Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Swinson’s great LD gamble – making cancelling Brexit party pol

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited September 2019 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Swinson’s great LD gamble – making cancelling Brexit party policy

Liberal Democrat members have overwhelmingly voted to cancel Brexit, should their party come to power at the next general electionhttps://t.co/mXWVMYv2lX pic.twitter.com/bvoNzXkTOo

Read the full story here


«1345678

Comments

  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    edited September 2019
    Admirably clear policy. Unlike Labour's dog's dinner.

    How it plays out at the ballot box remains (geddit) to be seen, but it undeniably gives a lot of disaffected people a political home to go to.

    [Edit: poor old SquareRoot]
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    First. Even in Greece
  • DadgeDadge Posts: 2,036
    What do the LibDems say about having another referendum (after revoking A50)?
  • Good summary from OGH. It's a much better piece of positioning than it is a policy. While I'm queasy about it myself I think it can work well for them as long as they are never in a position to implement it.
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 2,963
    It's a clear policy as long as you don't spend any sort of time thinking about trivial things such as internal consistency with other referendum situations...
  • Anorak said:

    Admirably clear policy. Unlike Labour's dog's dinner.

    How it plays out at the ballot box remains (geddit) to be seen, but it undeniably gives a lot of disaffected people a political home to go to.

    Dog's breakfast, a pedant writes. Labour's conference starts this weekend. Lord knows what will emerge.
  • DadgeDadge Posts: 2,036
    The attempt to be consistent is usually futile anyway, since no two situations are exactly the same. Dealing with each situation on its merits is the way to go.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,620
    Less discussed is the impact this will have on parties on the other side of the debate. Perhaps there was little doubt that the Lib Dems just want to cancel Brexit, but now they are openly advocating it.

    You'd imagine that would energise the other side. Would that be the Brexit party or the Tories?
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621

    Anorak said:

    Admirably clear policy. Unlike Labour's dog's dinner.

    How it plays out at the ballot box remains (geddit) to be seen, but it undeniably gives a lot of disaffected people a political home to go to.

    Dog's breakfast, a pedant writes. Labour's conference starts this weekend. Lord knows what will emerge.
    Thanks to your pedantry, I have learned something new!

    Although 'dog's dinner' alliterates quite pleasingly.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 36,695
    edited September 2019
    O/T fpt:
    kinabalu said:

    Nigelb said:

    In an attempt to derail the thread, what is missing from this list ?
    https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2019/sep/16/100-best-tv-shows-of-the-21st-century

    I have watched a lot of telly in my time but have seen just 2 of the top 10 - The Office and Fleabag.

    Surprised - and slightly perturbed - by this.
    Extraordinary. Of course people can argue the toss between The Sopranos and The Wire but not to have seen either.

    What on earth is your demographic?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 72,757
    rkrkrk said:

    Less discussed is the impact this will have on parties on the other side of the debate. Perhaps there was little doubt that the Lib Dems just want to cancel Brexit, but now they are openly advocating it.

    You'd imagine that would energise the other side. Would that be the Brexit party or the Tories?

    Long term, likely both I reckon.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 36,695
    edited September 2019
    On Topic:

    It is so refreshing to hear, and must be also for those concerned, eg Ed & Jo et al to answer so directly and simply to any question thrown at them. Will convince/attract a lot of people imo.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 105,146
    Certainly Lucas' tweet this morning suggested cracks appearing in the Remain Alliance

    https://twitter.com/CarolineLucas/status/1173553598405459970?s=20
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 72,937
    edited September 2019
    The liberal undemocrats.....

    Its one thing to say i think we need a vote on a deal / no deal / no brexit, quite another to say screw you 17 million who votes to leave.

    I am not sure they can criticise the no-deal nutters if you are going to just ignore a referendum.
  • Dadge said:

    The attempt to be consistent is usually futile anyway, since no two situations are exactly the same. Dealing with each situation on its merits is the way to go.

    ..and hope no one notices.
  • tpfkartpfkar Posts: 1,527
    I don't see the Lib Dem move as a big deal myself. They are already the 'Stop Brexit' party so this is just the mechanism for how to do that, the policy aim is unchanged.

    And indeed, a political party saying what will be in their manifesto & they'll do if they win the next election, will happen at every political conference across the country this month. Big deal.

    The only thing that is new is recognising that a referendum result where there's been no agreement on how to deliver and has failed so far, has a time limit. I'm sure we'd all agree there's a point where any mandate expires the question is how long and how many elections / adverse results would it take? The Lib Dems seem simply to be going first.

  • TOPPING said:

    On Topic:

    It is so refreshing (and must be also for those concerned, eg Ed & Jo et al) to be able to answer so directly and simply to any question thrown at them. Will convince/attract a lot of people imo.

    Yes, I guess the problem with a referendum is that you then get asked, what's the Brexit option in the referendum, at which you have to say either TMay's deal - and if that's the best available why didn't you vote for it - or go down some amazing renegotiation journey of the imagination.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 32,218
    Labour's Brexit policy is realistic, moderate, very easy to understand.

    It is therefore neither a dog's breakfast nor a dog's dinner.

    It is the dog's bollox.
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 4,426
    TOPPING said:

    O/T fpt:

    kinabalu said:

    Nigelb said:

    In an attempt to derail the thread, what is missing from this list ?
    https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2019/sep/16/100-best-tv-shows-of-the-21st-century

    I have watched a lot of telly in my time but have seen just 2 of the top 10 - The Office and Fleabag.

    Surprised - and slightly perturbed - by this.
    Extraordinary. Of course people can argue the toss between The Sopranos and The Wire but not to have seen either.

    What on earth is your demographic?
    I have seen neither the Sopranos nor the Wire. I maybe watch a couple of programmes a month via the internet because I choose to. I dislike using the TV as a default method of passing the time.
  • Wire definitely better than the sopranos.
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,979
    edited September 2019

    The liberal undemocrats.....

    Its one thing to say i think we need a vote on a deal / no deal / no brexit, quite another to say screw you 17 million who votes to leave.

    I am not sure they can criticise the no-deal nutters if you are going to just ignore a referendum.

    50 million people who live in the UK did not vote for Brexit. Just remember that. :wink:
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 36,695

    TOPPING said:

    On Topic:

    It is so refreshing (and must be also for those concerned, eg Ed & Jo et al) to be able to answer so directly and simply to any question thrown at them. Will convince/attract a lot of people imo.

    Yes, I guess the problem with a referendum is that you then get asked, what's the Brexit option in the referendum, at which you have to say either TMay's deal - and if that's the best available why didn't you vote for it - or go down some amazing renegotiation journey of the imagination.
    btw I noticed your project this morning and wondered whether your twitter handle is a Shakespeare reference, or is, er, your own name?
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382
    rkrkrk said:

    Less discussed is the impact this will have on parties on the other side of the debate. Perhaps there was little doubt that the Lib Dems just want to cancel Brexit, but now they are openly advocating it.

    You'd imagine that would energise the other side. Would that be the Brexit party or the Tories?

    The policy is certainly dogmatic.
    The Brexit Party will use it to say , The Lib Dems do not respect the referendum result.
    They are correct.
    If they got into government with a majority and had to implement it.
    It would be a clusterfuck.
    If Corbyn had announced this ,the outcry would have been huge.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 72,937
    edited September 2019
    HYUFD said:
    Fire up the bercow, time to take control of the order paper again will be the cry from the usual suspects.
  • Andy_CookeAndy_Cooke Posts: 4,461
    There is some disquiet in the Lib Dem Party on this.

    After all, it was sprung on the Party within five days of Conference, no amendments were accepted (even with a very short timeline for amendments, I know for a fact that at least one was successfully submitted by the Thursday deadline after the publication of the policy on Tuesday, but rejected out of hand), and there was cleverly a separate vote on whether to take out the three lines saying "Revoke without a referendum in the event of a Parliamentary majority" to vote on separately (which seems convoluted even to me).

    The result of that was that the vote to extract those lines was far less overwhelming (clear, but not overwhelming; probably somewhere between 40-60 and 30-70) but would not be reported on.
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 4,426

    The liberal undemocrats.....

    Its one thing to say i think we need a vote on a deal / no deal / no brexit, quite another to say screw you 17 million who votes to leave.

    I am not sure they can criticise the no-deal nutters if you are going to just ignore a referendum.

    Implementing Brexit is saying "screw you" to 16 million voters.

    This is the problem with the current situation. Whatever happens there will be a lot of people who passionately oppose it.
  • I see the maybot is standing again at the next general election. I take it nobody is offering any money for a crappy book or speaking tour.
  • Andy_CookeAndy_Cooke Posts: 4,461

    The liberal undemocrats.....

    Its one thing to say i think we need a vote on a deal / no deal / no brexit, quite another to say screw you 17 million who votes to leave.

    I am not sure they can criticise the no-deal nutters if you are going to just ignore a referendum.

    50 million people who live in the UK did not vote for Brexit. Just remember that. :wink:
    Well over a hundred and ten thousand Lib Dem members did not vote on this policy.
    Just remember that.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 72,757
    Plenty of very good fare omitted from the top 100 list - The Simpsons is a weirdly iconic miss even if you consider Futurama or Rick & Morty too niche. South Park the only animated feature that makes it.

    Whilst the Big Bang Theory is rightly excluded no Friends or Seinfeld either.

    Chernobyl omitted too...

    At least Mrs Browns boys didn't make it so that's something I suppose.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 105,146
    edited September 2019
    Yorkcity said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Less discussed is the impact this will have on parties on the other side of the debate. Perhaps there was little doubt that the Lib Dems just want to cancel Brexit, but now they are openly advocating it.

    You'd imagine that would energise the other side. Would that be the Brexit party or the Tories?

    The policy is certainly dogmatic.
    The Brexit Party will use it to say , The Lib Dems do not respect the referendum result.
    They are correct.
    If they got into government with a majority and had to implement it.
    It would be a clusterfuck.
    If Corbyn had announced this ,the outcry would have been huge.
    The LD policy is aimed at inner and Southwest London, Oxford and Cambridge, Scotland, the posher parts of the Home Counties like St Albans, Guildford and Lewes ie diehard Remainerville. Areas which voted Remain and may have voted LD in the European Parliament elections too.

    It will go down like a lead balloon in the largely Leave voting former LD heartlands of the South West bar a few areas like Cheltenham and Bath but the LDs seem to be willing to make that sacrifice and it will also go down badly in the Leave voting North and Midlands but the LDs are weak there anyway.

  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 4,679
    Logically the Lib Dems policy is unwise. But in polarised times it will probably work for them. In fact I think it has made me more likely to vote for them next time. Voting and logic don't really go together.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 36,695
    eristdoof said:

    TOPPING said:

    O/T fpt:

    kinabalu said:

    Nigelb said:

    In an attempt to derail the thread, what is missing from this list ?
    https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2019/sep/16/100-best-tv-shows-of-the-21st-century

    I have watched a lot of telly in my time but have seen just 2 of the top 10 - The Office and Fleabag.

    Surprised - and slightly perturbed - by this.
    Extraordinary. Of course people can argue the toss between The Sopranos and The Wire but not to have seen either.

    What on earth is your demographic?
    I have seen neither the Sopranos nor the Wire. I maybe watch a couple of programmes a month via the internet because I choose to. I dislike using the TV as a default method of passing the time.
    Amazing.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 72,757
    "now clearly playing a Lib Dem first strategy" - Blimey, what an accusation to level at the leader of the Lib Dems !!!
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 36,695
    Pulpstar said:

    Plenty of very good fare omitted from the top 100 list - The Simpsons is a weirdly iconic miss even if you consider Futurama or Rick & Morty too niche. South Park the only animated feature that makes it.

    Whilst the Big Bang Theory is rightly excluded no Friends or Seinfeld either.

    Chernobyl omitted too...

    At least Mrs Browns boys didn't make it so that's something I suppose.

    Did you see the fight?
  • I remember the days when the lib dems used to stand up in the house of commons demanding a referendum on our membership of the EU.
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382
    HYUFD said:

    Certainly Lucas' tweet this morning suggested cracks appearing in the Remain Alliance

    https://twitter.com/CarolineLucas/status/1173553598405459970?s=20

    Agreed especially in the green , lib dem area.
    Swinson is seen as a more right of centre and authoritarian.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 81,465
    HYUFD said:
    Hes not wrong. Baker knows he and his ate more powerful than the Grievers even if fewer were expelled.
  • kinabalu said:

    Labour's Brexit policy is realistic, moderate, very easy to understand.

    It is therefore neither a dog's breakfast nor a dog's dinner.

    It is the dog's bollox.

    In fact its the only realistic way forward - parliament will never agree on a deal, or to no deal, a general election is unlikely to break the impasse, a second referendum is the only way out.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 36,695
    eristdoof said:

    The liberal undemocrats.....

    Its one thing to say i think we need a vote on a deal / no deal / no brexit, quite another to say screw you 17 million who votes to leave.

    I am not sure they can criticise the no-deal nutters if you are going to just ignore a referendum.

    Implementing Brexit is saying "screw you" to 16 million voters.

    This is the problem with the current situation. Whatever happens there will be a lot of people who passionately oppose it.
    As Davey said on PL and as you note also, you're going to upset people whatever the hell you do. This is the LDs who are coming off a low base so are not likely to shed more voters than they might attract.
  • NooNoo Posts: 2,380

    I remember the days when the lib dems used to stand up in the house of commons demanding a referendum on our membership of the EU.

    If you ever get a time machine and are thinking about travelling to the past and voting, keep that in mind.
  • ab195ab195 Posts: 477
    I can see the political logic, and I buy in to there being a solid 20% in favour of revoke/rejoin. However what does it do to the South West and Lamb’s seat in the East?

    Add in the new MPs and the thousands of new members and the LibDems must be a very different party now. Moving away from Brexit for a moment, it’ll be interesting to see what policy platform develops.

  • TOPPING said:

    eristdoof said:

    The liberal undemocrats.....

    Its one thing to say i think we need a vote on a deal / no deal / no brexit, quite another to say screw you 17 million who votes to leave.

    I am not sure they can criticise the no-deal nutters if you are going to just ignore a referendum.

    Implementing Brexit is saying "screw you" to 16 million voters.

    This is the problem with the current situation. Whatever happens there will be a lot of people who passionately oppose it.
    As Davey said on PL and as you note also, you're going to upset people whatever the hell you do. This is the LDs who are coming off a low base so are not likely to shed more voters than they might attract.
    Their old policy of a second referendum was far more palatable. This is just screw democracy.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 32,218
    TOPPING said:

    Extraordinary. Of course people can argue the toss between The Sopranos and The Wire but not to have seen either.

    What on earth is your demographic?

    Middle-aged white male, not quite past it but 'going over'.

    Affluent Hampstead but Northern Working Class by birth. Hard Left Social Democrat. Guardian reader on Tuesdays. Remainer but Leave with a (soft) Deal.

    And (it would appear) non-watcher of the deemed best US import TV drama.

    I have been boycotting American products (where I can) since Trump but I guess the timing is wrong for this to explain it.
  • Harris_TweedHarris_Tweed Posts: 1,293
    edited September 2019
    Yorkcity said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Less discussed is the impact this will have on parties on the other side of the debate. Perhaps there was little doubt that the Lib Dems just want to cancel Brexit, but now they are openly advocating it.

    You'd imagine that would energise the other side. Would that be the Brexit party or the Tories?

    The policy is certainly dogmatic.
    The Brexit Party will use it to say , The Lib Dems do not respect the referendum result.
    They are correct.
    If they got into government with a majority and had to implement it.
    It would be a clusterfuck.
    If Corbyn had announced this ,the outcry would have been huge.
    On one hand, I think the LDs are being very clear-headed in coming up with a simple policy which will appeal to a good chunk of the 48pc, just as Boris has done with one for a good chunk of the 52pc. I don't discount that increasing their share of the vote or seat count. And most (not all) of those disgusted by it were not in the market for voting LibDem at the next election.

    On the other, the LDs are (a) not going to get 52+pc of the vote in a "see.. opinion has changed" direct mandate, and (b) not going to form a majority government after the next election. So they will be negotiating with other parties to get a (probably small) portion of their platform enacted. If feels a safe-ish bet that this will not include revocation.

    So quite aside from the question of mandate and Will Of The People (TM), they're going to end up being accused of treachery by remainers lured from Lab - just as they were on student fees by students lured from Lab.

    It's the sort of policy which you hope wins you one seat fewer than the number required to hold the balance of power ;)
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 72,757
    edited September 2019
    TOPPING said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Plenty of very good fare omitted from the top 100 list - The Simpsons is a weirdly iconic miss even if you consider Futurama or Rick & Morty too niche. South Park the only animated feature that makes it.

    Whilst the Big Bang Theory is rightly excluded no Friends or Seinfeld either.

    Chernobyl omitted too...

    At least Mrs Browns boys didn't make it so that's something I suppose.

    Did you see the fight?
    Yep, Fury didn't look great but he clearly won by a wide margin. I expect his Wilder fight will be pushed back, a cut like that takes ages to heal iirc.
    Kamworor's half was obviously the great sporting achievement of the weekend. 13.1 consecutive miles of 4:25.5 minute miles - absolubtely mad.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 105,146
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 36,695

    TOPPING said:

    eristdoof said:

    The liberal undemocrats.....

    Its one thing to say i think we need a vote on a deal / no deal / no brexit, quite another to say screw you 17 million who votes to leave.

    I am not sure they can criticise the no-deal nutters if you are going to just ignore a referendum.

    Implementing Brexit is saying "screw you" to 16 million voters.

    This is the problem with the current situation. Whatever happens there will be a lot of people who passionately oppose it.
    As Davey said on PL and as you note also, you're going to upset people whatever the hell you do. This is the LDs who are coming off a low base so are not likely to shed more voters than they might attract.
    Their old policy of a second referendum was far more palatable. This is just screw democracy.
    A tentative thread is forming itself on my pad along the lines of GE vs Referendum and the relative democratic attributes of each. As I am not a Fellow of All Souls, however, it may take some extended thinking on my part.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,620
    Pulpstar said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Less discussed is the impact this will have on parties on the other side of the debate. Perhaps there was little doubt that the Lib Dems just want to cancel Brexit, but now they are openly advocating it.

    You'd imagine that would energise the other side. Would that be the Brexit party or the Tories?

    Long term, likely both I reckon.
    Eurgh... that feeling when you think you're contemplating which is the worse of two options and then a third possibility rears its ugly head...
  • kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:
    Hes not wrong. Baker knows he and his ate more powerful than the Grievers even if fewer were expelled.
    Certainly. The Tory grassroots and the BXP would go into full betrayal mode if any ERGers are expelled. Johnson would be swept away in the resulting malestrom.
  • HYUFD said:

    Certainly Lucas' tweet this morning suggested cracks appearing in the Remain Alliance

    https://twitter.com/CarolineLucas/status/1173553598405459970?s=20

    The problem with the Greens is that they don't have a plausible pathway to 2 Westminster seats, let alone to a position of power where they could change anything.

    Sitting in Brighton pontificating about "strengthening our democracy" is all very well, but until GPEW works out exactly how it will ever become more than a protest vote, Caroline Lucas is not really any more relevant than Andrew Adonis.
  • The undemocratic Liberals have some gall keeping their current name.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 36,695
    kinabalu said:

    TOPPING said:

    Extraordinary. Of course people can argue the toss between The Sopranos and The Wire but not to have seen either.

    What on earth is your demographic?

    Middle-aged white male, not quite past it but 'going over'.

    Affluent Hampstead but Northern Working Class by birth. Hard Left Social Democrat. Guardian reader on Tuesdays. Remainer but Leave with a (soft) Deal.

    And (it would appear) non-watcher of the deemed best US import TV drama.

    I have been boycotting American products (where I can) since Trump but I guess the timing is wrong for this to explain it.
    The Wire came out in 2002; the Sopranos in 1999. Both totemic, revolutionary works of art. Perhaps at that time you were working towards your affluence so didn't have the time. You should watch them now.
  • ab195ab195 Posts: 477

    HYUFD said:

    Certainly Lucas' tweet this morning suggested cracks appearing in the Remain Alliance

    https://twitter.com/CarolineLucas/status/1173553598405459970?s=20

    The problem with the Greens is that they don't have a plausible pathway to 2 Westminster seats, let alone to a position of power where they could change anything.

    Sitting in Brighton pontificating about "strengthening our democracy" is all very well, but until GPEW works out exactly how it will ever become more than a protest vote, Caroline Lucas is not really any more relevant than Andrew Adonis.
    They don’t seem to have made enough out of Extinction Rebellion to me. One would think their line ought to “let’s stop wittering on about this nonsense and focus on the Climate Emergency”.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 72,757

    The undemocratic Liberals have some gall keeping their current name.

    Hmm I think that isn't the key - essentially the Lib Dems acknowledge the supremacy of parliament over referenda. The issue is if/when remain wins another referendum it leaves them stuck if the Tories/Brexit party campaign on unilateral removal of the UK from the EU without a further vote.
    I appreciate this is some way off but it presents a good argument perhaps ~ 5 years in the future for the leave side.
  • I genuinely don’t get the issue here. If the LibDems win a majority in a general election with Revoke in their manifesto then they will have the mandate to deliver. If they don’t, then they won’t.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 36,695
    Pulpstar said:

    TOPPING said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Plenty of very good fare omitted from the top 100 list - The Simpsons is a weirdly iconic miss even if you consider Futurama or Rick & Morty too niche. South Park the only animated feature that makes it.

    Whilst the Big Bang Theory is rightly excluded no Friends or Seinfeld either.

    Chernobyl omitted too...

    At least Mrs Browns boys didn't make it so that's something I suppose.

    Did you see the fight?
    Yep, Fury didn't look great but he clearly won by a wide margin. I expect his Wilder fight will be pushed back, a cut like that takes ages to heal iirc.
    Kamworor's half was obviously the great sporting achievement of the weekend. 13.1 consecutive miles of 4:25.5 minute miles - absolubtely mad.
    Didn't see that and yes agree with all that on Fury.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 4,556

    Yorkcity said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Less discussed is the impact this will have on parties on the other side of the debate. Perhaps there was little doubt that the Lib Dems just want to cancel Brexit, but now they are openly advocating it.

    You'd imagine that would energise the other side. Would that be the Brexit party or the Tories?

    The policy is certainly dogmatic.
    The Brexit Party will use it to say , The Lib Dems do not respect the referendum result.
    They are correct.
    If they got into government with a majority and had to implement it.
    It would be a clusterfuck.
    If Corbyn had announced this ,the outcry would have been huge.
    On one hand, I think the LDs are being very clear-headed in coming up with a simple policy which will appeal to a good chunk of the 48pc, just as Boris has done with one for a good chunk of the 52pc. I don't discount that increasing their share of the vote or seat count. And most (not all) of those disgusted by it were not in the market for voting LibDem at the next election.

    On the other, the LDs are (a) not going to get 52+pc of the vote in a "see.. opinion has changed" direct mandate, and (b) not going to form a majority government after the next election. So they will be negotiating with other parties to get a (probably small) portion of their platform enacted. If feels a safe-ish bet that this will not include revocation.

    So quite aside from the question of mandate and Will Of The People (TM), they're going to end up being accused of treachery by remainers lured from Lab - just as they were on student fees by students lured from Lab.

    It's the sort of policy which you hope wins you one seat fewer than the number required to hold the balance of power ;)
    The equivalent to the tuition fees debacle would be to get in to a coalition government and then come out in favour of Brexit. The problem with fees wasn't that they failed to abolish them (they had no majority, so that could not be expected) but that they voted to triple them.

    I know the system was improved in other ways - in many ways, it is the long proposed graduate tax - but it looked terrible.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 42,807
    edited September 2019

    First. Even in Greece

    I missed all the banter about where we all are last night; after posting my first I had dinner and got an early night, ready for a long drive across the prairie today.

    I don’t see that the LibDems have much to lose by their latest decision - I can’t see anything that could be thrown at them now that couldn’t already be thrown at them before? The policy implies rejoin but obviously all the parties will expect to revisit their proposals if and when we actually leave.

    Meanwhile am I right in thinking that an October election is now impossible and so I can count my winnings from laying it (and September before it) at good odds? And get to vote, since I will be back in the Uk by November (although if I could i’d be tempted to look at laying that too, if not to the same extent).
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 45,328
    The Lib Dem policy has the merits of candour and clarity. We know that you stupid people voted to leave but we don’t care. We know better. And actually a good chunk of those that voted remain will do us just fine, thank you very much.

    It’s undemocratic and morally questionable but it might well work.
  • FensterFenster Posts: 2,115
    Good, brave policy from Swinson.

    It will attract an avalanche of criticism but lots of votes.

    Painful for Labour MPs. Perhaps painful for many southern Tory MPs too.

  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    Brendan O'Neill really is a tool. "The Lib Dems are now the most extremist party in the UK". Jeez.
    https://twitter.com/SpecCoffeeHouse/status/1173569562668912640
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    edited September 2019

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:
    Hes not wrong. Baker knows he and his ate more powerful than the Grievers even if fewer were expelled.
    Certainly. The Tory grassroots and the BXP would go into full betrayal mode if any ERGers are expelled. Johnson would be swept away in the resulting malestrom.
    Let the BXP go into betrayal mode, its what they do. Screw them and if its a good deal screw any Tories who refuse to back it in a confidence vote! And welcome back home to any like Letwin or Clarke but not Grieve who back it too.

    The Brexit Party surged because we didn't Brexit, not because it was "the wrong type of Brexit". Once we are out Farage will be a footnote in history - and the Conservative Party is not going to be worse off without Baker. Anyone disagree?
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    Anorak said:

    Brendan O'Neill really is a tool. "The Lib Dems are now the most extremist party in the UK". Jeez.
    https://twitter.com/SpecCoffeeHouse/status/1173569562668912640

    Although when Carloine Lucas is baulking at your anti Brexit position he might have the kernel of a point
  • TabmanTabman Posts: 1,028
    kinabalu said:

    Labour's Brexit policy is realistic, moderate, very easy to understand.

    It is therefore neither a dog's breakfast nor a dog's dinner.

    It is the dog's bollox.

    FTFY

  • tpfkartpfkar Posts: 1,527
    One other thing I think will play well about the Lib Dem move is they can campaign on "Make Brexit go away"
    Both Lab and Con policy will ensure that Brexit will dominate the 2020s. There's a growing realisation that no-deal means years and years of talking about little else while we try to find our way in the world again from a standing start. We can make Brexit go away is superficially very tempting.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 36,695
    edited September 2019
    DavidL said:

    The Lib Dem policy has the merits of candour and clarity. We know that you stupid people voted to leave but we don’t care. We know better. And actually a good chunk of those that voted remain will do us just fine, thank you very much.

    It’s undemocratic and morally questionable but it might well work.

    Bollocks. They have a clear position. It is not so much we know you stupid people voted to leave as vote for us if you want this particular outcome. What are they supposed to do? Do an @HYUFD and agree with whomever won the last election regardless of their own views?
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 15,304
    DavidL said:

    The Lib Dem policy has the merits of candour and clarity. We know that you stupid people voted to leave but we don’t care. We know better. And actually a good chunk of those that voted remain will do us just fine, thank you very much.

    It’s undemocratic and morally questionable but it might well work.

    Why do Leavers continually refer to their own brethren as stupid? It’s very unkind and unbecoming.
  • BromBrom Posts: 3,760

    I genuinely don’t get the issue here. If the LibDems win a majority in a general election with Revoke in their manifesto then they will have the mandate to deliver. If they don’t, then they won’t.

    In a way I'd prefer revoke over a 2nd ref as a leaver so I understand their position. However Liberals have spent a number of years suggesting they understand and care for those communities who voted leave. To ignore the referendum suggests they have narrowed their base to the 25% of largely privileged people who see things only through the prism of stopping Brexit and will do absolutely nothing in power to try and help the so-called 'left behind'.
  • NooNoo Posts: 2,380
    To anyone talking about divisions between Remain parties, a lesson from the history of advertising.

    A naive view of advertising is that it's a zero sum game where similar competitors fight it out for market share. By advertising, you switch folk from one product (Pepsi) to another (Coca Cola). The overall sales of carbonated vegetable extract drinks don't change, but Coke goes forward and Pepsi goes backwards.

    The reality is, when Coke advertises, both Coke and Pepsi sales rise. Sure, Coke sales rise faster, which could easily bring a higher market share (or not, as it happens). But Pepsi gains without spending a dime.

    The genius of the Lib Dem policy proposal is it now starts a conversation of "which type of Remain are you?", as opposed to "should I stay or should I go?"*. Remain as a broad church does not suffer from this. It opens the Overton window, it makes Corbyn's Brexit stance look moderate, and it garners a huge amount of press. It's brilliant.

    *no, that was Levis, not Coke. 1991. Fat guy in the pool hall loses his trousers.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 15,304

    I genuinely don’t get the issue here. If the LibDems win a majority in a general election with Revoke in their manifesto then they will have the mandate to deliver. If they don’t, then they won’t.


    Quite. Too simple and logical for PB.
  • Anorak said:

    Brendan O'Neill really is a tool. "The Lib Dems are now the most extremist party in the UK". Jeez.
    https://twitter.com/SpecCoffeeHouse/status/1173569562668912640

    It is literally correct.

    Can you name one other party more extreme than the Lib Dems with their revoke without a referendum policy?

    It'd be like UKIP having had a "leave without a referendum" policy pre-referendum.
  • DavidL said:

    The Lib Dem policy has the merits of candour and clarity. We know that you stupid people voted to leave but we don’t care. We know better. And actually a good chunk of those that voted remain will do us just fine, thank you very much.

    It’s undemocratic and morally questionable but it might well work.

    Why is it undemocratic to put a policy in your manifesto and implement it if you win a majority?
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    tpfkar said:

    One other thing I think will play well about the Lib Dem move is they can campaign on "Make Brexit go away"
    Both Lab and Con policy will ensure that Brexit will dominate the 2020s. There's a growing realisation that no-deal means years and years of talking about little else while we try to find our way in the world again from a standing start. We can make Brexit go away is superficially very tempting.

    Cancelling article 50 unilaterally guarantees Brexit is at the very centre of an increasingly divided nations arguments, protests and action for the full 5 year parliament
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 15,304
    HYUFD said:

    If you wish to ignore polls you don’t like, you are at liberty to do so. You need not provide a reason.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 36,695

    Anorak said:

    Brendan O'Neill really is a tool. "The Lib Dems are now the most extremist party in the UK". Jeez.
    https://twitter.com/SpecCoffeeHouse/status/1173569562668912640

    It is literally correct.

    Can you name one other party more extreme than the Lib Dems with their revoke without a referendum policy?

    It'd be like UKIP having had a "leave without a referendum" policy pre-referendum.
    No it would be like UKIP having a "leave without a referendum" policy at the GE, getting a thumping majority, and then, er, leaving without a referendum.
  • Anorak said:

    Brendan O'Neill really is a tool. "The Lib Dems are now the most extremist party in the UK". Jeez.
    https://twitter.com/SpecCoffeeHouse/status/1173569562668912640

    It is literally correct.

    Can you name one other party more extreme than the Lib Dems with their revoke without a referendum policy?

    It'd be like UKIP having had a "leave without a referendum" policy pre-referendum.
    Vote Leave said they wouldn’t invoke Article 50 without a plan, so the Lib Dems are just honouring the referendum. :)
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 45,328

    DavidL said:

    The Lib Dem policy has the merits of candour and clarity. We know that you stupid people voted to leave but we don’t care. We know better. And actually a good chunk of those that voted remain will do us just fine, thank you very much.

    It’s undemocratic and morally questionable but it might well work.

    Why is it undemocratic to put a policy in your manifesto and implement it if you win a majority?
    Because we were asked and we answered. That’s how democracy works.
  • NooNoo Posts: 2,380

    DavidL said:

    The Lib Dem policy has the merits of candour and clarity. We know that you stupid people voted to leave but we don’t care. We know better. And actually a good chunk of those that voted remain will do us just fine, thank you very much.

    It’s undemocratic and morally questionable but it might well work.

    Why is it undemocratic to put a policy in your manifesto and implement it if you win a majority?
    Because democracy was a single moment in summer 2016, and anything since is moaning and treachery, unless it conforms with the official doctrine of St Nigel of Medway.
  • Brom said:

    I genuinely don’t get the issue here. If the LibDems win a majority in a general election with Revoke in their manifesto then they will have the mandate to deliver. If they don’t, then they won’t.

    In a way I'd prefer revoke over a 2nd ref as a leaver so I understand their position. However Liberals have spent a number of years suggesting they understand and care for those communities who voted leave. To ignore the referendum suggests they have narrowed their base to the 25% of largely privileged people who see things only through the prism of stopping Brexit and will do absolutely nothing in power to try and help the so-called 'left behind'.

    My guess is they would say the best way to help the left behind is to stop Brexit.

  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 32,218
    TOPPING said:

    The Wire came out in 2002; the Sopranos in 1999. Both totemic, revolutionary works of art. Perhaps at that time you were working towards your affluence so didn't have the time. You should watch them now.

    Yes, that is the actual reason - work, pub, home, crash, work, repeat - watch sport and bet at the w/e.

    Probably I will binge watch most of those top 5s at some point. It's the modern equivalent of reading 'those books*' you've failed to find time for when you were younger.

    * We all know the ones.
  • I am in the UK, and have not been out of the UK for at least six years.

    Given everyone else appears to be traitors who actually step foot on gangplank or aeronautical vehicle to visit smelly foreign lands or, worse, live in said foreign lands, my view should be preeminent amongst all posters.

    That's told you!
  • 148grss148grss Posts: 1,448
    The LD position is to have a thing in their manifesto they would do if they got a majority of seats in the House.

    Do PBers not agree that a post referendum GE has more of a mandate than the referendum itself, and especially if the LDs DID win a majority, that that would actually be a mandate for revocation? Whilst I personally agree with Caroline Lucas, it must be said that it is a lot more honest than what most parties do with their manifestos.

    Although I also agree with Adonis that this is a cynical attempt from the LDs to split the remainer vote from Hard and Soft remain. This would make life easier for the LDs, as a Tory majority government is a good foil, whereas the potential to form a government with Corbyn as PM leads to horrible things like choices and consequences and things.
  • theakestheakes Posts: 675
    Lib Dem General Elelction strategy just seems to be endorsing "Bollocks to Brexit", cannot see the differenece myself. All strategies have a risk element, this seems to have less risk than Cons or Labour, frankly do not know where Lucas is coming from or what she is doing. My experience of the Greens is that they are in rather autocratic.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    It was very important for the Lib Dems to know the view of the electorate before ignoring it. That's why they demanded an in/out referendum in the first place.
  • BromBrom Posts: 3,760
    edited September 2019
    TOPPING said:

    Anorak said:

    Brendan O'Neill really is a tool. "The Lib Dems are now the most extremist party in the UK". Jeez.
    https://twitter.com/SpecCoffeeHouse/status/1173569562668912640

    It is literally correct.

    Can you name one other party more extreme than the Lib Dems with their revoke without a referendum policy?

    It'd be like UKIP having had a "leave without a referendum" policy pre-referendum.
    No it would be like UKIP having a "leave without a referendum" policy at the GE, getting a thumping majority, and then, er, leaving without a referendum.
    Didn't half the current Lib Dem MPs vote to have the referendum and vote to back Article 50 bill? And then you have the leader a decade ago calling for a referendum.

    I understand people change their minds but I think to the majority of folk the Lib Dems appear to only listen if they hear the answer they want from the public. Until this weekend their Brexit policy was another referendum although Swinson had said she wouldn't respect that vote if Leave won. it's all a bit silly.
  • DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    The Lib Dem policy has the merits of candour and clarity. We know that you stupid people voted to leave but we don’t care. We know better. And actually a good chunk of those that voted remain will do us just fine, thank you very much.

    It’s undemocratic and morally questionable but it might well work.

    Why is it undemocratic to put a policy in your manifesto and implement it if you win a majority?
    Because we were asked and we answered. That’s how democracy works.

    But the LDs can only get a majority if there is a democratic election and they win it.

  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 42,807
    edited September 2019
    The best approach would be to revoke first and have another referendum afterwards, one that isn’t advisory and triggers A50 automatically in the event of a leave result, and one based on a reasonably specific path to leave. (edit/ i.e. what Cammo should have done in the first place)

    The three years of chaos and national humiliation that leavers have inflicted upon us all trying to find a way to leave after the referendum vote is honour quite enough for its result.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 36,695
    edited September 2019
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    The Lib Dem policy has the merits of candour and clarity. We know that you stupid people voted to leave but we don’t care. We know better. And actually a good chunk of those that voted remain will do us just fine, thank you very much.

    It’s undemocratic and morally questionable but it might well work.

    Why is it undemocratic to put a policy in your manifesto and implement it if you win a majority?
    Because we were asked and we answered. That’s how democracy works.
    huh? Turnout for the 2017 GE was 4% lower than for the referendum. Not an egregious violation. Plus the way democracy works usually is via general elections.
  • Andy_CookeAndy_Cooke Posts: 4,461

    DavidL said:

    The Lib Dem policy has the merits of candour and clarity. We know that you stupid people voted to leave but we don’t care. We know better. And actually a good chunk of those that voted remain will do us just fine, thank you very much.

    It’s undemocratic and morally questionable but it might well work.

    Why is it undemocratic to put a policy in your manifesto and implement it if you win a majority?
    The argument would be that proposing explicitly overriding a majority vote on a single question with a plurality vote on a swathe of issues (which could, in a 4+ Party FPTP system, be as low as the high twenties) can look rather antidemocratic, especially for a party which has long decried plurality votes providing complete power and campaigned against such for over a century.

    Unlike many other policies, this one would be in the face of a very specific referendum result which has not yet been completely enacted. Thus throwing the democratic question into stark relief.

    Of course, one ironic positive is that for a Party who does maintain that plurality votes should provide complete power to challenge that makes them equally as hypocritical and antidemocratic (because they previously benefited from FPTP majorities on plurality votes).

    If this is a cunning ploy to highlight the need for electoral reform, then it's very well done.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    edited September 2019
    IanB2 said:

    The best approach would be to revoke first and have another referendum afterwards, one that isn’t advisory and triggers A50 automatically in the event of a leave result, and one based on a reasonably specific path to leave.

    The three years of chaos and national humiliation that leavers have inflicted upon us all trying to find a way to leave after the referendum vote is honour quite enough for its result.

    But then we will have all the referendums are only advisory shit all over again if it's a close result, you cant have non advisory referendums under our system. Plus a fresh 2 year negotiating period with the EU. Joyous.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 6,576
    Brom said:

    I genuinely don’t get the issue here. If the LibDems win a majority in a general election with Revoke in their manifesto then they will have the mandate to deliver. If they don’t, then they won’t.

    In a way I'd prefer revoke over a 2nd ref as a leaver so I understand their position. However Liberals have spent a number of years suggesting they understand and care for those communities who voted leave. To ignore the referendum suggests they have narrowed their base to the 25% of largely privileged people who see things only through the prism of stopping Brexit and will do absolutely nothing in power to try and help the so-called 'left behind'.
    There is a problem, which would get noticed here, that it is possible for something aroun d 35+% of the vote to give you a mandate to 'Remain' or whatever in a GE; whereas 49.9% of the vote doesn't give you such a mandate in a referendum.

    Having said that, the LDs are right to take this simple position, as there is only a tiny chance of them winning a majority (not zero but close) and if they did win a GE by some tidal wave of opinion shifting it would be so momentous that the notable nature of their promise would be lost in the general crush of remainers cashing in as the Establishment closes ranks around the new establishment.

  • The LibDem position is sound and rational. If they are elected to government that is literally the will of the people. The idea that they cannot seek election on that position because a vote in the past voted differently is absurd. We change government at elections because people change their minds. If we elect a LibDem government then people have changed their mind.

    Hardcore leavers hate this because many of them only ever voted the once and think their singular vote is more important than those of us who always vote. Wrong.
  • I genuinely don’t get the issue here. If the LibDems win a majority in a general election with Revoke in their manifesto then they will have the mandate to deliver. If they don’t, then they won’t.


    Quite. Too simple and logical for PB.
    The Tories stood on a mandate to leave in 2017, which apparently didn't count for very much. As the LDs would have told you then, it was a plurality of votes...
This discussion has been closed.