• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Cont: Brexit: Now What? 7th heaven...

Status
Not open for further replies.
ceptimus said:
It's more lying nonsense from remainers: Brexit was never a simple left-right issue - plenty of Labour supporters voted to leave.
Click to expand...
Jeremy Corbyn being the most prominent - probably. He is a Brexiteer which is why he kept pretty quiet during the referendum campaign.

Labour have now been pushed by their remain contingent into abandoning their leavers. I understand why they did this - sitting on the fence was losing them potential votes from both sides, and they calculated, correctly I think, that they'd lose less votes by abandoning their leavers then they would by abandoning their remainers.
Click to expand...

Actually, Brexit will hurt the Labour leavers as much as the Labour Remainers. Brexit is bad for everybody except the super rich who can afford to move their money out of the UK and will be able to exploit everybody else more once the pesky European employment protection legislation has been repealed.

So by opposing Brexit, you are not abandoning most Leavers even though they don't agree that it is better for them to Remain.

If Labour, aided by Tory remainers, do manage to force an early general election then it's now possible that the Tories will be returned with a workable majority that won't require DUP support to push a proper Brexit through.
Click to expand...

I don't think so. I think a hung parliament is the most likely result. That is itself an indictment of Labour. The Tories should have been crucified over their record since the referendumm.
 
Lothian said:
It has taken 4 days for this Government to go from can-do optimists to doubters, doomsters, and gloomsters.
Click to expand...

The odds on No-Deal shortened from "a million to one" to "a very real prospect" in only the time it takes to say "What form of words would make Brexit party voters believe they could switch their vote to us if we called an election right now?".
 
Lothian said:
2017 was after the referendum and it's unspecific question. Both policies are interpretations of what people may well have voted for. Trouble is we don't really know. If only there was some way of finding out if s particular way of leaving has >50% public support.
Click to expand...
Well, the vast majority of votes in the 2017 General Election went to the parties who promised to honour the result of the 2016 referendum - so there's that. And then in the recent EU elections, the clear winner was the Brexit party - so there's that too.

Of course those on the losing side of the referendum have ceaselessly campaigned for a loser's referendum to give them a second chance of winning. Naturally those who won the first time wish to be granted their prize before any rematch is arranged.

The Liberal Democrats have admitted recently that though they want a second referendum, they still would not accept the result if leave won again! So they are neither Liberal nor Democratic. :)

It seems increasingly unlikely, to me, that there will be another referendum before Brexit, but if there were, I now expect that leave would win by an even larger margin. The British don't like being asked the same question twice.
 
Information Analyst said:
Leave supporters are still a minority amongst Labour voters/supporters, just as Remain supporters are a minority amongst Conservatives.
Click to expand...
True, and that's why I said that, in my opinion, Labour pivoted the correct way for them. They had to abandon their nonsensical ambivalent position which was losing them votes on both sides, so they've chosen the side that most of their supporters are on. But that still stands a chance of losing them many of their northern constituency seats in the next election.

Also, if the Tories do manage to Brexit and make a success of it (I know you think that's impossible) then Labour will be left looking rather foolish. They had to chose one side or the other though, and a lot might happen before the next election.

It's been clear for ages now that the best thing Labour could do to enhance their chances would be to get rid of Corbyn - just as it was clear that the Tories needed to get rid of May. Labour seem unwilling or unable to make the change however.
 
Last edited:
We should Quietly revoke Article 50, tell Brexiters we left with no deal and send them blue passport covers. then just get on with things.
 
ceptimus said:
Well, the vast majority of votes in the 2017 General Election went to the parties who promised to honour the result of the 2016 referendum - so there's that. And then in the recent EU elections, the clear winner was the Brexit party - so there's that too.

Of course those on the losing side of the referendum have ceaselessly campaigned for a loser's referendum to give them a second chance of winning. Naturally those who won the first time wish to be granted their prize before any rematch is arranged.

The Liberal Democrats have admitted recently that though they want a second referendum, they still would not accept the result if leave won again! So they are neither Liberal nor Democratic. :)

It seems increasingly unlikely, to me, that there will be another referendum before Brexit, but if there were, I now expect that leave would win by an even larger margin. The British don't like being asked the same question twice.
Click to expand...
Have another referendum then, everyone has a much greater understanding of the issues, especially the young, and how Brexit will ruin their lives.
 
Samson said:
Have another referendum then, everyone has a much greater understanding of the issues, especially the young, and how Brexit will ruin their lives.
Click to expand...
I'm not in favour of re-running referendums because people failed to educate themselves properly prior to voting. And your assertion that Brexit will ruin their lives is just that - an assertion, and a wildly hysterical one at that.

In any case, all this re-run stuff is just code for not wanting to leave. Only those who were on the losing side first time round want a re-run, and many of those who do want a re-run would refuse to accept the result as final even after they lose for a second time. Certainly none of them would accept that if they did win a re-run then that would be one win for each side with a third referendum then needed as a decider.

It's just the same with the SNP's demands for another referendum on leaving the UK. As long as they exist as a party, they will continue to demand referendum after referendum, using any excuse as a pretext for such. Right now that excuse is Brexit: after Brexit they will find some other reason. But if they should ever win, then that will be the end of the matter as far as they're concerned - there will be no calls from them for a re-run because, 'people didn't understand what they were voting for.'
 
ceptimus said:
Well, the vast majority of votes in the 2017 General Election went to the parties who promised to honour the result of the 2016 referendum - so there's that. And then in the recent EU elections, the clear winner was the Brexit party - so there's that too.

Of course those on the losing side of the referendum have ceaselessly campaigned for a loser's referendum to give them a second chance of winning. Naturally those who won the first time wish to be granted their prize before any rematch is arranged.

The Liberal Democrats have admitted recently that though they want a second referendum, they still would not accept the result if leave won again! So they are neither Liberal nor Democratic. :)

It seems increasingly unlikely, to me, that there will be another referendum before Brexit, but if there were, I now expect that leave would win by an even larger margin. The British don't like being asked the same question twice.
Click to expand...
The general election was not only about brexit. The EU one however was. Remain parties did better than leave parties. You know that, just as you know another referendum would go against you. That is why leavers don't want it. If you thought you would win you would be demanding it like Farage did when he foresaw a narrow defeat.
 
I agree that there's no justification for repeating the first referendum, principally because we've been asked the question already and answered it, but also because it was a poorly designed question; it didn't define its terms and left people squabbling over what Leave means. However, there's an excellent case for a different vote.

One thing we can say now that Johnson has got the old Vote Leave band back together: they're not going to deliver what they told us we were voting for. They reassured the voters we would quickly get a great deal and any suggestion that things might be otherwise was ridiculous fearmongering. So now we're in freefall, I think it's morally incumbent upon them to ask the country "This isn't at all what we told you you would get if you voted Leave, but is it what you want?".

Unlike ceptimus I have no doubt the answer is No, despite people's resentment at being asked to vote again.
 
Last edited:
I agree there's no moral case for a repeat of the first referendum. We've answered that question already. The case is for a different question: "This isn't what we asked you to vote for, but will it do?".

I'm highly confident the answer is No.

The first ref question failed to define its terms, leaving people squabbling over what Leave meant. But Johnson has now got the old Vote Leave band back together and those guys were in no doubt: they reassured the voters they were swiftly going to get an excellent deal, and any claim to the contrary was scaremongering nonsense.

Now that their promises and reassurances are plainly exposed as hollow and worthless, they're morally obligated to ask us if the shambles they're now dragging us toward is what we want after all.
 
ceptimus said:
I'm not in favour of re-running referendums because people failed to educate themselves properly prior to voting. And your assertion that Brexit will ruin their lives is just that - an assertion, and a wildly hysterical one at that.

In any case, all this re-run stuff is just code for not wanting to leave. Only those who were on the losing side first time round want a re-run, and many of those who do want a re-run would refuse to accept the result as final even after they lose for a second time. Certainly none of them would accept that if they did win a re-run then that would be one win for each side with a third referendum then needed as a decider.

It's just the same with the SNP's demands for another referendum on leaving the UK. As long as they exist as a party, they will continue to demand referendum after referendum, using any excuse as a pretext for such. Right now that excuse is Brexit: after Brexit they will find some other reason. But if they should ever win, then that will be the end of the matter as far as they're concerned - there will be no calls from them for a re-run because, 'people didn't understand what they were voting for.'
Click to expand...
This is a very binary case.
I have always considered the platonic simplicity in running a referendum to determine whether there should be another referendum to be the only solution.
That might be game theory.
 
Lothian said:
I ignored Lab and.Con votes but if you apply Lord Ashcroft's polling to the lab and con votes it still shows more voted for Remain.
Click to expand...

I see. You excluded two leave supporting (at the time of the EU election) parties and therefore asserted that remain got more votes.

If you count all the Con and Lab votes as leave, then as you know, leave won.

Labour's position was intentionally ambiguous: strictly speaking they were still supporting a weak form of leave, though I'm sure many of their voters didn't understand that.

You were definitely cheating in ignoring Con votes though.
 
Last edited:
ceptimus said:
I see. You excluded two leave supporting (at the time of the EU election) parties and therefore asserted that remain got more votes.

If you count all the Con and Lab votes as leave, then as you know, leave won.

Labour's position was intentionally ambiguous: strictly speaking they were still supporting a weak form of leave, though I'm sure many of their voters didn't understand that.

You were definitely cheating in ignoring Con votes though.
Click to expand...
If you think all Labour and Tory voters support leave you are delusional.

As mentioned. If you split the Labour and Tory votes into leave and remain in accordance with how supporters of those parties voted in the referendum then Remain won.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom