto doesn’t mean it’s law. The bill has to be tabled, voted on by MPs and made law. 
Even after these last three years of media coverage of Parliament people still seem to think that the Government make all the decisions. Parliament make the decisions, it’s easier to get some through with a big party majority but only if all the MPs obey the whip. 
I really don’t see anything radical happening after the election unless there’s a landslide. 

Report
Andy Hardy 05 Nov 2019
In reply to krikoman:

We're in that situation now: we have a known deal, and can compare with remain. Corbyn would not support a 2nd ref. 

Report
krikoman 05 Nov 2019
In reply to Andy Hardy:

> We're in that situation now: we have a known deal, and can compare with remain. Corbyn would not support a 2nd ref. 


But it's a shit deal, and one that Labour weren't involved in. Labour ARE supporting a second ref.

https://www.eveningexpress.co.uk/news/uk/corbyn-new-brexit-deal-and-second-referendum-within-six-months-is-realistic/

How many more times?

Report
DancingOnRock 05 Nov 2019
In reply to krikoman:

They’re supporting a second referendum but are they supporting a deal or to remain?

That is the question we are asking. No one seems to want to answer that. Least not Mr Corbyn. 

Report
didntcomelast 05 Nov 2019
In reply to neilh:my wife and I were due to start work for a ski company in December but due to Brexit uncertainty our offer of employment was cancelled  a couple of weeks ago  that was the reason given and 5 months living in Europe out of the window  

Report
Lusk 05 Nov 2019
In reply to DancingOnRock:

> They’re supporting a second referendum but are they supporting a deal or to remain?

> That is the question we are asking. No one seems to want to answer that. Least not Mr Corbyn. 


Who cares which way JC, or any other Labour MP, or, indeed the Party, will support.
It comes down to another referendum next summer on an Exit where we all have an infinitely more informed idea of what it will look like, or Remain.

Whatever the result is, it will be enacted the following day.

Report
Andy Hardy 05 Nov 2019
In reply to krikoman:

So does the labour party think that there is a better deal than full membership? I keep asking around this but get no answer, so I have to assume that JC and his team think so, which, as a remainer fills me with despair. If they win, we'll be discussing red unicorns instead of blue ones

Report
DancingOnRock 05 Nov 2019
In reply to Andy Hardy:

Unless they get a whopping majority and all the Labour MPs follow the whip there will be no second referendum and Labour will be going backwards and forwards trying to do a deal for months and months. 
 

When has any party managed to do what they set out in their manifesto? 
 

It’s not going to happen. Endless Brexit debates are going to be a feature of the foreseeable future.

Post edited at 19:49
Report
Pete Pozman 05 Nov 2019
In reply to didntcomelast:

> my wife and I were due to start work for a ski company in December but due to Brexit uncertainty our offer of employment was cancelled  a couple of weeks ago  that was the reason given and 5 months living in Europe out of the window  

That's a thumbs-up as a gesture of solidarity by the way. What a bummer! 

Report
Martin Hore 06 Nov 2019
In reply to hokkyokusei:

> You're actually voting for who you would like to be your MP.


Oh how I wish it was that simple (which it would be if we had a properly democratic voting system). 

This time, I'll be voting for the candidate who will vote in parliament to oppose Brexit (or at least in favour of a People's Vote) and who has a realistic chance of winning. 

Martin

Report
Offwidth 06 Nov 2019
In reply to DancingOnRock:

Don't be ridiculous... Labour have already spoken to Barnier and know full well various soft brexit formats are OK with Europe, including the off-the-shelf Norway model; all of which would be much easier than May or Boris's deal as the NI issue goes away. Arguably a soft brexit might have even have passed the Commons under May if she really wanted to work with Labour for the sake of the nation  (political suicide for her of course) and the tories didn't threaten to whip against it. As a remainer I'm pleased as it keeps open the possibility that we remain... I see any hard brexit as short term extremely damaging and medium term high risk and any soft brexit as being part of the EU at higher cost and with no say (the ability and importamce to eventually reform the EU for the improvement of world peace, fairness and prosperity is one of the main justifications of my support for remain)

I agree with Corbyn (rare for me) that what they plan after the eleftion,  if they get a majority, is pretty easy to understand... quickly negotiate a soft brexit and put it to the public in a referendum against remain.

Report
MargieB 09:40 Fri
In reply to Andy Hardy:

If the last three years has taught us anything he devil has always been in the detail and the consensus, not of remain MPs , but Leave MPs and the often zealous nature of their hard right definition.

I'm sorry Brexit is the central platform of a GE, which should have been the central platform of a referendum but I'm afraid I do see this GE as essentially a referendum on this issue, after 3 long years of deadlock.

Report
DancingOnRock 11:36 Fri
In reply to MargieB:

Not really. The withdrawal is just the start. All the MPs are aware of that and trying to delay until they can find a legitimate way of stopping it. It doesn’t help that we have MPs in Leave constituencies who want to remain and vice versa. An election might well see these MPs lose their seats. 

Report
neilh 11:48 Fri
In reply to Offwidth:

Well the 6 month timescales wer  knocked on its head by Juncker in his interview on the BBC on Tuesday-- did you see it.

Granted he is on borrowed time at the moment but the Juncker/Tusk/Barnier trio is  a formidible trio.

Report
Eric9Points 13:02 Fri
In reply to neilh:

Tusk is no longer there, or is leaving his post very soon.

Not sure who Barnier was speaking for.

Report
Offwidth 14:15 Fri
In reply to neilh:

I always felt it was obvious that the optimism of Boris on getting a really good EU trade deal was based on a fantasy. Hence, I still expect if he wins the election that a no deal brexit at the end of the negotiating period will be the most likely outcome after yet another year of political pain. How could the EU allow a detached UK to have a good EU deal, alongside much weakened regulation and seperate UK deals with the rest of the world, with what they would see as a grossly unfair competitive advantage? That Barnier warned the UK about this was just him doing his job.

In contrast any likely Labour soft brexit will be OK with the EU and will need to get a public vote to be implemented.

Report
neilh 14:27 Fri
In reply to Offwidth:

Try and find the interview. Juncker liked BJ. Lol. 

Report
David Riley 15:02 Fri
In reply to Offwidth:

> How could the EU allow a detached UK to have a good EU deal, alongside much weakened regulation and seperate UK deals with the rest of the world, with what they would see as a grossly unfair competitive advantage?

So, being in the EU puts members at a grossly unfair competitive disadvantage compared to a non member with only some of the benefits of membership ?

Report
Rob Exile Ward 15:09 Fri
In reply to David Riley:

Tell you what - why don't you try and work that out for yourself? I could explain, but it would go in one ear and straight out the other.

I'll mark your answer for you, if you like.

Report
MonkeyPuzzle 15:21 Fri
In reply to neilh:

The Juncker that said the extension request would be rejected? That guy?

Report
neilh 16:14 Fri
In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

Yes, said he liked him. Does not mean he agrees with him....

Report
MargieB 22:15 Fri
In reply to what the hex:

Just seen polls on the north of England, particularly North East England and some North west England areas. Conservative seems well ahead. 

These areas had Labour votes once but I think the ambiguity of the Labour Brexit stance seems to have misfired. Austerity contributed to the problems in these areas but the ambiguity about Brexit hasn't  conveyed a distinctive political analysis about the cause of their problems - with no decisive dismissal of the idea the EU as the source of all their problems. IMO . A better Labour policy would have been to support remain and emphasised change can occur through voting for MEPs IMO. Corbyn seems to have failed to dislodge the propaganda of the Brexit movement - and that seems to have been necessary to win over these areas. Its a poor political judgement IMO.

Much depends on Scotland, IMO.

Post edited at 22:23
Report
MargieB 10:00 Sat
In reply to what the hex:

Is Macron's approach to national politics synthesised with EU membership the best advert for Remain political argument as regards EU/ immigration/freedom of movement?

Post edited at 10:07
Report

Please Register as a New User in order to reply to this topic.