Brexit discussion thread IX (Please read OP before posting)

Franz Von Peppercorn II

listermint wrote: »

Let's cut you with some facts first.



European Elections:
UK: 80% counted so far:

Remain parties: 40.3%
Hard Brexit parties: 34.9%
Conservatives/Labour: 23.2%

The conservatives and labour are Brexit parties. So that largely reiterated what I said. Although I didn’t distinguish between hard and soft Brexit, right enough.

I can’t post links but here is what the labour parties “labour plan for Brexit” website says.

Labour’s priority is to get the best Brexit deal for jobs and living standards, to underpin our plans to upgrade the economy and invest in every community and region.

And the conservatives are of course pro Brexit.

So a 60-40 Brexit vote there

Enzokk

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

The conservatives and labour are Brexit parties. So that largely reiterated what I said. Although I didn’t distinguish between hard and soft Brexit, right enough.

I can’t post links but here is what the labour parties “labour plan for Brexit” website says.

Labour’s priority is to get the best Brexit deal for jobs and living standards, to underpin our plans to upgrade the economy and invest in every community and region.

And the conservatives are of course pro Brexit.

So a 60-40 Brexit vote there

So you think the Labour voters that voted for Seb Dance is for Brexit?

Franz Von Peppercorn II

Enzokk wrote: »

Yeah, but it is easier for Labour voters who want to Brexit to vote for another party in the EU elections than it is in a general election as they think it matters more to them in a general election on their daily lives and to keep the Tories away from power. So the dithering of Labour cost them voters to both the Brexit Party and Libdems and Greens as well. What we do know is that Labour members are overwhelmingly in favour of remain. It is only the leader and his some of his close advisers that want to leave the EU. This doesn't mean that you can automatically count the party as either remain or leave. You can add the Conservatives and UKIP to the Brexit Party though.

We can assume that the voters who didn’t defect from labour today are following the leadership line and those conservatives who also didn’t defect are in favour of a softer Brexit, but still Brexit. Some conservatives must have defected to LibDems (this is clear in places like Kensington and Bath).

So if we’re counting all the Brexit votes I would in fact include the votes for labour and conservatives.

Franz Von Peppercorn II

Enzokk wrote: »

So you think the Labour voters that voted for Seb Dance is for Brexit?

Nobody voted for Seb Dance. I’m putting the Labour voters who didn’t defect to libs, or greens, or chuk, or other remain parties into the (soft) Brexit camp and not the remain camp because I think that the remainers in either party defected, and voted for remain parties.

The Brexit vote is not just the BP and UKIP.

Enzokk

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

We can assume that the voters who didn’t defect from labour today are following the leadership line and those conservatives who also didn’t defect are in favour of a softer Brexit, but still Brexit. Some conservatives must have defected to Lib Dem’s (this is clear in places like Kensington and Bath). So if we’re counting all the Brexit votes I would in fact include the votes for labour and conservatives.

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

Nobody voted for Seb Dance. I’m putting the Labour voters who didn’t defect to libs, or greens, or chuk, or other remain parties into the (soft) Brexit camp and not the remain camp because I think that the remainers in either party defected, and voted for remain parties.

The Brexit vote is not just the BP and UKIP.

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?

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.

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

Most Labour members believe Corbyn should back second Brexit vote

Labour members are significantly more opposed to Brexit than Jeremy Corbyn is, with 72% of them thinking their leader should fully support a second referendum, according to a study of attitudes in the party.

The polling, part of an ongoing wider academic study into attitudes in various parties, found that only 18% opposed Labour campaigning for a second referendum, while 88% would then opt for remain if such a vote was held.

But you could say that this is members and not voters, so lets see what their voters said in October 2018 before May brought back her deal.

Most Labour voters want us to stay in the EU

The research shows that Labour voters are by far the biggest group to shift, with a net number of over 1.4m Labour voters that voted Leave in the 2016 referendum switching in favour of staying in the EU. The research shows that three out of ten Labour voters that voted leave in the referendum would now vote to stay in the EU, and that trend is set to continue.

The shift of Labour voters towards wanting to stay in the EU is, however, offset by Conservative voters who backed Remain in the EU Referendum. Overall, 69 per cent of Tory supporters would back Brexit in a new poll, compared to 25 per cent who would support staying in the EU. Most Labour voters, Labour constituencies and the majority of the British public want to stay in the EU and reject all forms of Brexit.

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

How Britain Voted

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

Enzokk

And just to again show how divided the UK is, Sky projects that the seats will be as followed:

Brexit - 29
Conservative - 4

Labour - 10

Libdems - 16
Green - 7
SNP - 3
PC - 1

That is 33 for Brexit and 27 for remain if you discount Labour. But as shown above Labour is most definitely a remain party so you can bet your house that those 10 MEPs will be pro-EU and you can count them with the 27. So 37-33 split before the Northern Ireland results come in.

So while Farage may be the biggest party in the EU Parliament, the other UK MEPs will be able to counter any measures he may bring forth in votes at least. So a good result for Farage for sure, but the shouts of a great victory and how he will be a force in the general election is very much premature in my eyes.

Peregrinus

Enzokk wrote: »

And just to again show how divided the UK is, Sky projects that the seats will be as followed:

Brexit - 29
Conservative - 4

Labour - 10

Libdems - 16
Green - 7
SNP - 3
PC - 1

That is 33 for Brexit and 27 for remain if you discount Labour. But as shown above Labour is most definitely a remain party so you can bet your house that those 10 MEPs will be pro-EU and you can count them with the 27. So 37-33 split before the Northern Ireland results come in.

So while Farage may be the biggest party in the EU Parliament, the other UK MEPs will be able to counter any measures he may bring forth in votes at least.

There are no circumstances in which UK MEPs, and only UK MEPs, vote on any issue. So the pro-Brexit and pro-Remain breakdown among UK MEPs is actually irrelevant.

The number of votes that each group attracts may be meaningful as telling us something about public opinion on Brexit, and about how the outcome of a general election or a referendum might go. The number of seats each party gets, not so much.

Enzokk wrote: »

So a good result for Farage for sure, but the shouts of a great victory and how he will be a force in the general election is very much premature in my eyes.

It's a good result for Farage in that he has been able to hoover up all the hard Brexit votes, almost completely squeezing out UKIP. (Though, to be fair, UKIP helped him a lot with that by becoming an openly racist and fascist party. And the rest of us can take comfort from the fact that, even in the present fevered atmosphere and default of decent alternatives, the Brits still won't vote in any numbers for open racism and fascism.)

What's less good for Farage is that he failed to make any inroads into the Remain/Second Referendum vote, which in fact looks like being higher than the Hard Brexit/Crash-out Brexit vote. Farage has not done much more than inherit the old UKIP vote from 2014 and, to the extent that he has improved on that, he has done so by cannibalising the Tory vote. And he's still faced with the problem that, offered the opportunity to vote for no-deal Brexit, two out of three voters decline.

The big winners in this election are the Lib Dems and the Greens. The losers are the parties that try to straddle remain and leave opinion; that clearly is not a viable strategy. Even the present dim, rigid and incompetent Labour leadership must realise this now. Expect a pivot.

Larbre34

So if we assume 1 SF 1 DUP and 1 Alliance up North that'll be 39 to 34 Remain supporting MEPs from the UK.

Or 53.5% to 46.5%. Doesn't change very much definitively does it?

Enzokk

Peregrinus wrote: »

There are no circumstances in which UK MEPs, and only UK MEPs, vote on any issue. So the pro-Brexit and pro-Remain breakdown among UK MEPs is actually irrelevant.

The number of votes that each group attracts may be meaningful as telling us something about public opinion on Brexit, and about how the outcome of a general election or a referendum might go. The number of seats each party gets, not so much.

I know, sort of. It was just my answer and a way to help myself process the result a bit as well. 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. I was just looking at how even if all of the Brexit MEPs turn up for votes it will not matter that much if they are the biggest party as their votes could easily be countered by the other UK MEPs.

But as you note it is not so much how well they did in the UK, but what coalition and block they will fall in with at the EU Parliament. We will have to wait and see whether they will have enough support along with other like minded parties to form a voting block that can have an effect. We should also not forget that how many MEPs they send doesn't matter if they don't actually do the work either. They could have taken all of the UK MEP positions, if they don't actually show up and work in Brussels it is a bit of a waste of a vote.

20silkcut

Just looking at this graphic seems to give a nice overview.
Taking the greens as a remain party it’s seems to show 39% for outright remain.
34% for outright brexit.
Ignoring lab/con percentages where there are unknown shades of remain/soft/ hard brexit voters.

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.

[Deleted User]

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

dolanbaker 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

dolanbaker 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.

[Deleted User]

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

dolanbaker 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.