nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Brexit discussion thread XI (Please read OP before posting)

Quin_Dub

This is the eleventh incarnation of our Brexit discussion thread,

Same warnings etc still apply:

As we are approaching the critical end of March October 2019 period, please bear the following in mind before posting:
Insults directed at popular figures are not acceptable in this forum
Please do not post memes, videos or comedy links here
Please do not be uncivil to other posters
Please use the report function to alert the mods when necessary

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Memnoch

Deleted User wrote: »

Because he is at odds with most Labour voters.

Not really. Propaganda has been effective in putting him behind in the polls. But like the last time a general election forces fairer rules on journalism.

I think his position is precisely attempting to accommodate the view of the broader tent of the Labour Party which includes many people who voted brexit.

Memnoch

Sam Russell wrote: »

Well there is talk of a Gov of National Unity. If there is a vote of NC carried by the HoC, then there is a window of 14 days to form such a Gov. The choice of PM might be an issue, but a stooge PM such as Ken Clarke who is retiring at the next election would allow an opportunity to settle Brexit.

If the aim of such a Gov is to get a second vote, the best way to achieve that is to agree that a second referendum is held within six months with a GE immediately afterwards. In the meantime, they revoke Art 50, on the basis that they make Art 50 declaration immediately if the vote is for Leave, with the WA already negotiated. The political declaration is nothing, and the Backstop is an irrelevance if a SM and CU applies to NI.

The problem with a GE preceding the 2nd Ref, is that a popular vote as low as 33% might be enough to return a majority pro-leave Gov, where the deselection of pro-remain candidates has occurred, while the Ref needs a popular vote in excess of 50%.

It is a mess of gigantic proportions. Democracy is in the balance.

A government of national unity is no more likely to be achieved than the various votes in the house of Parliament that stood for anything.

The only thing Parliament can agree on is what they disagree on. But they have yet to be able to achieve any kind of consensus on a way forward. This is likely to continue to be the case without another general election that returns a plurality in favor of a second referendum i.e. some kind of centerleft coalition or a clear conservative majority which will force brexit through one way or the other.

woohoo!!!

Remember back on the day, a previous GE Tory spin, 'Red Ed' and 'Chaos with Miliband'. Considering the years since then and now of utter Tory caused chaos, I'm not sure we can pay much attention to the Tory spin against Corbyn. I don't think Corbyn is a good leader but he is not some extreme left winger but a centre left old fashioned politician. His centrist position re Brexit is lost in the noise of crash out vs revoke.

listermint

Memnoch wrote: »

Why? So that the establishment can continue as before? And nothing substantive changes in the slow, inexorable decline towards a total corporatocracy?

More of the same old sileage turning.

Corporatocracy or any other buzz words of the month.

Honest left wingers. Honest social democrats do and would understand that the only way to really truly impact workers rights, social issues and making sure corporations do the right thing is from within an organisation like the EU.

It's uniquely the only union in the world with the clout and power to be able to impact such changes.

The boring old lefty arguments will do nothing. It's not even swimming against a tide, I mean is the reality for you to think that Corbyn can create some social paradise off the coast of France and Ireland where everyone's looked after and money flourishes for its citizens.

These people don't operate in the real world. Change is made on concensus, it's made with bodies and market power it's made with like minded unions.

Like.

Erm the EU

Memnoch

listermint wrote: »

More of the same old sileage turning.

Corporatocracy or any other buzz words of the month.

Honest left wingers. Honest social democrats do and would understand that the only way to really truly impact workers rights, social issues and making sure corporations do the right thing is from within an organisation like the EU.

It's uniquely the only union in the world with the clout and power to be able to impact such changes.

The boring old lefty arguments will do nothing. It's not even swimming against a tide, I mean is the reality for you to think that Corbyn can create some social paradise off the coast of France and Ireland where everyone's looked after and money flourishes for its citizens.

These people don't operate in the real world. Change is made on concensus, it's made with bodies and market power it's made with like minded unions.

Like.

Erm the EU

I agree 100% with everything you are saying. I also don't think that Corbyn's principal stance of remaining within the EU but advocating reform, which is what he argued for at the time of the referendum, is contradictory to what you're saying.

Consensus is exactly what he is trying to build within the Labor Party. This is of course easier said than done as we look at the current state of British politics and the mood and attitudes within the wider electorate.

briany

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Absolutely. Every chance he'll do it, just to be able to bang on again about labour running "frit", when they refuse to fall into the trap. Gives him something to blather on about if nothing else.

Why not just resign?

quokula

woohoo!!! wrote: »

Remember back on the day, a previous GE Tory spin, 'Red Ed' and 'Chaos with Miliband'. Considering the years since then and now of utter Tory caused chaos, I'm not sure we can pay much attention to the Tory spin against Corbyn. I don't think Corbyn is a good leader but he is not some extreme left winger but a centre left old fashioned politician. His centrist position re Brexit is lost in the noise of crash out vs revoke.

Anywhere else in Europe and Corbyn is typical centre left - Labour's manifesto policies are nearly all well within the norm across the continent, though some of the new announcements this week around the 32 hour working week are on the more ambitious end of the spectrum.

The UK media have done an amazing job in turning him into a bogey man. Shows how far to the right they've moved the overton window there too.

Even though Labour policy is now a referendum between Remain and Soft Brexit, which is basically the absolute best policy the country could possibly realistically hope for from a party with any chance of getting elected, I still see people crucify him for it, even though the same people regularly praised the Lib Dems for having effectively the same policy (except with the Brexit option being undefined and possibly much more extreme)

J Mysterio

Memnoch wrote: »

Why? So that the establishment can continue as before? And nothing substantive changes in the slow, inexorable decline towards a total corporatocracy?

Ok, that's nonsense. I now understand that you are basically just jumping in to defend Corbyn and his agenda. Glad that's clear.

As to why... I believe politicians should state their position and argue for it, especially as regards the 'big questions'. May be considered naive to some, but I respect politicians who act honestly, honourably and with integrity.

Corbyn is practicing deception in his antics, same as the Tories. He has held basically no position on Brexit in three years (biggest issue of his political life), instead preferring to simply criticise the government. He has offered nothing.

I think you would find that were he honest in his appraisal of the situation and truly laid out his position, many would appreciate that. Reality is he feels he cannot state his position because he knows he will lose voters. I think we're essentially agreed on this last point - except you seem to think that is right and I do not. If Corbyn ever does become PM with a majority, he will quickly and happily alienate many of these people he strung along with his policies. This is one of the reasons people lose faith in politics.

Memnoch

J Mysterio wrote: »

Ok, that's nonsense. I now understand that you are basically just jumping in to defend Corbyn and his agenda. Glad that's clear.

As to why... I believe politicians should state their position and argue for it, especially as regards the 'big questions'. May be considered naive to some, but I respect politicians who act honestly, honourably and with integrity.

Corbyn is practicing deception in his antics, same as the Tories. He has held basically no position on Brexit in three years (biggest issue of his political life), instead preferring to simply criticise the government. He has offered nothing.

I think you would find that were he honest in his appraisal of the situation and truly laid out his position, many would appreciate that. Reality is he feels he cannot state his position because he knows he will lose voters. I think we're essentially agreed on this last point - except you seem to think that is right and I do not. If Corbyn ever does become PM with a majority, he will quickly and happily alienate many of these people he strung along with his policies. This is one of the reasons people lose faith in politics.

His position has been clear from the start. He is 7/10 on the EU. He advocates remaining within the EU but arguing for reform. I don't see anything extreme or deceptive about this position.

As things stand in the UK currently, if he were to take a hard remain position he would be painted as undemocratic and ignoring the will of the electorate. This might not be true but will be effective propaganda for the conservative party in the upcoming general election.

I'm not sure what you think he will actually do. I believe he will call the second referendum that will yield a remain result.

Again, you can disagree with his strategy. I think that it is the only one that can practically work. And if after a second referendum, the British public decide on some kind of Norway style brexit then that is entirely their prerogative. I think it is difficult to now argue that they have not been made better aware of the realities of the decision that has to be made.

[Deleted User]

The British would vote for leave again a week from now. We just need a sensible leader who can make that happen in a non-catastrophic way.

Memnoch

briany wrote: »

Why not just resign?

Because he wants to hold onto power at all costs and milk it for everything that he can?

It is the Tory way.

Memnoch

Deleted User wrote: »

The British would vote for leave again a week from now. We just need a sensible leader who can make that happen in a non-catastrophic way.

I'm not convinced it is that clear-cut. But the labor position is to try and offer a Norway style brexit or remain as referendum options.

Not sure what other options would be more sensible?

Thargor

Putting the boot in:

https://twitter.com/guyverhofstadt/status/1176441621962985474

listermint

Memnoch wrote: »

I agree 100% with everything you are saying. I also don't think that Corbyn's principal stance of remaining within the EU but advocating reform, which is what he argued for at the time of the referendum, is contradictory to what you're saying.

Consensus is exactly what he is trying to build within the Labor Party. This is of course easier said than done as we look at the current state of British politics and the mood and attitudes within the wider electorate.

I don't buy it. He's very much anti EU.

Frankly I'd say he voted out do we really know?

As for building consensus in his own party ? How is he doing this if he's sidelining all remainers and constructing votes to remove people. He is the ERG of labour.

That's not the media spin. It's via his actions. Making him out to be just left of centre is not factual.

He'd be out of the EU in the morning if he could . The deal stuff is a fascade.

[Deleted User]

Memnoch wrote: »

I'm not convinced it is that clear-cut. But the labor position is to try and offer a Norway style brexit or remain as referendum options.

Not sure what other options would be more sensible?

Well apart from the inevitability of it being an Irish sea border, I don't really know. It changes every day. It's all so fcky.

Memnoch

listermint wrote: »

I don't buy it. He's very much anti EU.

Frankly I'd say he voted out do we really know?

As for building consensus in his own party ? How is he doing this if he's sidelining all remainers and constructing votes to remove people. He is the ERG of labour.

That's not the media spin. It's via his actions. Making him out to be just left of centre is not factual.

He'd be out of the EU in the morning if he could . The deal stuff is a fascade.

And I would say that you are grossly misinformed and have brought into the smear campaign designed to undermine him and keep him out of power at all costs.

The Labour Party's lead negotiator as appointed by Corbyn is Keir Stammer. This is not sidelining all remainders.

The Labour Party cannot win a general election on the hard remain platform. A second referendum between remain and the Norway style brexit is the most balanced position and the only one that could achieve some kind of consensus in the current climate.

Memnoch

Deleted User wrote: »

Well apart from the inevitability of it being an Irish sea border, I don't really know. It changes every day. It's all so fcky.

Exactly. So I don't understand how in this climate people expect Corbyn to take a hard remain stance.

It is fantastical thinking to believe that this would actually result in a revocation or even another referendum.

quokula

J Mysterio wrote: »

Ok, that's nonsense. I now understand that you are basically just jumping in to defend Corbyn and his agenda. Glad that's clear.

As to why... I believe politicians should state their position and argue for it, especially as regards the 'big questions'. May be considered naive to some, but I respect politicians who act honestly, honourably and with integrity.

Corbyn is practicing deception in his antics, same as the Tories. He has held basically no position on Brexit in three years (biggest issue of his political life), instead preferring to simply criticise the government. He has offered nothing.

I think you would find that were he honest in his appraisal of the situation and truly laid out his position, many would appreciate that. Reality is he feels he cannot state his position because he knows he will lose voters. I think we're essentially agreed on this last point - except you seem to think that is right and I do not. If Corbyn ever does become PM with a majority, he will quickly and happily alienate many of these people he strung along with his policies. This is one of the reasons people lose faith in politics.

But he has a position. He's consistently had a position and repeated it over and over again.

Labour accept that the referendum happened and they accept the democratic outcome. However, they want to maintain a close relationship with the EU including customs union membership. They also want to maintain alignment with EU environmental standards and workers rights. They have no red lines with regard to freedom of movement or the ECJ like the Tories do. Ultimately they'll end up with a deal something akin to Norway, which would cause minimal damage.

Further to that, they want to put this deal to the people in a referendum to ensure it has the support of the country, rather than wanting to remain once they see what is on the table.

I realise that this position can't be turned into a pithy soundbite like "No Deal is Better than a Bad Deal" or "Bollox to Brexit", but that's because it's a serious policy dealing with a serious and complex issue.

Ultimately their position is a second referendum, with Remain vs Soft Brexit. It's the absolute best case scenario for both the UK and the EU.

Harry Palmr

The opposition are for different reasons happy to leave Johnson swinging in the breeze.

Memnoch

Memnoch wrote: »

And I would say that you are grossly misinformed and have brought into the smear campaign designed to undermine him and keep him out of power at all costs.

The Labour Party's lead negotiator as appointed by Corbyn is Keir Stammer. This is not sidelining all remainders.

The Labour Party cannot win a general election on the hard remain platform. A second referendum between remain and the Norway style brexit is the most balanced position and the only one that could achieve some kind of consensus in the current climate.

Also, I would add that the general election as a proxy for a second referendum plays right into Boris Johnson's hands.

This allows it to be a single issue election and for the conservatives do not have to defend or discuss their record in power and the devastating policies that they have inflicted upon the British public.

Yes, brexit is the biggest issue at stake. But if it is the only issue being argued then that makes it much easier for the conservative party to fight their campaign.

[Deleted User]

Memnoch wrote: »

Exactly. So I don't understand how in this climate people expect Corbyn to take a hard remain stance.

It is fantastical thinking to believe that this would actually result in a revocation or even another referendum.

I don't think there should be either, nor do I want that to happen. If, and if I posted that tonight, I take it back. I've lost a bet I put on six months ago. Then, I didn't understand the UK well enough. Now, I've a better idea.

robinph

Joe_ Public wrote: »

MadYaker wrote: »

Can Bojo call a vote of no confidence in himself to trigger an election?

Absolutely. Every chance he'll do it, just to be able to bang on again about labour running "frit", when they refuse to fall into the trap. Gives him something to blather on about if nothing else.

Don't think he can.

Johnson can try for calling an early election, which he failed at.
Johnson can resign.
Any other MP can call for a vote of no confidence, just not Johnson. If he wasn't confident in himself then that is a resignation and that isn't what he wants as it removes him as PM and leader of the party and he can't win an election from not being the party leader.

He wants someone else to do it for him so that he can still take his chances at being PM.

briany

How can Corbyn have a real position one way or another? To do so would alienate half of the party. His strategy is to ride the middle ground, which could end up being worse than going one way or the other, but it's how he's chosen. I think opponents of Corbyn and Labour would much prefer him to pick a firm side as it would give a better idea of their election strategies against him and his party.

Itssoeasy

Of all the things that would get a sitting PM their walking papers, you'd think being found to have lied/mislead the head of state would be a fairly cut and dry way of doing it. How will JRM who seems to be the ultimate royalist be able to keep going knowing it's been stated in the highest court in the land that the Rt hon member JRM has mislead her majesty ?

Memnoch

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't think there should be either, nor do I want that to happen. If, and if I posted that tonight, I take it back. I've lost a bet I put on six months ago. Then, I didn't understand the UK well enough. Now, I've a better idea.

I'm not sure what your stance is. But that is fair enough and you are absolutely entitled to it. Just as the British electorate are entitled to come to a democratic decision.

The first referendum was flooded in disinformation. There will be a lot of propaganda the second time around as well but at least they have had time to think and consider and there has been ample public debate for the issues to be more clearly crystallized.

Democracy is not perfect and certainly not what little of it still remains in the Western world. But it is what we have.

[Deleted User]

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Of all the things that would get a sitting PM their walking papers, you'd think being found to have lied/mislead the head of state would be a fairly cut and dry way of doing it. How will JRM who seems to be the ultimate royalist be able to keep going knowing it's been stated in the highest court in the land that the Rt hon member JRM has mislead her majesty ?

Bizarre times. Fueled not only by chaos but by the public not caring beyond two seconds of a clip.

The Supreme Court finds that prorogation was illegal. Just another Tuesday I suppose in a Month's worth of Tuesday shltstorms. Who cares.

listermint

briany wrote: »

How can Corbyn have a real position one way or another? To do so would alienate half of the party. His strategy is to ride the middle ground, which could end up being worse than going one way or the other, but it's how he's chosen. I think opponents of Corbyn and Labour would much prefer him to pick a firm side as it would give a better idea of their election strategies against him and his party.

He's actively losing members how is that a strategy. Their whole mantra for two years has been the purge of 'blairites' and what's gas is there are people on here blaming the media...

Pull the other one.

He's disliked in his own party as much as out.

Labour would be flying under anyone else.

And it's arrogant to blame the media and tell people they are misinformed.

Arrogant

Memnoch

listermint wrote: »

He's actively losing members how is that a strategy. Their whole mantra for two years has been the purge of 'blairites' and what's gas is there are people on here blaming the media...

Pull the other one.

He's disliked in his own party as much as out.

Labour would be flying under anyone else.

And it's arrogant to blame the media and tell people they are misinformed.

Arrogant

Actually, the so-called 'Blairites' have been intent on sabotaging his leadership from day one. Because it represents actual democracy and not the stitch up that the current British establishment have been enjoying for at least two decades.

Let's not forget that many of these were parachuted into safe labor seats through completely undemocratic means and the local members of the party were prevented from having any say in their appointment.

He has been smeared from every direction and in every manner possible. Misinformation is too polite a term for what has taken place. The full weight of the British political, media and financial establishment has been brought to bear to prevent there being any real democratic change in the structure of British governance.

Feel free to call me arrogant. This is my view.

[Deleted User]

Where is #10 on all of this? Have they released anything?

briany

Itssoeasy wrote: »

How will JRM who seems to be the ultimate royalist be able to keep going knowing it's been stated in the highest court in the land that the Rt hon member JRM has mislead her majesty ?

Mogg's appetite for discomfort should not be underestimated, judging from those pictures of him snoozing with his head on the hard wooden arm rest of the HoC front bench.