Brexited | the worst threads live the longest

Do you think there will be a Deal or No Deal?

  • Total voters
    194
  • Poll closed .
 
711 said:
A lot of different ways of claiming Labour voters aren't responsible for Brexit here, or their leaders, I suspect. In denial is the phrase that comes to mind.
Click to expand...

Except that's not what has been said at all.

Intellectual dishonesty is the phrase that comes to mind...
 
esmufc07 said:
I've always voted Labour but I cancelled my membership a few months back because of Labour's Brexit approach and their handling of antisemitism.

Honestly don't know who I'd vote for in an election. Probably the Lib Dems.
Click to expand...

I am with you on this. Always voted for Labour primarily because I didn't agree with the nasty party politics and still don't.
I will wait and see what happens because I don't see a GE being iminent.
Change UK might be interesting but absolutely not Liberal.

This country has far more important things to get resolved before the time is right for an election.
 
Buster15 said:
I am with you on this. Always voted for Labour primarily because I didn't agree with the nasty party politics and still don't.
I will wait and see what happens because I don't see a GE being iminent.
Change UK might be interesting but absolutely not Liberal.

This country has far more important things to get resolved before the time is right for an election.
Click to expand...
Vote SNP
 
Paul the Wolf said:
That may be true but how many Labour supporters just on this forum who voted Labour in the last election and support Remain?
Click to expand...

Me for one.
I don’t see how the two are not mutually compatible. Politics is so dominated by leaving the EU but we must remember that there are countless other issues within the UK that need to be resolved.

We can all see the fallout from the failed austerity policy. With the idiot Cameron and his henchmen lead by the equally idiotic George Osborne they only had one policy - austerity for austerity sake.
When it became obvious that the fiscal side was not going to be achieved they kicked that target into the long grass but continued to screw public services.
 
711 said:
A lot of different ways of claiming Labour voters aren't responsible for Brexit here, or their leaders, I suspect. In denial is the phrase that comes to mind.
Click to expand...

Someone else who has swallowed the Tories blame culture. It is everyone else who is at fault but not us...
Complete and utterly bullshit.
 
Buster15 said:
I am with you on this. Always voted for Labour primarily because I didn't agree with the nasty party politics and still don't.
I will wait and see what happens because I don't see a GE being iminent.
Change UK might be interesting but absolutely not Liberal.

This country has far more important things to get resolved before the time is right for an election.
Click to expand...
Change UK are considering an alliance with the Lib Dems:
The Independent Group is mulling an electoral alliance with the Liberal Democrats in which they would both run under the same "umbrella" and field joint candidates in certain seats at future elections.

The group of former Labour and Conservative MPs announced this week that they are applying to become a political party under the name of Change UK. The party-to-be also plans to field candidates in the May European Parliament elections, should a lengthy delay to Brexit force the UK to partake.

Business Insider has been told that the group has discussed forming an electoral alliance with the Liberal Democrats which is similar to the Labour party's relationship with the Cooperative Party.
Click to expand...
https://www.businessinsider.com/the...-alliance-with-liberoal-democrats-2019-3?IR=T
 
Buster15 said:
Me for one.
I don’t see how the two are not mutually compatible. Politics is so dominated by leaving the EU but we must remember that there are countless other issues within the UK that need to be resolved.

We can all see the fallout from the failed austerity policy. With the idiot Cameron and his henchmen lead by the equally idiotic George Osborne they only had one policy - austerity for austerity sake.
When it became obvious that the fiscal side was not going to be achieved they kicked that target into the long grass but continued to screw public services.
Click to expand...

That's the problem, it's not just about one subject. There are plenty of Tory voters who are pro-remain as there are Labour voters, also as there are Tory Mps and Labour MPs. Brexit has really broken UK politics and it needs a complete overhaul.

The only people I consider responsible for Brexit are the people who voted for it, whatever their political persuasion, being gullible, ignorant or xenophobic is no excuse. But whatever happens they must take responsibility for the consequences of their actions.
 
Last edited:
711 said:
Oh right, so Labour voters are responsible for Brexit then? I wasn't being dishonest, I genuinely thought people were claiming otherwise.
Click to expand...

Very few people will defend the leadership on this issue. Dobba and Mozza will, but that's about it.

Nevertheless, I'm pretty certain you know how our electoral system works and I'm pretty certain you know why people might vote for a party that has a policy they don't like (such as Labour's manifesto pledge for a softer form of Brexit) in order to prevent a party with a manifesto pledge that they REALLY don't like winning — especially when they think that a party with a policy they do like (such as holding a referendum) won't win their seat.

To claim otherwise, and then to accuse others of being in denial simply for correctly pointing out how elections work when I'm certain you already know this, stinks of intellectual dishonesty.

There are Remain supporting Labour voters I don't have sympathy for (if you voted for Kate Hoey in a seat which has Lib Dems in second place you are an idiot or don't care about her stance on Brexit), but you're simply trying to blame people for having to cast their vote in a flawed system.
 
NinjaFletch said:
Very few people will defend the leadership on this issue. Dobba and Mozza will, but that's about it.

Nevertheless, I'm pretty certain you know how our electoral system works and I'm pretty certain you know why people might vote for a party that has a policy they don't like (such as Labour's manifesto pledge for a softer form of Brexit) in order to prevent a party with a manifesto pledge that they REALLY don't like winning — especially when they think that a party with a policy they do like (such as holding a referendum) won't win their seat.

To claim otherwise, and then to accuse others of being in denial simply for correctly pointing out how elections work when I'm certain you already know this, stinks of intellectual dishonesty.

There are Remain supporting Labour voters I don't have sympathy for (if you voted for Kate Hoey in a seat which has Lib Dems in second place you are an idiot or don't care about her stance on Brexit), but you're simply trying to blame people for having to cast their vote in a flawed system.
Click to expand...


Not debating the rest but where is Labour's softer form of Brexit? Unicorns don't count.
 
Paul the Wolf said:
Not debating the rest but where is Labour's softer form of Brexit? Unicorns don't count.
Click to expand...

Well they definitely do in this case. Your options in 2017 were a rock hard Brexit supported by a bunch of racists and cnuts, or a pledge for a softer Brexit which was unfeasible. They weren't by any stretch of the imagination great choices, but there's not really any issue with voters deciding they preferred what Labour was offering to the Tories whether they knew Labour's Brexit plan was flawed or whether they didn't.
 
NinjaFletch said:
Well they definitely do in this case. Your options in 2017 were a rock hard Brexit supported by a bunch of racists and cnuts, or a pledge for a softer Brexit which was unfeasible. They weren't by any stretch of the imagination great choices, but there's not really any issue with voters deciding they preferred what Labour was offering to the Tories whether they knew Labour's Brexit plan was flawed or whether they didn't.
Click to expand...

Which means either Labour were lying or stupid. Depressing stuff.
 
Paul the Wolf said:
Which means either Labour were lying or stupid. Depressing stuff.
Click to expand...

I think it depends on what you think those unicorns were doing. At that stage it wasn't necessarily a problem that you were asking the EU to do to things they wouldn't agree to, as long as it was a negotiating position and were prepared to compromise.

As we now know, I think it's pretty clear that they actually represent a fundamental misunderstanding of what the EU is, wants, and could agree too.

The fact that that still was a better option than May and her red lines is certainly depressing.
 
NinjaFletch said:
Very few people will defend the leadership on this issue. Dobba and Mozza will, but that's about it.

Nevertheless, I'm pretty certain you know how our electoral system works and I'm pretty certain you know why people might vote for a party that has a policy they don't like (such as Labour's manifesto pledge for a softer form of Brexit) in order to prevent a party with a manifesto pledge that they REALLY don't like winning — especially when they think that a party with a policy they do like (such as holding a referendum) won't win their seat.

To claim otherwise, and then to accuse others of being in denial simply for correctly pointing out how elections work when I'm certain you already know this, stinks of intellectual dishonesty.

There are Remain supporting Labour voters I don't have sympathy for (if you voted for Kate Hoey in a seat which has Lib Dems in second place you are an idiot or don't care about her stance on Brexit), but you're simply trying to blame people for having to cast their vote in a flawed system.
Click to expand...
Yes of course, it's how five minutes later those same people loudly protest that the secondary 'policy they don't like' is the biggest disaster to hit the country for generations that rankles. If you think that's dishonest, so be it, although it's ironic that is the very thing I'm accusing Corbyn supporters of being, although more dishonest with themselves to be fair.
 
711 said:
Yes of course, it's how five minutes later those same people loudly protest that the secondary 'policy they don't like' is the biggest disaster to hit the country for generations that rankles. If you think that's dishonest, so be it, although it's ironic that is the very thing I'm accusing Corbyn supporters of being, although more dishonest with themselves to be fair.
Click to expand...

I'm just going to post this again in bold and underlined: You're simply trying to blame people for having to cast their vote in a flawed system.
 
NinjaFletch said:
I'm just going to post this again in bold and underlined: You're simply trying to blame people for having to cast their vote in a flawed system.
Click to expand...

If that's how you regard 'five minutes later those same people loudly protest that the secondary 'policy they don't like' is the biggest disaster to hit the country for generations that rankles' then we've identified our disagreement and I'll leave it there.
 
Raulduke said:


Click to expand...


I'd prefer this to mays deal or no deal, but I cant help but think this suits no-one. EU membership is totemic for both sides of the argument, so this halfway house is more likely to suit no-one than everyone.
 
711 said:
If that's how you regard 'five minutes later those same people loudly protest that the secondary 'policy they don't like' is the biggest disaster to hit the country for generations that rankles' then we've identified our disagreement and I'll leave it there.
Click to expand...

Because, providing you understand (as you claim to do) how our system works, that is a completely consistent position to hold.

If you think Brexit is a disaster and your two options are 1) Really, really bad disaster and 2) really bad disaster it is completely legitimate to vote for 'really bad disaster' over 'really, really bad disaster'.

That was the reality for a huge portion of Labour Remainers in the last election. That they didn't vote Lib Dem or Green because they were worried that that would lead to the Tories winning says nothing other than FPTP is a bad system.

Our disagreement stems from you claiming to know this, but trying to argue against this fundamental point.
 
EwanI Ted said:
I'd prefer this to mays deal or no deal, but I cant help but think this suits no-one. EU membership is totemic for both sides of the argument, so this halfway house is more likely to suit no-one than everyone.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately there is no option that suits everyone. Ive been thinking for a few weeks now that Common market 2.0 is the least worst option.
 
That'sHernandez said:
It was a secret ballot, what they say on public record is irrelevant once they are in the booth. Am I being ignorant or cynical here?
Click to expand...
A bit irrelevant, no? It's much more important what they campaigned for (no matter how weak the campaign) than what they voted for. Their vote is one vote like anyone else, their campaigns would be worth thousands of votes.
 
Last edited:
golden_blunder said:
Corbyn has been a euro-skeptic for decades, why would he change now?

Mays record on immigration in the HO speaks to where her real beliefs lie and it’s not to remain
Click to expand...

That's true about Corbyn, why anyone should think he will change his beliefs I don't know... well perhaps if he gets his GE, he will 'turn his coat', but since the Tories aren't playing that game... just yet, then he can carry on with his subterfuge.

May foolishly thought if she could just land/agree some change on FoM, with EU, then everything else would pass muster with the 'Leavers' and they would vote her deal through. The truth is there is a myriad of reasons why people voted leave, mostly it had nothing to do with economics and was about 'getting out from under' in a political sense. For some people voting leave was done on a whim, for others an expression of long held deep belief, but for most I suspect it was a poke in the eye for the 'liberal elite'.

The truth is the UK has been a poor European State, in particular when various UK leaders realised what we had signed up to; hence we have opted out of all sorts of things, demanded rebates, not joined the euro zone, are definitely against further integration, no support for a EU army, etc. etc. you would think the EU would be glad to be rid of us wouldn't you?

So why haven't they said "on yer bike"? Perhaps they will in the next week or so? After all there are enough looming problems in the other 27 States and there is a change of leadership etc. due in the EU, that they could well do without the awkward squad from the UK stirring things up.
 
NinjaFletch said:
Because, providing you understand (as you claim to do) how our system works, that is a completely consistent position to hold.

If you think Brexit is a disaster and your two options are 1) Really, really bad disaster and 2) really bad disaster it is completely legitimate to vote for 'really bad disaster' over 'really, really bad disaster'.

That was the reality for a huge portion of Labour Remainers in the last election. That they didn't vote Lib Dem or Green because they were worried that that would lead to the Tories winning says nothing other than FPTP is a bad system.

Our disagreement stems from you claiming to know this, but trying to argue against this fundamental point.
Click to expand...
Liberal voters obviously would argue against that point wouldn't they? I can understand you disagreeing but how that makes them (and me) dishonest is slightly beyond me I'm afraid. The electoral system is a whole different subject, if you want PR (as Liberals do of course) you then have to say what type of PR, and discuss and accept that there are pros and cons to each of those as well, but as I say, that is a different subject.
 
Right, this Motion G. Would that proposed vote be binary "hard brexit" or "revoke article 50" or would parliament have to do the Ayes to the right thing on both?
 
711 said:
Liberal voters obviously would argue against that point wouldn't they? I can understand you disagreeing but how that makes them (and me) dishonest is slightly beyond me I'm afraid. The electoral system is a whole different subject, if you want PR (as Liberals do of course) you then have to say what type of PR, and discuss and accept that there are pros and cons to each of those as well, but as I say, that is a different subject.
Click to expand...

On the contrary, I'm sure Lib Dem voters recognise that the need for tactical voting under FPTP limits the electoral success of their party. Certainly their party itself does. Again, though, you're misrepresenting what was said to you. I didn't accuse you of being intellectually dishonest for the reasons you seem to think, I accused you of it because you were trying to pretend that votes for Labour were always votes for Brexit: a logical position that can only be arrived at through ignorance or intellectual dishonesty. As I don't think you're ignorant, it led me to the second conclusion (which for the record, is not the same as saying you are dishonest, just that you're applying logic selectively to reach the conclusion you want to reach).

And yes, you're right that is a different debate. For the purposes of this one, all that matters is that they're all better than FPTP in terms of encouraging people to vote for what they want rather than against what they do not.
 
I think its weird that so little time is dedicated to thrashing this out in Parliament.

I mean, every passing day is incredibly valuable, it's surely a bit mad that they still take weekends off? I work weekends when I'm busy in work, surely these political figures tasked with steering Britain out of a horrific crisis that will potentially hinder the livelihoods of millions should be working weekends as well? If I remember correctly, MPs took like 17 days off for Christmas?

It might be a case of me just not having a good grasp on the political landscape and in reality, important work is being done behind the scenes and any more time in Parliament would just be counter-productive. Just find it a bit strange.
 
Ekkie Thump said:
Right, this Motion G. Would that proposed vote be binary "hard brexit" or "revoke article 50" or would parliament have to do the Ayes to the right thing on both?
Click to expand...

Found the text. So the proposal is that MP's should have to vote for or against no deal and if the motion for no deal fails then revoking becomes automatic.
 
GDaly95 said:
I think its weird that so little time is dedicated to thrashing this out in Parliament.

I mean, every passing day is incredibly valuable, it's surely a bit mad that they still take weekends off? I work weekends when I'm busy in work, surely these political figures tasked with steering Britain out of a horrific crisis that will potentially hinder the livelihoods of millions should be working weekends as well? If I remember correctly, MPs took like 17 days off for Christmas?

It might be a case of me just not having a good grasp on the political landscape and in reality, important work is being done behind the scenes and any more time in Parliament would just be counter-productive. Just find it a bit strange.
Click to expand...

It's the latter but it's still a shitty system. When days off are quoted they're from parliament sitting so constituency business still continues.

Outside of voting Parlaiment is largely a place to make announcements on records. Places like the cross-party brexit committee is where the work should happen but it's undermined by a lack of authority.
 
She's ordered cabinet to abstain, i mean how can you get to that position it's laughable.

Resignations incoming
 
17 Van der Gouw said:
Can somebody (of either remain or leave camp) answer me this without bias?

- Is it economically beneficial for the UK to sign its own trade agreements on WTO, or, will the customs union make us just as much money?

I remember right after the referendum, both Labour and Conservatives were keen on leaving both the EU and the single market. It's almost like they think we can do better with WTO and our own trade arrangements?
Click to expand...

No one can give you an answer to that as it's impossible to know what the hypothetical deals are.
There's a world where we get amazing deals and it would be beneficial but there's no precedent for that and common sense/history tells you that size matters in these negotiations and we'll get fecked by the bigger boys.
 
horsechoker said:
Although Labour are whipping in favour of it, aren't there Labour MPs who ignore the whip and don't face any repercussions?
Click to expand...

Well Kevin Baron has announced he won't vote for Customs Union 2 which usually means likes of Hoey, Mann, Stringer, Skinner and Flint won't be far behind.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.