Not very often I agree with the EU but I do think the upshot of the hung parliament will be to make a no deal Brexit far more likely than if May had won 100 seats;
However, in his interview, Mr Barnier sounded increasingly impatient with the UK, saying: "I don't know what hard Brexit or soft Brexit means. I read yesterday 'Open Brexit' too! Brexit is withdrawal from the EU - it's the UK's decision. We're implementing it."
Well to be fair that's what Mrs May was saying before the election. All this "hard Brexit" and "soft Brexit" stuff was just brought up by Remainiacs to try and muddy the waters.
We're leaving and we've got to prepare and get on with it instead of all this angst-ridden hard and soft Brexit stuff.
Sorry no, I'm not having that, when people pointed out how difficult Brexit was going to be, we were called Remoaners.
Sadly for those who are having to deal with Brexit on a daily basis, we've been proved right.
Theresa triggered Article 50 nearly three months ago, then wasted 7 weeks on a general election, and we're even further away from any Brexit deal.
No, Remoaners were people who wanted to re run the referendum or fiilibuster BRexit
I don't recall such definitional niceties. I have never wanted to rerun the referendum or filibuster Brexit and have frequently been called a Remoaner.
Maybe calling everyone who voted Leave a c*nt could be a third category!
I don't think I've ever exactly said that. Anyway, you'll be pleased to know that I'm extending my range.
They are deranged. Britain has just had an election called to give the Conservatives a mandate to implement its vision of Brexit. The nation politely declined. Why on earth would a non-entity with no relevant experience whose sole qualification is his "soundness" on Brexit be a suitable candidate?
They are deranged. Britain has just had an election called to give the Conservatives a mandate to implement its vision of Brexit. The nation politely declined. Why on earth would a non-entity with no relevant experience whose sole qualification is his "soundness" on Brexit be a suitable candidate?
They are deranged. Britain has just had an election called to give the Conservatives a mandate to implement its vision of Brexit. The nation politely declined. Why on earth would a non-entity with no relevant experience whose sole qualification is his "soundness" on Brexit be a suitable candidate?
Corbo would rip him to shreds. He looks like your typical Tory boy
I know nothing about Peterborough, but we apparently have an office there. This message just came round as an email circular:
"Peterborough taxi companies will be operating a limited service in the city on 26th and 27th June due to Eid celebrations. If anyone is planning on visiting Peterborough on those dates and knows they’ll need taxi’s to and from the station we strongly advise you book well in advance to avoid lengthy waiting times of between 30 – 45 minutes.”
I guess now I do know something about Peterborough. Or at least who drives the taxis there.
Labour's perceived success at this election was a flash in the pan. The Tories will never run a campaign as dire as this one again, they'll have a more public friendly PM (hopefully), and Corbyn and McDonnell will go on being the far left extremists they have always been.
The Tory manifesto sunk the Tories, not Corbyn. The polling pre and post manifesto proves that conclusively. And I wonder how many people would have voted Labour if they thought seriously that Corbyn could have been PM.
All the reasons why the PLP tried to remove Corbyn will remain, indeed, they will be intensified, and professional worms like Cooper and Umuna will regret grovelling at his feet.
She'll have a majority for QS and budget but not much else... Think these journo's are confusing confidence and supply with a coalition...
I expect the DUP will have agreed to support the whole of an agreed programme rather than just confidence & supply. That's not the same as coalition, though - they won't hold government posts.
Labour's perceived success at this election was a flash in the pan. The Tories will never run a campaign as dire as this one again, they'll have a more public friendly PM (hopefully), and Corbyn and McDonnell will go on being the far left extremists they have always been.
The Tory manifesto sunk the Tories, not Corbyn. The polling pre and post manifesto proves that conclusively. And I wonder how many people would have voted Labour if they thought seriously that Corbyn could have been PM.
All the reasons why the PLP tried to remove Corbyn will remain, indeed, they will be intensified, and professional worms like Cooper and Umuna will regret grovelling at his feet.
When I am in an optimistic mood that too is what I believe. When I am pessemistic...
Labour's perceived success at this election was a flash in the pan. The Tories will never run a campaign as dire as this one again, they'll have a more public friendly PM (hopefully), and Corbyn and McDonnell will go on being the far left extremists they have always been.
The Tory manifesto sunk the Tories, not Corbyn. The polling pre and post manifesto proves that conclusively. And I wonder how many people would have voted Labour if they thought seriously that Corbyn could have been PM.
All the reasons why the PLP tried to remove Corbyn will remain, indeed, they will be intensified, and professional worms like Cooper and Umuna will regret grovelling at his feet.
The hypocrisy of the PLP is a sight to behold. Shamelessly unprincipled. Hope Jezza tells them to do one
She'll have a majority for QS and budget but not much else... Think these journo's are confusing confidence and supply with a coalition...
Her consolation is a divided Labour party and a group of Lib Dems who have more in common with May than with Corbyn. Confidence and supply is the only possible option, a formal coalition could cause irreversible damage.
Nothing substantive was going to be done until after the German election anyway.
Do people still think May will sit down with Merkel and sort the whole thing out in an afternoon?
No... But it will be mainly Germany calling the shots in the end...
Not really. The first thing is to accept the EU exit bill and sort out citizens rights and something on Ireland. Merkel doesn't have any input into that. Then it's outline of a possible final settlement and finally some transition arrangement. Then we're out. The only thing that matters to us right now is getting some kind of continuity (which is the final thing to be agreed). Money no object. Final arrangement is for later. But we are TOTALLY UNREADY to leave the EU in 18 months time.
Not very often I agree with the EU but I do think the upshot of the hung parliament will be to make a no deal Brexit far more likely than if May had won 100 seats;
However, in his interview, Mr Barnier sounded increasingly impatient with the UK, saying: "I don't know what hard Brexit or soft Brexit means. I read yesterday 'Open Brexit' too! Brexit is withdrawal from the EU - it's the UK's decision. We're implementing it."
Well to be fair that's what Mrs May was saying before the election. All this "hard Brexit" and "soft Brexit" stuff was just brought up by Remainiacs to try and muddy the waters.
We're leaving and we've got to prepare and get on with it instead of all this angst-ridden hard and soft Brexit stuff.
Sorry no, I'm not having that, when people pointed out how difficult Brexit was going to be, we were called Remoaners.
Sadly for those who are having to deal with Brexit on a daily basis, we've been proved right.
Theresa triggered Article 50 nearly three months ago, then wasted 7 weeks on a general election, and we're even further away from any Brexit deal.
No, Remoaners were people who wanted to re run the referendum or fiilibuster BRexit
And what is wrong with that? If the result had been the other way Leavers would have done the same.
You're falling into the very common trap of not understanding the asymmetric nature of the referendum.
Had Remain won, the decision would have automatically been implemented, and thus arguing for a new referendum would not have been democratically illegitimate.
But as Leave won and the decision has not yet been implemented, the converse does not apply.
My bet on John Bercow seeing the year out as Speaker is looking pretty good now.
He's been a useful source of reliable funds.
He is possibly my favourite MP for that reason.
I have fond memories of Gordon Brown for the same reason, except that you could collect winnings on his failure to be defenestrated more frequently than you can with Bercow.
Not very often I agree with the EU but I do think the upshot of the hung parliament will be to make a no deal Brexit far more likely than if May had won 100 seats;
However, in his interview, Mr Barnier sounded increasingly impatient with the UK, saying: "I don't know what hard Brexit or soft Brexit means. I read yesterday 'Open Brexit' too! Brexit is withdrawal from the EU - it's the UK's decision. We're implementing it."
Well to be fair that's what Mrs May was saying before the election. All this "hard Brexit" and "soft Brexit" stuff was just brought up by Remainiacs to try and muddy the waters.
We're leaving and we've got to prepare and get on with it instead of all this angst-ridden hard and soft Brexit stuff.
Sorry no, I'm not having that, when people pointed out how difficult Brexit was going to be, we were called Remoaners.
Sadly for those who are having to deal with Brexit on a daily basis, we've been proved right.
Theresa triggered Article 50 nearly three months ago, then wasted 7 weeks on a general election, and we're even further away from any Brexit deal.
No, Remoaners were people who wanted to re run the referendum or fiilibuster BRexit
And what is wrong with that? If the result had been the other way Leavers would have done the same.
You're falling into the very common trap of not understanding the asymmetric nature of the referendum.
Had Remain won, the decision would have automatically been implemented, and thus arguing for a new referendum would not have been democratically illegitimate.
But as Leave won and the decision has not yet been implemented, the converse does not apply.
If Remain had won 52/48 do you think it would have been taken as a remit by the most Europhile Remainers as a to drive for a hard Remain (join Euro, support a Euro army etc etc) and that Leavers would have been demanding a 'soft' Remain due to closeness of the result? Genuine question.
My bet on John Bercow seeing the year out as Speaker is looking pretty good now.
He's been a useful source of reliable funds.
He is possibly my favourite MP for that reason.
What's the kremlinology of Bercow? iirc it used to be he was liked by backbenchers (who are the ones who count) but hated by the government and pb Tories. Has this changed now the Cameroons have left the stage?
glw said: Well obviously when 85% of the voters vote for a pro-Brexit party...
JonCisBack said: On topic, genuinely do not understand the Tory remainer who voted Labour. Labour's manifesto makes it crystal clear they are Leavers. WTF?
Hi there, first post - delurking just to reply to various comments like the above.
Since becoming PM Mrs May has chosen to interpret the referendum result as a mandate for pursuing a hard Brexit. She called the election asking the country to give her a bigger majority so that she could pursue that aim.
I don't want a hard Brexit. So I take what small step I can to prevent her from gaining that bigger majority and therefore send the opposite message. If I were in Oxford West (or various other seats) I would have voted Lib Dem. But there were far more seats where the best chance of preventing that bigger majority was to vote Labour, and a Lib Dem vote would have been wasted.
The fact that Labour's policy is also for a hard Brexit is irrelevant - they are not the ones doing the negotiating. It was the message to the Prime Minister that was important. Now I am only one person. But I suspect (looking at the swing to Labour in remain areas) there are tens if not hundreds of thousands like me, including Tory remainer referred to in the header.
So to interpret votes for Labour as votes for hard Brexit is a misinterpretation.
PS Sorry, haven't worked out how to do quotes correctly yet.
Not very often I agree with the EU but I do think the upshot of the hung parliament will be to make a no deal Brexit far more likely than if May had won 100 seats;
However, in his interview, Mr Barnier sounded increasingly impatient with the UK, saying: "I don't know what hard Brexit or soft Brexit means. I read yesterday 'Open Brexit' too! Brexit is withdrawal from the EU - it's the UK's decision. We're implementing it."
Well to be fair that's what Mrs May was saying before the election. All this "hard Brexit" and "soft Brexit" stuff was just brought up by Remainiacs to try and muddy the waters.
We're leaving and we've got to prepare and get on with it instead of all this angst-ridden hard and soft Brexit stuff.
Sorry no, I'm not having that, when people pointed out how difficult Brexit was going to be, we were called Remoaners.
Sadly for those who are having to deal with Brexit on a daily basis, we've been proved right.
Theresa triggered Article 50 nearly three months ago, then wasted 7 weeks on a general election, and we're even further away from any Brexit deal.
No, Remoaners were people who wanted to re run the referendum or fiilibuster BRexit
And what is wrong with that? If the result had been the other way Leavers would have done the same.
You're falling into the very common trap of not understanding the asymmetric nature of the referendum.
Had Remain won, the decision would have automatically been implemented, and thus arguing for a new referendum would not have been democratically illegitimate.
But as Leave won and the decision has not yet been implemented, the converse does not apply.
If Remain had won 52/48 do you think it would have been taken as a remit by the most Europhile Remainers as a to drive for a hard Remain (join Euro, support a Euro army etc etc) and that Leavers would have been demanding a 'soft' Remain due to closeness of the result? Genuine question.
Doubt it, because we were voting for a deal that had already been agreed.
Labour's perceived success at this election was a flash in the pan. The Tories will never run a campaign as dire as this one again
Famous last words...
I'm ready for PM Jezza at any point. Think everyone needs to brace themselves!
Yes indeed, the shrewd PB Tories who assured us that that May was the messiah are the same people who are assuring us that Jezza is NOT the messiah!
Well I can tell you I never thought that of May. But Corbyn PM, no chance, not now. The DUP hate him more than the Tories do, and they will cosy along nicely together for the foreseeable.
Whatever may's shortcomings are - and they are numerous - the thought of Corbyn PM is a million times worse.
The PLP gave an extremist a standing ovation in the HoC today. They will live to regret that.
And what is wrong with that? If the result had been the other way Leavers would have done the same.
You're falling into the very common trap of not understanding the asymmetric nature of the referendum.
Had Remain won, the decision would have automatically been implemented, and thus arguing for a new referendum would not have been democratically illegitimate.
But as Leave won and the decision has not yet been implemented, the converse does not apply.
But ultimately, a second referendum under the same terms and franchise as the first does not indicate an ignoring of the Brexit vote. It is only if the result is different that it would supercede the first result. It would only be different if the will of the country has changed and no longer supports Brexit. It doesn't matter whether we have already left or not, the British people are entitled to change their minds as they see fit without justification. Nothing at all illegitimate about a second referendum.
I don't think the public is at the stage of a reversal on Brexit, but hypothetically, if for whatever reason, a referendum was called pre-leaving, under the same terms and question, and this time Remain won 52-48%, would you still advocate we continue with Brexit or that we halt it (at least until a 'best of 3' referendum is called!)?
It would only be illegitimate to halt Brexit without express consent of the people.
My bet on John Bercow seeing the year out as Speaker is looking pretty good now.
He's been a useful source of reliable funds.
He is possibly my favourite MP for that reason.
What's the kremlinology of Bercow? iirc it used to be he was liked by backbenchers (who are the ones who count) but hated by the government and pb Tories. Has this changed now the Cameroons have left the stage?
The PB Tories, or at least some of them, have an unusual position on Bercow. They seem to blame him because he became a Cameroon before Cameron even got into the HoC.
Labour's perceived success at this election was a flash in the pan. The Tories will never run a campaign as dire as this one again
Famous last words...
I'm ready for PM Jezza at any point. Think everyone needs to brace themselves!
Yes indeed, the shrewd PB Tories who assured us that that May was the messiah are the same people who are assuring us that Jezza is NOT the messiah!
Well I can tell you I never thought that of May. But Corbyn PM, no chance, not now. The DUP hate him more than the Tories do, and they will cosy along nicely together for the foreseeable.
Whatever may's shortcomings are - and they are numerous - the thought of Corbyn PM is a million times worse.
The PLP gave an extremist a standing ovation in the HoC today. They will live to regret that.
glw said: Well obviously when 85% of the voters vote for a pro-Brexit party...
JonCisBack said: On topic, genuinely do not understand the Tory remainer who voted Labour. Labour's manifesto makes it crystal clear they are Leavers. WTF?
Hi there, first post - delurking just to reply to various comments like the above.
Since becoming PM Mrs May has chosen to interpret the referendum result as a mandate for pursuing a hard Brexit. She called the election asking the country to give her a bigger majority so that she could pursue that aim.
I don't want a hard Brexit. So I take what small step I can to prevent her from gaining that bigger majority and therefore send the opposite message. If I were in Oxford West (or various other seats) I would have voted Lib Dem. But there were far more seats where the best chance of preventing that bigger majority was to vote Labour, and a Lib Dem vote would have been wasted.
The fact that Labour's policy is also for a hard Brexit is irrelevant - they are not the ones doing the negotiating. It was the message to the Prime Minister that was important. Now I am only one person. But I suspect (looking at the swing to Labour in remain areas) there are tens if not hundreds of thousands like me, including Tory remainer referred to in the header.
So to interpret votes for Labour as votes for hard Brexit is a misinterpretation.
PS Sorry, haven't worked out how to do quotes correctly yet.
Whilst I understand your position and I don't want the so called 'Hard' Brexit either, the fact is that you and everyone else who voted Labour voted for a party that included what you refer to as a Hard Brexit in their election pledges. Parties are judged by their manifestoes and what they say during the campaign (as May is finding out to her cost) and for every person like you who claim they did not vote for a hard Brexit from Labour there an ex-UKIP supporter who specifically felt they were able to vote for Labour because of the commitment to leave the Single Market and impose border controls. You and I may not want it but that is what the parties campaigned for and it is what they will be judged on.
And what is wrong with that? If the result had been the other way Leavers would have done the same.
You're falling into the very common trap of not understanding the asymmetric nature of the referendum.
Had Remain won, the decision would have automatically been implemented, and thus arguing for a new referendum would not have been democratically illegitimate.
But as Leave won and the decision has not yet been implemented, the converse does not apply.
But ultimately, a second referendum under the same terms and franchise as the first does not indicate an ignoring of the Brexit vote. It is only if the result is different that it would supercede the first result. It would only be different if the will of the country has changed and no longer supports Brexit. It doesn't matter whether we have already left or not, the British people are entitled to change their minds as they see fit without justification. Nothing at all illegitimate about a second referendum.
I don't think the public is at the stage of a reversal on Brexit, but hypothetically, if for whatever reason, a referendum was called pre-leaving, under the same terms and question, and this time Remain won 52-48%, would you still advocate we continue with Brexit or that we halt it (at least until a 'best of 3' referendum is called!)?
It would only be illegitimate to halt Brexit without express consent of the people.
If the country votes for change it is probably worth trying the change before having another vote I would say.
If there had been a referendum on Gay Marriage, and the country voted NO 52/48, I would say the pro Gay Marriage side were entitled to keep campaigning. If YES had won 52/48 it would be wrong if there was another vote on it before anyone was allowed to marry someone of the same sex
Not very often I agree with the EU but I do think the upshot of the hung parliament will be to make a no deal Brexit far more likely than if May had won 100 seats;
However, in his interview, Mr Barnier sounded increasingly impatient with the UK, saying: "I don't know what hard Brexit or soft Brexit means. I read yesterday 'Open Brexit' too! Brexit is withdrawal from the EU - it's the UK's decision. We're implementing it."
Well to be fair that's what Mrs May was saying before the election. All this "hard Brexit" and "soft Brexit" stuff was just brought up by Remainiacs to try and muddy the waters.
We're leaving and we've got to prepare and get on with it instead of all this angst-ridden hard and soft Brexit stuff.
Sorry no, I'm not having that, when people pointed out how difficult Brexit was going to be, we were called Remoaners.
Sadly for those who are having to deal with Brexit on a daily basis, we've been proved right.
Theresa triggered Article 50 nearly three months ago, then wasted 7 weeks on a general election, and we're even further away from any Brexit deal.
No, Remoaners were people who wanted to re run the referendum or fiilibuster BRexit
And what is wrong with that? If the result had been the other way Leavers would have done the same.
You're falling into the very common trap of not understanding the asymmetric nature of the referendum.
Had Remain won, the decision would have automatically been implemented, and thus arguing for a new referendum would not have been democratically illegitimate.
But as Leave won and the decision has not yet been implemented, the converse does not apply.
If Remain had won, Leave would have kept campaigning. Farage thought he had lost at 2am on the morning of the referendum and said he would keep on. I watched him say it. It was just like Socttish IndyRef. The Nats keep losing the referenda and they keep asking for another one.
glw said: Well obviously when 85% of the voters vote for a pro-Brexit party...
JonCisBack said: On topic, genuinely do not understand the Tory remainer who voted Labour. Labour's manifesto makes it crystal clear they are Leavers. WTF?
Hi there, first post - delurking just to reply to various comments like the above.
Since becoming PM Mrs May has chosen to interpret the referendum result as a mandate for pursuing a hard Brexit. She called the election asking the country to give her a bigger majority so that she could pursue that aim.
I don't want a hard Brexit. So I take what small step I can to prevent her from gaining that bigger majority and therefore send the opposite message. If I were in Oxford West (or various other seats) I would have voted Lib Dem. But there were far more seats where the best chance of preventing that bigger majority was to vote Labour, and a Lib Dem vote would have been wasted.
The fact that Labour's policy is also for a hard Brexit is irrelevant - they are not the ones doing the negotiating. It was the message to the Prime Minister that was important. Now I am only one person. But I suspect (looking at the swing to Labour in remain areas) there are tens if not hundreds of thousands like me, including Tory remainer referred to in the header.
So to interpret votes for Labour as votes for hard Brexit is a misinterpretation.
PS Sorry, haven't worked out how to do quotes correctly yet.
Welcome .... although your first post must have a most uncomfortable one given your avatar and having lurked for so long.
And what is wrong with that? If the result had been the other way Leavers would have done the same.
You're falling into the very common trap of not understanding the asymmetric nature of the referendum.
Had Remain won, the decision would have automatically been implemented, and thus arguing for a new referendum would not have been democratically illegitimate.
But as Leave won and the decision has not yet been implemented, the converse does not apply.
But ultimately, a second referendum under the same terms and franchise as the first does not indicate an ignoring of the Brexit vote. It is only if the result is different that it would supercede the first result. It would only be different if the will of the country has changed and no longer supports Brexit. It doesn't matter whether we have already left or not, the British people are entitled to change their minds as they see fit without justification. Nothing at all illegitimate about a second referendum.
I don't think the public is at the stage of a reversal on Brexit, but hypothetically, if for whatever reason, a referendum was called pre-leaving, under the same terms and question, and this time Remain won 52-48%, would you still advocate we continue with Brexit or that we halt it (at least until a 'best of 3' referendum is called!)?
It would only be illegitimate to halt Brexit without express consent of the people.
Brexit has to be implemented first. Then another referendum can follow further down the line. Turnout would be below 50% if there was a 2nd ref as leavers like myself wouldn't bother.
Not very often I agree with the EU but I do think the upshot of the hung parliament will be to make a no deal Brexit far more likely than if May had won 100 seats;
However, in his interview, Mr Barnier sounded increasingly impatient with the UK, saying: "I don't know what hard Brexit or soft Brexit means. I read yesterday 'Open Brexit' too! Brexit is withdrawal from the EU - it's the UK's decision. We're implementing it."
Well to be fair that's what Mrs May was saying before the election. All this "hard Brexit" and "soft Brexit" stuff was just brought up by Remainiacs to try and muddy the waters.
We're leaving and we've got to prepare and get on with it instead of all this angst-ridden hard and soft Brexit stuff.
Sorry no, I'm not having that, when people pointed out how difficult Brexit was going to be, we were called Remoaners.
Sadly for those who are having to deal with Brexit on a daily basis, we've been proved right.
Theresa triggered Article 50 nearly three months ago, then wasted 7 weeks on a general election, and we're even further away from any Brexit deal.
No, Remoaners were people who wanted to re run the referendum or fiilibuster BRexit
And what is wrong with that? If the result had been the other way Leavers would have done the same.
You're falling into the very common trap of not understanding the asymmetric nature of the referendum.
Had Remain won, the decision would have automatically been implemented, and thus arguing for a new referendum would not have been democratically illegitimate.
But as Leave won and the decision has not yet been implemented, the converse does not apply.
If Remain had won 52/48 do you think it would have been taken as a remit by the most Europhile Remainers as a to drive for a hard Remain (join Euro, support a Euro army etc etc) and that Leavers would have been demanding a 'soft' Remain due to closeness of the result? Genuine question.
I think the difference is that the no one in Remain was campaigning for those things. Indeed their campaign was based on the fact that we would not do those things and would be able to have a loser relationship with the EU. On the other hand the leaders of Leave were, by and large, always campaigning for what would inevitably be Hard Brexit. Those of us who were not were very much in the minority.
1. Hard Brexit would be a disaster as DXEU knows fully well 2. Any kid of negotiated Brexit is impossible to achieve in the remaining time available, so 3. An off the shelf agreement is the only game in town to salvage any kind of political credibility and not have the thing spin out of control
So she's sacking the ministers who were prepping the no deal better than a good deal fantasy. And replacing them with people who have the number for the European Free Trade Association
Jezza arrives on the front bench to a standing ovation. Theresa ... well .... she's there.
You would think he had won.
He has pretty much/
No, there's a technical term to what happened to him and Labour in the election: they lost.
You have to hand it to Labour and the extremes they embrace. Corbyn is the same nutjob he was when they tried to get rid of him, and now they fall at his feet because he succeeded in seducing students with eye watering and wholly unrealistic bribes. The PLP are even more stupid than I initially thought.
The serious business of politics and government have passed the Labour party by with this overt display of insanity.
1. Hard Brexit would be a disaster as DXEU knows fully well 2. Any kid of negotiated Brexit is impossible to achieve in the remaining time available, so 3. An off the shelf agreement is the only game in town to salvage any kind of political credibility and not have the thing spin out of control
So she's sacking the ministers who were prepping the no deal better than a good deal fantasy. And replacing them with people who have the number for the European Free Trade Association
Yes it looks very like they are just going to grab Efta off the shelf although not sure how they are going to square the FoM circle.
glw said: Well obviously when 85% of the voters vote for a pro-Brexit party...
JonCisBack said: On topic, genuinely do not understand the Tory remainer who voted Labour. Labour's manifesto makes it crystal clear they are Leavers. WTF?
Hi there, first post - delurking just to reply to various comments like the above.
Since becoming PM Mrs May has chosen to interpret the referendum result as a mandate for pursuing a hard Brexit. She called the election asking the country to give her a bigger majority so that she could pursue that aim.
I don't want a hard Brexit. So I take what small step I can to prevent her from gaining that bigger majority and therefore send the opposite message. If I were in Oxford West (or various other seats) I would have voted Lib Dem. But there were far more seats where the best chance of preventing that bigger majority was to vote Labour, and a Lib Dem vote would have been wasted.
The fact that Labour's policy is also for a hard Brexit is irrelevant - they are not the ones doing the negotiating. It was the message to the Prime Minister that was important. Now I am only one person. But I suspect (looking at the swing to Labour in remain areas) there are tens if not hundreds of thousands like me, including Tory remainer referred to in the header.
So to interpret votes for Labour as votes for hard Brexit is a misinterpretation.
PS Sorry, haven't worked out how to do quotes correctly yet.
"Soft Brexit" means staying in the single market and under the jurisdiction of the ECJ, and not gaining control of our borders as far as I can see.
So not in any meaningful sense "Brexit", not what the referendum was about and also not what either main party said it supported in its manifesto.
Sotf Brexit is bullshit code for Remainers ignoring the referendum result, no more no less. "Hard Brexit" is what the vote was about. It's just effing Brexit
And what is wrong with that? If the result had been the other way Leavers would have done the same.
You're falling into the very common trap of not understanding the asymmetric nature of the referendum.
Had Remain won, the decision would have automatically been implemented, and thus arguing for a new referendum would not have been democratically illegitimate.
But as Leave won and the decision has not yet been implemented, the converse does not apply.
But ultimately, a second referendum under the same terms and franchise as the first does not indicate an ignoring of the Brexit vote.
Interesting post, and something we should consider.
Kinnock wasn't blamed for the ERM. Cameron wasn't blamed for Iraq. The electorate holds governments, not oppositions, to account.
Thank you for your welcome.
Of course, it could become a problem for Labour that such a large chunk of "the 48%" voted for them, and many of them possibly on a somewhat provisional basis. (According to Lord Ashcroft, almost 2/3 of Labour's vote had voted remain, and 43% would still like to find a way of remaining.) I'm not sure how Labour keep their coalition of voters together.
1. Hard Brexit would be a disaster as DXEU knows fully well 2. Any kid of negotiated Brexit is impossible to achieve in the remaining time available, so 3. An off the shelf agreement is the only game in town to salvage any kind of political credibility and not have the thing spin out of control
So she's sacking the ministers who were prepping the no deal better than a good deal fantasy. And replacing them with people who have the number for the European Free Trade Association
Before the election I suggested that those thinking she was looking for a large majority so she could push through a hard Brexit might be mistaken. I thought that, given her original Remainer position, she might actually be looking for a large majority so she could push through a soft Brexit against the wishes of the hard liners in her party.
I wonder now if the minority Government and the scare given to her MPs has, in fact, had the same result.
What exactly did Leave win beyond the chance to start the process that's already been started? How things pan out from here is completely dependent on the reality of our position and the evolution of public and political opinion. We don't have to chose bad options out of a false deference to a mandate that has already been fulfilled.
Not very often I agree with the EU but I do think the upshot of the hung parliament will be to make a no deal Brexit far more likely than if May had won 100 seats;
However, in his interview, Mr Barnier sounded increasingly impatient with the UK, saying: "I don't know what hard Brexit or soft Brexit means. I read yesterday 'Open Brexit' too! Brexit is withdrawal from the EU - it's the UK's decision. We're implementing it."
Well to be fair that's what Mrs May was saying before the election. All this "hard Brexit" and "soft Brexit" stuff was just brought up by Remainiacs to try and muddy the waters.
We're leaving and we've got to prepare and get on with it instead of all this angst-ridden hard and soft Brexit stuff.
Sorry no, I'm not having that, when people pointed out how difficult Brexit was going to be, we were called Remoaners.
Sadly for those who are having to deal with Brexit on a daily basis, we've been proved right.
Theresa triggered Article 50 nearly three months ago, then wasted 7 weeks on a general election, and we're even further away from any Brexit deal.
No, Remoaners were people who wanted to re run the referendum or fiilibuster BRexit
And what is wrong with that? If the result had been the other way Leavers would have done the same.
You're falling into the very common trap of not understanding the asymmetric nature of the referendum.
Had Remain won, the decision would have automatically been implemented, and thus arguing for a new referendum would not have been democratically illegitimate.
But as Leave won and the decision has not yet been implemented, the converse does not apply.
If Remain had won, Leave would have kept campaigning. Farage thought he had lost at 2am on the morning of the referendum and said he would keep on. I watched him say it. It was just like Socttish IndyRef. The Nats keep losing the referenda and they keep asking for another one.
Yes, and when a political party loses an election they fight the next one.
But in all cases only after the decision is implemented.
What exactly did Leave win beyond the chance to start the process that's already been started? How things pan out from here is completely dependent on the reality of our position and the evolution of public and political opinion. We don't have to chose bad options out of a false deference to a mandate that has already been fulfilled.
Labour's perceived success at this election was a flash in the pan. The Tories will never run a campaign as dire as this one again
Famous last words...
I'm ready for PM Jezza at any point. Think everyone needs to brace themselves!
Yes indeed, the shrewd PB Tories who assured us that that May was the messiah are the same people who are assuring us that Jezza is NOT the messiah!
Well I can tell you I never thought that of May. But Corbyn PM, no chance, not now. The DUP hate him more than the Tories do, and they will cosy along nicely together for the foreseeable.
Whatever may's shortcomings are - and they are numerous - the thought of Corbyn PM is a million times worse.
The PLP gave an extremist a standing ovation in the HoC today. They will live to regret that.
Politics is like football - JC is the journeyman midfielder who somehow has scored a hat-trick in the last 15 minutes of the match to grab a draw! He is therefore rightly being acclaimed as a hero (for now at least!)
Labour's perceived success at this election was a flash in the pan. The Tories will never run a campaign as dire as this one again
Famous last words...
I'm ready for PM Jezza at any point. Think everyone needs to brace themselves!
Yes indeed, the shrewd PB Tories who assured us that that May was the messiah are the same people who are assuring us that Jezza is NOT the messiah!
Well I can tell you I never thought that of May. But Corbyn PM, no chance, not now. The DUP hate him more than the Tories do, and they will cosy along nicely together for the foreseeable.
Whatever may's shortcomings are - and they are numerous - the thought of Corbyn PM is a million times worse.
The PLP gave an extremist a standing ovation in the HoC today. They will live to regret that.
Politics is like football - JC is the journeyman midfielder who somehow has scored a hat-trick in the last 15 minutes of the match to grab a draw! He is therefore rightly being acclaimed as a hero (for now at least!)
He reminds me of the High Sparrow in GoT. We all know how he ended up.
1. Hard Brexit would be a disaster as DXEU knows fully well 2. Any kid of negotiated Brexit is impossible to achieve in the remaining time available, so 3. An off the shelf agreement is the only game in town to salvage any kind of political credibility and not have the thing spin out of control
So she's sacking the ministers who were prepping the no deal better than a good deal fantasy. And replacing them with people who have the number for the European Free Trade Association
Before the election I suggested that those thinking she was looking for a large majority so she could push through a hard Brexit might be mistaken. I thought that, given her original Remainer position, she might actually be looking for a large majority so she could push through a soft Brexit against the wishes of the hard liners in her party.
I wonder now if the minority Government and the scare given to her MPs has, in fact, had the same result.
Possibly, but I don't trust the woman. Who knows whether she really was a Remainer, she didn't put much effort into it. Who knows what she would have done with a 100 seat majority?
Labour's perceived success at this election was a flash in the pan. The Tories will never run a campaign as dire as this one again
Famous last words...
I'm ready for PM Jezza at any point. Think everyone needs to brace themselves!
Yes indeed, the shrewd PB Tories who assured us that that May was the messiah are the same people who are assuring us that Jezza is NOT the messiah!
Well I can tell you I never thought that of May. But Corbyn PM, no chance, not now. The DUP hate him more than the Tories do, and they will cosy along nicely together for the foreseeable.
Whatever may's shortcomings are - and they are numerous - the thought of Corbyn PM is a million times worse.
The PLP gave an extremist a standing ovation in the HoC today. They will live to regret that.
Politics is like football - JC is the journeyman midfielder who somehow has scored a hat-trick in the last 15 minutes of the match to grab a draw! He is therefore rightly being acclaimed as a hero (for now at least!)
He deserves plaudits for now. He should be aware he cannot rest on his laurels. The PMQ performances need to be considerably improved. The tricky situation now is does he reward those who stayed loyal or create a more inclusive cabinet.
Labour's perceived success at this election was a flash in the pan. The Tories will never run a campaign as dire as this one again
Famous last words...
I'm ready for PM Jezza at any point. Think everyone needs to brace themselves!
Yes indeed, the shrewd PB Tories who assured us that that May was the messiah are the same people who are assuring us that Jezza is NOT the messiah!
Well I can tell you I never thought that of May. But Corbyn PM, no chance, not now. The DUP hate him more than the Tories do, and they will cosy along nicely together for the foreseeable.
Whatever may's shortcomings are - and they are numerous - the thought of Corbyn PM is a million times worse.
The PLP gave an extremist a standing ovation in the HoC today. They will live to regret that.
Politics is like football - JC is the journeyman midfielder who somehow has scored a hat-trick in the last 15 minutes of the match to grab a draw! He is therefore rightly being acclaimed as a hero (for now at least!)
Labour's perceived success at this election was a flash in the pan. The Tories will never run a campaign as dire as this one again
Famous last words...
I'm ready for PM Jezza at any point. Think everyone needs to brace themselves!
Yes indeed, the shrewd PB Tories who assured us that that May was the messiah are the same people who are assuring us that Jezza is NOT the messiah!
Well I can tell you I never thought that of May. But Corbyn PM, no chance, not now. The DUP hate him more than the Tories do, and they will cosy along nicely together for the foreseeable.
Whatever may's shortcomings are - and they are numerous - the thought of Corbyn PM is a million times worse.
The PLP gave an extremist a standing ovation in the HoC today. They will live to regret that.
Politics is like football - JC is the journeyman midfielder who somehow has scored a hat-trick in the last 15 minutes of the match to grab a draw! He is therefore rightly being acclaimed as a hero (for now at least!)
Nah, they lost 4-3 from 4-0 down...
Yeah, but only because the other side managed a hat-trick of own-goals.
glw said: Well obviously when 85% of the voters vote for a pro-Brexit party...
JonCisBack said: On topic, genuinely do not understand the Tory remainer who voted Labour. Labour's manifesto makes it crystal clear they are Leavers. WTF?
Hi there, first post - delurking just to reply to various comments like the above.
Since becoming PM Mrs May has chosen to interpret the referendum result as a mandate for pursuing a hard Brexit. She called the election asking the country to give her a bigger majority so that she could pursue that aim.
I don't want a hard Brexit. So I take what small step I can to prevent her from gaining that bigger majority and therefore send the opposite message. If I were in Oxford West (or various other seats) I would have voted Lib Dem. But there were far more seats where the best chance of preventing that bigger majority was to vote Labour, and a Lib Dem vote would have been wasted.
The fact that Labour's policy is also for a hard Brexit is irrelevant - they are not the ones doing the negotiating. It was the message to the Prime Minister that was important. Now I am only one person. But I suspect (looking at the swing to Labour in remain areas) there are tens if not hundreds of thousands like me, including Tory remainer referred to in the header.
So to interpret votes for Labour as votes for hard Brexit is a misinterpretation.
PS Sorry, haven't worked out how to do quotes correctly yet.
"Soft Brexit" means staying in the single market and under the jurisdiction of the ECJ, and not gaining control of our borders as far as I can see.
So not in any meaningful sense "Brexit", not what the referendum was about and also not what either main party said it supported in its manifesto.
Sotf Brexit is bullshit code for Remainers ignoring the referendum result, no more no less. "Hard Brexit" is what the vote was about. It's just effing Brexit
You were a Remainer - fine. But you lost.
Soft Brexit is code for stalemate. For something that makes no objective sense but dissatisfies both camps equally. It retains some of the advantages of remaining in the EU while losing many others. As such it is better than losing all the advantages of being in the EU and getting nothing in compensation, which is Hard Brexit.
PS Soft Brexit is precisely because Remainers are NOT ignoring the referendum result. Otherwise they would go for membership of the EU, which is FAR better.
Corbyn's stickablity was obvious after the second leadership election, if not before. He saw off all-comers within his party and emerged stronger. Now he's lost an election, but the mood music is that he's won. The reasons:
*) May and the Conservatives lost seats. *) He performed far better than the low expectations. *) He smashed the vote share of both his predecessors.
And in a way he has won: the Conservatives are in a real mess. He has gained between a few months and a few years of breathing room to continue changing his party. Even better, he's now gained the fawning admiration of most of those inside his party who were against him.
Comments
Boom tish.
"Peterborough taxi companies will be operating a limited service in the city on 26th and 27th June due to Eid celebrations. If anyone is planning on visiting Peterborough on those dates and knows they’ll need taxi’s to and from the station we strongly advise you book well in advance to avoid lengthy waiting times of between 30 – 45 minutes.”
I guess now I do know something about Peterborough. Or at least who drives the taxis there.
The Tory manifesto sunk the Tories, not Corbyn. The polling pre and post manifesto proves that conclusively. And I wonder how many people would have voted Labour if they thought seriously that Corbyn could have been PM.
All the reasons why the PLP tried to remove Corbyn will remain, indeed, they will be intensified, and professional worms like Cooper and Umuna will regret grovelling at his feet.
Also can't see the DUP voting down EVEL matters - so they can progress.
Oh and the great repeal bill...
I'm ready for PM Jezza at any point. Think everyone needs to brace themselves!
Had Remain won, the decision would have automatically been implemented, and thus arguing for a new referendum would not have been democratically illegitimate.
But as Leave won and the decision has not yet been implemented, the converse does not apply.
Was that the highest?
Theresa has no majority, neither before or after the bigot beanfest.
"At least someone won by a landslide ...."
*Indyref2 looks dead before 2022.
Well obviously when 85% of the voters vote for a pro-Brexit party...
JonCisBack said:
On topic, genuinely do not understand the Tory remainer who voted Labour.
Labour's manifesto makes it crystal clear they are Leavers. WTF?
Hi there, first post - delurking just to reply to various comments like the above.
Since becoming PM Mrs May has chosen to interpret the referendum result as a mandate for pursuing a hard Brexit. She called the election asking the country to give her a bigger majority so that she could pursue that aim.
I don't want a hard Brexit. So I take what small step I can to prevent her from gaining that bigger majority and therefore send the opposite message. If I were in Oxford West (or various other seats) I would have voted Lib Dem. But there were far more seats where the best chance of preventing that bigger majority was to vote Labour, and a Lib Dem vote would have been wasted.
The fact that Labour's policy is also for a hard Brexit is irrelevant - they are not the ones doing the negotiating. It was the message to the Prime Minister that was important. Now I am only one person. But I suspect (looking at the swing to Labour in remain areas) there are tens if not hundreds of thousands like me, including Tory remainer referred to in the header.
So to interpret votes for Labour as votes for hard Brexit is a misinterpretation.
PS Sorry, haven't worked out how to do quotes correctly yet.
Probably a confusing set of responses to be fair.
Interesting post, and something we should consider.
Kinnock wasn't blamed for the ERM. Cameron wasn't blamed for Iraq. The electorate holds governments, not oppositions, to account.
Whatever may's shortcomings are - and they are numerous - the thought of Corbyn PM is a million times worse.
The PLP gave an extremist a standing ovation in the HoC today. They will live to regret that.
I don't think the public is at the stage of a reversal on Brexit, but hypothetically, if for whatever reason, a referendum was called pre-leaving, under the same terms and question, and this time Remain won 52-48%, would you still advocate we continue with Brexit or that we halt it (at least until a 'best of 3' referendum is called!)?
It would only be illegitimate to halt Brexit without express consent of the people.
If there had been a referendum on Gay Marriage, and the country voted NO 52/48, I would say the pro Gay Marriage side were entitled to keep campaigning. If YES had won 52/48 it would be wrong if there was another vote on it before anyone was allowed to marry someone of the same sex
1. Hard Brexit would be a disaster as DXEU knows fully well
2. Any kid of negotiated Brexit is impossible to achieve in the remaining time available, so
3. An off the shelf agreement is the only game in town to salvage any kind of political credibility and not have the thing spin out of control
So she's sacking the ministers who were prepping the no deal better than a good deal fantasy. And replacing them with people who have the number for the European Free Trade Association
The serious business of politics and government have passed the Labour party by with this overt display of insanity.
So not in any meaningful sense "Brexit", not what the referendum was about and also not what either main party said it supported in its manifesto.
Sotf Brexit is bullshit code for Remainers ignoring the referendum result, no more no less. "Hard Brexit" is what the vote was about. It's just effing Brexit
You were a Remainer - fine. But you lost.
https://twitter.com/Anna_Soubry/status/874624713145933825
I've long said the PLP are sheep*. They were in serious danger of growing a backbone, now they've returned to mindless bleating.
*Longstanding members may recall the Conservatives MPs are wolves, and the Lib Dem MPs students high on cannabis.
Of course, it could become a problem for Labour that such a large chunk of "the 48%" voted for them, and many of them possibly on a somewhat provisional basis. (According to Lord Ashcroft, almost 2/3 of Labour's vote had voted remain, and 43% would still like to find a way of remaining.) I'm not sure how Labour keep their coalition of voters together.
I wonder now if the minority Government and the scare given to her MPs has, in fact, had the same result.
But in all cases only after the decision is implemented.
“Mr Speaker-elect, can I congratulate you on your re-election. At least someone got a landslide.”
Good from May. Very good. If only.................ah well, we are where we are.
Me. Fencesitter, I agree, but the picture's very complicated. Potentially large gains and losses in various areas for both parties.
I wonder if that means it's spring time for the Lib Dems.
https://twitter.com/FraserNelson/status/874636719781556224
PS Soft Brexit is precisely because Remainers are NOT ignoring the referendum result. Otherwise they would go for membership of the EU, which is FAR better.
*) May and the Conservatives lost seats.
*) He performed far better than the low expectations.
*) He smashed the vote share of both his predecessors.
And in a way he has won: the Conservatives are in a real mess. He has gained between a few months and a few years of breathing room to continue changing his party. Even better, he's now gained the fawning admiration of most of those inside his party who were against him.