Brexit discussion thread IX (Please read OP before posting)

Peregrinus

The Conservative vote is down both in areas that voted Leave in 2016, and in areas that voted Remain. The same is true for Labour. The Conservatives are bleeding at about the same rate in both Leave and Remain areas; Labour are bleeding a bit more in Remain areas than in Leave.

By contrast, the parties that offer a clear, even if contentious, Brexit policy are gaining votes. This is true regardless of whether the policy is "no-deal Brexit" or "Remain/second referendum".

The lesson is clear; the major parties' strategy of trying to be all things to all voters is disastrous, electorally. You end up losing votes on both sides. In particular for Labour, the strategy of backing Brexit in an attempt to shore up the working class Labour vote is not working.

This gives both Labour and the Tories a strong incentive to pivot to a clear Brexit position. Labour will find this easier because (a) they're in oppposition, when pivots are always less embarrassing, and (b) they don't have to await the outcome of a leadership election. This puts Labour in pole position to pivot first, and therefore to pivot whichever way seems to offer the greatest electoral advantage, leaving slim pickings for the new Tory leader.

On the figures, pivoting to Remain/second referendum seems to offer the greater advantage. The R/2R vote is bigger than the no-deal Brexit vote, and all the opinion polls have been showing for a year now that, in a two-way choice between Remain and no-deal Brexit (or indeed between Remain and any specific form of Brexit), Remain is the more popular option with the electorate at large, and very much the more popular option with those who identify as Labour supporters.

This looks like a no-brainer to me. Still, we're dealing with Corbyn . . .

CelticRambler

Enzokk wrote: »

Labour's results are bad, the Conservatives seems ten times worse. They have lost more than half their vote and in some areas finished lower than 5th. Brexit has broken UK politics, like people warned and if Labour doesn't act responsibility both main parties could be decimated.

Methinks there's a bit of a boards.ie bubble around this thread! While I agree that UK politics is broken, as regards this election, I'd nearly go so far as to say that Brexit is irrelevant :eek: because ...

Peregrinus wrote: »

What's less good for Farage is that he failed to make any inroads into the Remain/Second Referendum vote...

The big winners in this election are the Lib Dems and the Greens.

... this pattern has been reflected in the results right across Europe. Now there may be an argument that the political chaos caused by Brexit in the UK amplified the determination amongst other electorates to make a stand against their local far-right parties, but I would interpret the UK result more as an exaggeration of what's happening throughout the continent, i.e. British voters making it clear that the days of tribal politics are over and it's time for continental-style governance by consensus.

For comparison, France's equivalent of both the Tories and Labour barely scraped enough votes to avoid forfeiting their deposits; while the far-right exFN only barely took first place from Macron's Lib-Dem equivalent, with the Greens whoosing up into third place.

Leroy42

37% turnout is shameful.

Macron was right, they should have been let leave last April. The extension was a folly by the EU in the vain hope that the UK public would help sort this out.

Either they simply do not care or they couldn't be bothered, but either way there is simply not enough voters to make anything other than leaving the correct course. And given that at least 40% of voters are more than happy with a No Deal (those that voted Brexit Party) it is hard to argue that at this stage this is way the UK should do.

Peregrinus

CelticRambler wrote: »

... this pattern has been reflected in the results right across Europe. Now there may be an argument that the political chaos caused by Brexit in the UK amplified the determination amongst other electorates to make a stand against their local far-right parties, but I would interpret the UK result more as an exaggeration of what's happening throughout the continent, i.e. British voters making it clear that the days of tribal politics are over and it's time for continental-style governance by consensus.

I can't agree. I think.

It's true that the Lib Dem and the Greens have done spectacularly well, but they were starting from a low base. The fact remains that the bulk of UK voters have voted for parties which neither practice nor advocate consensus politics (Labour, the Tories) or those which openly despise the idea (Brexit, UKIP). So it's very had to see this as the electorate signalling that they want more governance by consensus.

What has happened is that the party system has splintered. There is one party on about 30% of the vote, one on about 20% (and neither of them are the traditional "major parties") and a slew of others - I count 7 - on between 3% and 15% of the vote each.

This is a situation in which the UK would be well-served by a continental style valuing of consensus in politics, but it's not a situation in which many people can be said to have voted for that, or in which more than a minority of politicians are willing (or even able) to offer it.

So, if you mean that UK voters have voted for more consensus-seeking politics, no, they haven't. But if you mean that they have created an electoral system which could encourage (by making it practically necessary) the development of more consensus-seeking politics, well, perhaps they have. But it remains to be seen whether the politicians will respond to that or, if they do, whether the voters will like it.

Peregrinus

Leroy42 wrote: »

37% turnout is shameful.

Macron was right, they should have been let leave last April. The extension was a folly by the EU in the vain hope that the UK public would help sort this out.

Either they simply do not care or they couldn't be bothered, but either way there is simply not enough voters to make anything other than leaving the correct course. And given that at least 40% of voters are more than happy with a No Deal (those that voted Brexit Party) it is hard to argue that at this stage this is way the UK should do.

Where are you getting 40% from?

CelticRambler

Enzokk wrote: »

I have seen it reported a few times that Farage and his party will now be the biggest party in the EU Parliament overtaking the CDU and the implication of this seemed to be that they will be able assert their influence over the EU due to this.

You can rest easy on that point. On this side of the Channel, the summary of the results is "all of Europe voted for more cooperation, except for three countries that lurched to the far-right: Italy, Hungary and Britain." Foreign media is not afraid to lump Farage in with Salvini and Orban but also repeats the point made by myself a couple of days ago and Francie Barrett this morning - that these guys are so isolationist they can barely hold themselves together, never mind forming a stable bloc with others.

In practice, it looks like the British Greens, along with the Irish Greens and the French Greens and all the other Greens, are those who will be exerting the most influence over future EU policy.

(Side note: apparently it's the young 'uns wot got out of bed and voted Green to save the EU for themselves. Getting my info from the radio so no links).

CelticRambler

Peregrinus wrote: »

This is a situation in which the UK would be well-served by a continental style valuing of consensus in politics, but it's not a situation in which many people can be said to have voted for that, or in which more than a minority of politicians are willing (or even able) to offer it.

So, if you mean that UK voters have voted for more consensus-seeking politics, no, they haven't. But if you mean that they have created an electoral system which could encourage (by making it practically necessary) the development of more consensus-seeking politics, well, perhaps they have. But it remains to be seen whether the politicians will respond to that or, if they do, whether the voters will like it.

Talking to the young UK voters in my entourage, they desperately want more consensus and are frustrated by both FPTP and (what they see as) a lack of choice of non-tribal candidates. In practice, they have to work with FPTP, but are doing so in a strategic way and - so far - seem to be getting the result that they want (booted a Tory out of a safe seat in the last GE, pushed for the LibDems in this one).

Will the Establishment listen, and set in motion the changes necessary to facilitate them? Probably not :pac: but if we see a similar distribution of votes across several parties in the next two GEs, there'll come a time when CON-LAB realises that its only hope of regaining power is through some kind of proportional representation and coalition.

CelticRambler

Enzokk wrote: »

But what sways it for me now is that Cameron had no reason to call an election and he ran the campaign as well. Look at it this way, without Cameron calling the referendum May never would have become PM. So he set her up for failure for what was an unnecessary decisions.

Cameron at least had the wit to set up a non-binding referendum. May was the short-sighted fool who decided to trigger Art.50 without identifying a precise and achievable outcome, and while there were already allegations of impropriety surrounding the Leave campaign. If anything, Cameron set things up so that she could walk away from his mess.

listermint

listermint wrote: »

From what I see so far. It's just an exchange of ukips meps for brexit party meps.

The labour and tories have lost out to true remainer parties.

There is zero mandate or change for a real hard brexit with these results. Actually combined remain nip it.

Not exactly
UKIP - 23
Brexit +28
Still about 31% of the total vote

Leroy42

Peregrinus wrote: »

Where are you getting 40% from?

The Brexit Party circa 32%
Tories 9%
UKIP 3.2%

Sure you can argue that not all the Tory votes all for No Deal, but on that basis you need to bring some No deal from Labour.

But that is quite a sizeable volume, and in contrast to the Ref it is very clear what their voters were voting for. A Vote from the BP was a clear vote for No Deal, same with UKIP and Tory.

I simply cannot see how the UK can do anything but leave the EU given that and since they cannot seem to countenance any sort of compromise deal with the EU then a No Deal is the only option left.

Peregrinus

Deleted User wrote: »

Not exactly
UKIP - 23
Brexit +28
Still about 31% of the total vote

Nitpick: UKIP won 24 seats in 2014.

So, yes, the Brexit Party seem set for 28 - four extra seats, which is not trivial. And they have improved on UKIP's vote share - 31% as opposed to 27%, also not trivial.

But this is partly due to the fact that the Tories didn't campaign at all, and Labour barely so. So there were a great many votes and seats up there for grabs. And from that point of view UKIP's performance is a bit less impressive - they got an extra 4% of the vote, and 4 seats, but the Greens did exactly the same. And the Lib Dems picked up an extra 13% of the vote and 14 new seats. The principal beneficiaries of the hollowing out of the major parties' support are the Remain parties.

listermint

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Not exactly
UKIP - 23
Brexit +28
Still about 31% of the total vote

No exactly is true they tore the Tories leave votes but failed to pull any remainers or centerists in.

Something I thing farage will be unhappy about.

It's kinda murders your commentary on a majority appetite for leave.

Harry Palmr

Labour whether the leadership likes it or not are about to become a remain party I reckon.

Also the idea that Brexit party results will transpose to a big majority in the GE is ludicrous. They have no policies beyond leave and if they form some it'll repell many cos it'll be a vision of right wing claptrap.

Peregrinus

listermint wrote: »

No exactly is true they tore the Tories leave votes but failed to pull any remainers or centerists in.

Something I thing farage will be unhappy about.

I doubt that he will be unhappy about this. At no point has he ever, implicitly or explicity, sought to attract the support of remainers or centrists. He has consistently done everything he possibly could to alienate them.

listermint wrote: »

It's kinda murders your commentary on a majority appetite for leave.

Certainly murders the commentary on a remain appetite for no-deal Brexit. Offered a party whose literally only policy position on any question was "no-deal Brexit now!", seven of out ten voters said no. Even if we aggregate the BP and UKIP votes, 35% probably represents the high point of support for, and I suspect tolerance of, a no-deal Brexit.

This creates a real dilemma for ambitious Tories who would like to lead the party, but don't want to end up in a couple of years' time swinging from a lampost and surrounded by a jeering crowd.

Leroy42

I actually think the Brexit Party result is actually poor. Traditionally they were closest to Tory, which were not running for all intents.

It was also clear that the singular message they had was the single biggest factor in the UK. Literally it was the entire basis of the election. The BRexit Party are claiming that these elections were a 2nd Ref, and if so, they failed to get anywhere close to what they would need in a 2nd ref.

That is not to say that what Farage has done is not impressive, just that it is far from the decisive outcome that is is being portrayed as.

But what is pretty clear is that the Tory will now, is there was any doubt, go full on No Deal. It is therefore vital that Labour not only come out for Remain, but strongly and definitively.

listermint

listermint wrote: »

No exactly is true they tore the Tories leave votes but failed to pull any remainers or centerists in.

Something I thing farage will be unhappy about.

It's kinda murders your commentary on a majority appetite for leave.

I don't know how 31% is a majority appetite for leave.

kuro68k

The spectre of no-deal rises...

But nice to see that remain parties had a decent majority in the UK.

listermint

[Deleted User] wrote: »

If people believe that the EU elections were to be used as a proxy for a second referendum, then the figures coming in so far appear to show a very strong support for (a hard) Brexit at over 30%, voters who chose Conservative or Labour candidates probably put party loyalty before choosing Brexit or remain by switching to Liberal Democrats.
The Greens have obviously picked up the votes from people who believe that environmental issues are more important than Brexit.

This is you from yesterday.

I can remember posts. It's not difficult.

That's not strong support as you claim.

So



....

lawred2

Effectively we still more or less see the same 50:50 split that we saw in 2016.

It's just the makeup of the split that's changed

Lucy8080

The Daily Mail have a mainly Turquise map of England ( barring London and some Lib -Dem patches elsewhere). They are calling it a political earthquake from the Brexit Party!

Scotland is entirely Yellow (S.N.P.).For some reason that is not the headline. I think remain parties have (combined) beaten leave parties. Their vote is split along party lines.

Scotland seems to know where it stands on this issue. That is the real earthquake!

Nigel, the man who maybe leading the way to the break -up of the U.K.

Christy42

Lucy8080 wrote: »

The Daily Mail have a mainly Turquise map of England ( barring London and some Lib -Dem patches elsewhere). They are calling it a political earthquake from the Brexit Party!

Scotland is entirely Yellow (S.N.P.).For some reason that is not the headline. I think remain parties have (combined) beaten leave parties. Their vote is split along party lines.

Scotland seems to know where it stands on this issue. That is the real earthquake!

Nigel, the man who maybe leading the way to the break -up of the U.K.

Noticed cnn had a story about the success of the far right in Europe which seemed at odds with the results. And I would have had them above the daily mail in terms of quality. They were light on numbers too (and obviously couldn't mention certain countries like Germany where the far right failed).

Franz Von Peppercorn II

Enzokk wrote: »

You are wrong. There are Labour voters that voted Labour because they will always vote Labour. They voted Labour before the referendum and they will vote for them in the future. So they were Labour supporters when the party supported remain and when they were for Brexit. So how do you count them?

I count them as having voted for a soft Brexit party. They could have defected but didn’t.

then you have the voters that are angry at their stance on Brexit but they actually know their MEPs and still voted for the party due to the MEP and not Corbyn. Take the London vote, and very much unscientific add the Brexit Parties together, according to your definition, and you get a 51% share. This is more than during the Brexit referendum so it seems wrong to suggest that all Labour voters are leave voters.

Nobody voted for personal candidates. It’s a party list system. This was clear in the returning officers results if nothing else, did you hear a personal Farage vote?

Then you ignore the polls of Labour members and voters who are overwhelmingly for remain.

I’m aware of those polls. I clearly said that labour remainers have in general defected to the Lib Dems, Greens and other remain parties. Therefore those that voted for labour were in the overwhelming majority pro Brexit. The defectors left because labour was pro Brexit. And yet now it is claimed that all these Labour voters can be considered remain.

But how did Labour voters vote in the referendum? Well according to the below linked article they voted 65-35% for remain.

So tell me again why you think we should count Labour as a Brexit party?

Again because the 65% of labour voters who voted remain probably didn’t vote for labour in this election. Labour got <10% of the votes here compared to 30.4% in the general election which maps exactly to the percentages that you say are remain vs leave.

Maybe there is some stickiness in the labour vote, maybe some voters defected to BP and some remain voters stayed, but as it stands labour is a Brexit party and it makes far more sense to say the reason they lost 60% of their vote was because remainers didn’t vote for them and that therefore what’s left are largely brexit voters.

That analysis makes far more sense than adding all of the labour voters in this election to the remain camp. Either exclude them, because we don’t know exactly or add them to the soft Brexit camp.

listermint

That's a terrible analysis tbh. There is no factual basis for that analysis other than labour leadership are at odds with its base.

Sorry but no

Harry Palmr

It feels as if everyone in the commentariat was so certain the nationalist right would have a big night it'll take a few days for the facts of the matter to sink in.

Franz Von Peppercorn II

Lucy8080 wrote: »

The Daily Mail have a mainly Turquise map of England ( barring London and some Lib -Dem patches elsewhere). They are calling it a political earthquake from the Brexit Party!

Scotland is entirely Yellow (S.N.P.).For some reason that is not the headline. I think remain parties have (combined) beaten leave parties. Their vote is split along party lines.

Scotland seems to know where it stands on this issue. That is the real earthquake!

Nigel, the man who maybe leading the way to the break -up of the U.K.

Scotland is always SNP in general elections. And as far as I know European elections. No Earthquake there. For them to win all constituencies is fairly normal.

Leroy42

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

Scotland is always SNP in general elections. And as far as I know European elections. No Earthquake there. For them to win all constituencies is fairly normal.

Ah right, so when Brexit Party fails to make any significant inroadds it is simply because the Scots simply vote for the same all the time?

You don't see the clear, and widening, gap between England and Scotland? For a country that deems that the UK must be sovereign, it seems totally au fait with one of the core make up of that union drifting further and further away.

Based on tweets from a number of Tories this morning, it is clear that they see the only way back is to go full on Brexit, with even previous remainers such as Liz Truss stating that they need to leave on 31 Oct Deal or No Deal. You also have the likes of Owen Paterson stating

The UK must now leave the EU by 31st October, ideally with an FTA agreed in principle but, if necessary on WTO terms with practical side deals already agreed.

I was listening to Suella Braverman on R5 last night claiming the result a clear message to get out on No deal if that is what it takes. What annoyed me was the guy debating her (Kinnock I think) didn't simply ask her, as she was previously part of the government, what the reports she had read had claimed about No Deal impacts on jobs etc and what she would do if they came to pass. They never hold them to account for them view that everything will be fine, they are never questioned on what basis they make this judgment.

Lucy8080

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

Scotland is always SNP in general elections. And as far as I know European elections. No Earthquake there. For them to win all constituencies is fairly normal.

Their vote stood up,despite the new (no policy,one issue) Brexit party. The Cons/Lab in England would love that sort of guarantee at the polls.

Franz Von Peppercorn II

listermint wrote: »

That's a terrible analysis tbh. There is no factual basis for that analysis other than labour leadership are at odds with its base.

Sorry but no

That’s quite the rebuttal. My analysis that the 10% of labour voters that voted for labour - down from 30% in the election - are pro Corbyn and pro Brexit maps exactly to the Brexit divisions in the Labour Party ie about 70/30 remain.

Assuming that 100% of all the labour voters here are remain when the party lost votes to remain parties flies against that logic. Either Labour Party voters are not to be added to either camp or are to be added to the leave camp. They aren’t certain remain voters though. Which is the analysis here.

listermint

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

That’s quite the rebuttal. My analysis that the 10% of labour voters that voted for labour - down from 30% in the election - are pro Corbyn and pro Brexit maps exactly to the Brexit divisions in the Labour Party ie about 70/30 remain.

Assuming that 100% of all the labour voters here are remain when the party lost votes to remain parties flies against that logic. Either Labour Party voters are not to be added to either camp or are to be added to the leave camp.

That flies in the face of the overtly pro EU meps they voted back in.

As I said your analysis is incredibly poor and is more than coloured by some of your own pro brexit desires and bias

Dyr

I think the real take away might be that we could wind up with a hung EU parliament and Macron has been walloped in France


The danger for us was always that the sands shift under us and we lose the firm support from the EU for our position.

Franz Von Peppercorn II

Lucy8080 wrote: »

Their vote stood up,despite the new (no policy,one issue) Brexit party. The Cons/Lab in England would love that sort of guarantee at the polls.

Nobody expected anything else. Scotland voted remain. The SNP have been dominant for years.

The SNP are fairly one issue too btw and a good example of how nationalist politics can in some cases trump economic or class divisions if allowed to.

Christy42

I feel like labour votes should be chucked out.

We don't know what they stand for. Maybe voters want a mild Brexit as they have argued for a customs union? That is about as far as you can go with them. I would just compare UKIP/Brexit/Con vs LibDem/Green/SNP.

listermint

Christy42 wrote: »

I feel like labour votes should be chucked out.

We don't know what they stand for. Maybe voters want a mild Brexit as they have argued for a customs union? That is about as far as you can go with them. I would just compare UKIP/Brexit/Con vs LibDem/Green/SNP.

You can't just chuck out the incredible strong turnout for very media pro EU MEPs from labour that have been elected. That's just not going to fly with the reality

Lucy8080

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

Nobody expected anything else. Scotland voted remain. The SNP have been dominant for years.

The SNP are fairly one issue too btw and a good example of how nationalist politics can in some cases trump economic or class divisions if allowed to.

So there you have it! The S.N.P. don't want to leave Europe and the Scots are supporting them!

What conclusion would you draw from that in regards to the U.K.s future prospects?

Peregrinus

Lucy8080 wrote: »

The Daily Mail have a mainly Turquise map of England ( barring London and some Lib -Dem patches elsewhere). They are calling it a political earthquake from the Brexit Party!

Scotland is entirely Yellow (S.N.P.).For some reason that is not the headline. I think remain parties have (combined) beaten leave parties. Their vote is split along party lines.

Those maps are deeply misleading. The colour in an entire region to indicate which party got more votes than any other, but in a multiparty proportional representation system that's a pretty meaningless statistic. In the election just held the highest ranking party in each UK region for which we have results as yet
has recevied between 27% and 38% of the vote, so a region may be coloured to indicate that it has been "won" by (say) the Brexit party despite 70% or more of the voters having voted against the Brexit party.

Pay no attention to those maps. Look at vote shares. And look at vote shares for policy positions, not for individual parties.

Franz Von Peppercorn II

listermint wrote: »

That flies in the face of the overtly pro EU meps they voted back in.

As I said your analysis is incredibly poor and is more than coloured by some of your own pro brexit desires and bias

For the third time. They didn’t vote for those MEPS. It’s a list system. This level of analysis is the problem here.

I’m not pro Brexit. I said that in my first post. And even if I were thats not an argument, it’s an ad hominem.

And again no real rebuttal. If you claim the 10% of voters who voted labour in this election are all remainers then you are saying that both the voters who stayed with labour and those that left are equally remainers, even though the labour leadership is a pro soft Brexit and the labour membership didn’t vote 100% remain in the referendum.

Given the parties stance, that it polled at about 30% of its general election level and that 30% is about equal to the pro Brexit Labour Party vote, my analysis makes more sense than yours which assumes the Labour Party vote is 100% remain and that labour is a remain party. The labour vote in this election was either pro Brexit or agnostic.

It can’t be added to the remain vote.

Franz Von Peppercorn II

Lucy8080 wrote: »

So there you have it! The S.N.P. don't want to leave Europe and the Scots are supporting them!

What conclusion would you draw from that in regards to the U.K.s future prospects?

That it will break up? Nothing new there either.

Peregrinus

Bambi wrote: »

I think the real take away might be that we could wind up with a hung EU parliament and Macron has been walloped in France


The danger for us was always that the sands shift under us and we lose the firm support from the EU for our position.

When was the EU parliament ever not hung? EU support for Ireland on the Brexit issue has never, ever depended on the makeup of the 2014-19 Parliament.

As for Macron being walloped in France, I think that's a bit of an overstatement. He hasn't had a great day, but I wouldn't go further than that. And the liberal political tendency which Macron respresents and aspires to lead may not have done well in France, but across the EU as a whole it's one of the big winners in this election.

Lucy8080

Peregrinus wrote: »

Those maps are deeply misleading. The colour in an entire region to indicate which party got more votes than any other, but in a multiparty proportional representation system that's a pretty meaningless statistic. In the election just held the highest ranking party in each UK region for which we have results as yet
has recevied between 27% and 38% of the vote, so a region may be coloured to indicate that it has been "won" by (say) the Brexit party despite 70% or more of the voters having voted against the Brexit party.

Pay no attention to those maps. Look at vote shares. And look at vote shares for policy positions, not for individual parties.

In fairness to you, I think Brexit Party is polling as low as 10% of the general (available) electorate. As you said ,the maps may be misleading. But ,for the sake of argument, I'm comparing the stories that can be taken from the maps( be they yeah or nay).

listermint

Farage increases his seats by 4 and it's called a surge in far right support.

Remained parties increase their seats by 19 and it gets no such coverage


Even from folks in this thread with an obvious bias

francois

listermint wrote: »

Farage increases his seats by 4 and it's called a surge in far right support.

Remained parties increase their seats by 19 and it gets no such coverage


Even from folks in this thread with an obvious bias

Yes-Quite how 32% of the vote on a 37% turnout is a landslide is newspeak at its finest

Zubeneschamali

Leroy42 wrote: »

I simply cannot see how the UK can do anything but leave the EU given that and since they cannot seem to countenance any sort of compromise deal with the EU then a No Deal is the only option left.

I am actually more hopeful today than for a good while that Labour will get off the fence and force a 2nd referendum, remain will win and Brexit will be cancelled.

IAmTheReign

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

For the third time. They didn’t vote for those MEPS. It’s a list system. This level of analysis is the problem here.

I’m not pro Brexit. I said that in my first post. And even if I were thats not an argument, it’s an ad hominem.

And again no real rebuttal. If you claim the 10% of voters who voted labour in this election are all remainers then you are saying that both the voters who stayed with labour and those that left are equally remainers, even though the labour leadership is a pro soft Brexit and the labour membership didn’t vote 100% remain in the referendum.

Given the parties stance, that it polled at about 30% of its general election level and that 30% is about equal to the pro Brexit Labour Party vote, my analysis makes more sense than yours which assumes the Labour Party vote is 100% remain and that labour is a remain party. The labour vote in this election was either pro Brexit or agnostic.

It can’t be added to the remain vote.

It's a list system where you know the order of the list though. If a pro EU Labour voter walks into the polls and sees pro EU Labour candidates topping the list why would they not vote for Labour?

lawred2

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I am actually more hopeful today than for a good while that Labour will get off the fence and force a 2nd referendum, remain will win and Brexit will be cancelled.

and Britain will still fall apart under the weight of division and polarisation

A Dub in Glasgo

Peregrinus wrote: »

Those maps are deeply misleading. The colour in an entire region to indicate which party got more votes than any other, but in a multiparty proportional representation system that's a pretty meaningless statistic. In the election just held the highest ranking party in each UK region for which we have results as yet
has recevied between 27% and 38% of the vote, so a region may be coloured to indicate that it has been "won" by (say) the Brexit party despite 70% or more of the voters having voted against the Brexit party.

Pay no attention to those maps. Look at vote shares. And look at vote shares for policy positions, not for individual parties.

They are misleading but it does not stop the people being fed them by the media. The narrative now is that No deal Brexit won

Edit: This is the map

Harry Palmr

Ha, in the UK the only map that matters is the actual voting population map, geo-maps are always a lie but esp in the UK so concentrated is the population is large urban areas.

darem93

Those election result maps are very telling. It is becoming quite evident that Scotland are on a divergent path to England and Wales. Like it's such a massive contrast between a party like the SNP cleaning up in Scotland and then a party like the Brexit Party cleaning up south of the border.

Harry Palmr

Brexit are not cleaning up - you are getting distracted by pretty colours!

LeinsterDub

IAmTheReign wrote: »

It's a list system where you know the order of the list though. If a pro EU Labour voter walks into the polls and sees pro EU Labour candidates topping the list why would they not vote for Labour?

Because they know the pro EU candidate could resign tomorrow and be replaced by an anti EU MEP

Professor Moriarty

Harry Palmr wrote: »

Brexit are not cleaning up - you are getting distracted by pretty colours!

The Brexit Party basically took UKIP's vote plus a few percent from (presumably) the Tories and Lab. The interesting question is how many Tory and Lab votes went to the Lib Dems and the Greens. Those that stayed Tory/Lab are essentially the party faithful and/or those who are waiting for policy changes.