Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » There will be no second referendum whether Labour backs it or
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » There will be no second referendum whether Labour backs it or not
Brexit is not unlike Hurricane Florence. A huge amount of energy is being expended, mostly to destructive effect, dumping a load of output which is flooding out a great deal else, while not going anywhere fast.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1040709108008202242
If there is a Further Referendum, the hideous battle over what form that takes is a purely internal UK matter, devoid of any blame on the EU. It becomes Us v Us.
She is famously a Bloody Difficult Woman. She has said no to a Further Referendum. She would need to be removed to have that happen. And of the multiple reasons for calling a VONC, getting a new Conservatve leader who will deliver a Further Referendm is not one.
Edit: too slow! Good morning everyone.
She can't half pick 'em.
1) The PM has to want to do it.
2) Their party has to let them do it without stringing them up from a lamp-post
If those two conditions apply then the rest is doable: The PM would ask the other member states for an extension, which they'd almost definitely agree to. She'd also ask them and the Commission to agree that if the result was "remain" the UK could remain without joining the Euro or giving back Gibraltar or whatever, which they'd also almost definitely agree to.
I think a referendum would almost definitely be Remain vs Leave (with the deal, if there is one): After what happened to Cameron, no PM is going to voluntarily ask the voters if they want to do something the PM thinks is a terrible idea. The only reason they might hold one now is to undo the damage that was done last time a PM tried this.
The news last night included Thornberry's latest utterance. Apparently Labour is set to vote down any deal that doesn't include a free lapdance from Olivia Wilde for every voter, and they also oppose leaving with no deal.
Once you eliminate the obvious, whatever remains, however impossible, must be the truth.
No to any deal and no to no deal means that the only options remaining are, ahem, remaining and a referendum on such.
Thornberry and Nandy seem to be at odds. I wonder, do they even talk?
Minor edit point - is there a “Fear” missing after “Project” in “Remainers are still instinctively drawn to some form of Project rather than....” ?
Although Norway seems to get along fine with that. IIRC the last opinion poll there showed a small majority for their current arrangement, or at least no strong desire to join.
So maybe, when all the dust has settled, we’ll be happy with the same position. For a while at least.
But you do point to the dilemma for the Leave side if the PM comes out with a referendum on Remain vs Deal. If they denounce the deal as a traitorous betrayal, and the referendum as illegitimate, they risk their own side boycotting the thing, in which case they lose.
This in turn makes it a useful device for the PM: If she makes a deal and gets a substantial faction of the Tory party threatening to vote against it, she can go and talk to the LibDems and/or the SNP and/or Labour Centrists Dads and ask for *their* support... but she'd have to offer them something in return, like a second referendum. Think the ERG are feeling lucky?
But I cannot see any campaign to rejoin the EU as a whole prospering while third rate authoritarian imbeciles like Juncker and Selmayr have political standing within it, or while the possibility of membership of the Euro is open. It's going to be mighty difficulty even to rejoin the EEA once we'be left it in this fashion.
And I don't think that she would. Whenever it gets called, it will be the starting pistol for a new leader.
The rantings of the Nigel-devotee from Glenelg-south are less interesting.
The #peoplesvote campaign has several obstacles to get a parliamentary mandate, not least changing Labour party policy, then collapsing the May government, but these are worthwhile objectives in their own right.
The campaign has other value too, even if no further referendum takes place before Brexit:
1) It applies pressure on the government towards a softer EEA style Brexit, and we have seen how successful campaigns have been on the coirse of that rudderless ship of state.
2) It energises and gives focus to street level enthusiasm for European integration. Seeing several hundred thousand pro EU demonstrators on the streets of London is not something I have seen in my lifetime. There will be big demonstrations at the party conferences and in London on Oct 20th.
3) In the likely circumstances of no #peoplesvote, it sets up a powerful narrative of the government not trusting the people, and forcing an unpopular form of Brexit on the country. Every adverse consequence, real or imagined, can then be hung around the neck of the Brexiteers in the Tory party. "This is not the Brexit that we voted for".
4) Post Brexit, it gives a nucleus, membership and organising core for the Rejoin movement.
I was opposed to the vote until I saw the pathetic Chequers plan, and the June demonstrations, but now a supporter. A campaign to undermine and sabotage Brexit as far as possible is in the interest of the country.
You - as a so-called Lib Dem - would prefer a Labour anti-Semite as PM rather than May.
However, even if all your other points were true - and if it didn't have the considerable negative of further driving Leavers away from Remain by (rightly or wrongly) confirming them in their view that these people are anti-democratic and selfish - the fact that as David notes there simply isn't time for another referendum totally undermines its credibility.
But it seems like a highly risky move for the rest of the MPs, doesn't it? A lot of the same things that apply now would apply then, but even worse: They don't know who they'll get instead, the person they get may well be a bit mad, and until it's decided the voters are sitting there watching a leaderless Conservative Party arguing with itself, while businesses panic and the financial markets crash and fall off. Meanwhile the DUP could pull the plug at any moment, producing a new general election where they'll have to fight for their jobs under these not entirely auspicious circumstances.
By this point I think we're pretty deep into "TMay Or The Country Burns" territory.
If some leavers want to boycott a new referendum then it is up to them, but it is unknowable how many of those that voted Leave in 2016 wanted EFTA, Canada +, Chequers, WTO or any of the other myriad possibilities - or simply wanted to kick Cameron.
Many 2016 Leavers may have seen the problems ranging from the drop in the value of the pound and the UK's worsening economic performance to companies planning to relocate and simply changed their minds.
Edited extra bit: on that note, Ladbrokes has Ricciardo 6 for pole and 4.5 for the win. Not sure I buy that divergence, given the difficulty of overtaking and the atrocious reliability he's had recently. Over the course of the season (and it's been worse than the average recently) he's had 6 DNFs from 14 races.
https://www.independent.ie/business/brexit/government-puts-brexit-deal-ahead-of-bulletproof-guarantee-of-avoiding-hard-border-37318788.html
"Brexit sources say they recognise London won’t be able to sign off on the Border guarantee as it currently stands, and Ireland will face economic “catastrophe” if the UK leaves the EU with no deal.
“If we carry on the way we’re going, we’ll have no transition, no deal, just economic catastrophe,” said one source."
https://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/united-ireland-would-see-living-standards-in-republic-fall-by-15-1.3629748
If they want to torpedo Brexit they will have to do so without our help and face the consequences. No reason for Leave to make it easier by participating in another referendum.
Desperate efforts are being made by Brussels and Dublin to prevent the UK crashing out of the EU without a deal.
https://www.independent.ie/business/brexit/devastating-cliffedge-break-wouldnt-end-well-for-anyone-37318789.html
Who's a clever boy now, Mr Varadkar? Pity you scrapped the work Enda Kenny put in place...
https://www.rte.ie/news/2017/0119/846135-enda-kenny-davos/
Neither of these occurrences will aid the cause of remaining in the EU, as whomever replaces May will be more Europhobic, not less.
In his most upbeat assessment of negotiations scheduled to conclude at a leaders' summit on October 19, Mr Hogan said real fears that the UK would "crash out" without a deal, causing economic carnage, had receded...
"A deal is coming into shape. It is still true that no Brexit deal will be as good for everyone as UK membership has been. But given all the circumstances, red lines and so on, what is emerging is, I think, reasonable."
https://www.independent.ie/business/brexit/prospects-of-a-deal-growing-as-fears-of-crashout-diminish-37318791.html
The country is split down the middle on this flagship issue of a culture war I am not interested in surrendering to a nativist narrative.
https://twitter.com/EdConwaySky/status/1040866663267221504
Your last line is hilarious, and sounds like just the sort of bullshit that Corbyn and his fellow travellers would make.
As usual, those that advocate this start from the conclusion they want and work out a path (any path) back from that to where we are today, without thinking of much else.
A campaign based on “which part of Leave do you not understand?” would be much more effective at getting out those voters who just want the Government to get on with it and don’t understand why it’s taking so long.
If you're talking about what Leave supporters *should* do given their goals, it depends on whether they think they'll win or not. The side that thinks it's losing will often boycott a referendum - it's better to boycott one to lose it. But in this case the outcome wouldn't be that clear, so what Remain would be hoping for would be a boycott by 10% or 15% of Leave voters, which would give them a nice healthy margin but still be a fairly high total turnout. I think it's hard to see all the pro-Brexit people calling for a boycott, and even if they did not all the Leave supporters would follow them.
My guess is that the result will be decisive one way or another, much easier for those who lose to accept.The issue will then be decided one way or another, unlike the present mess.
The problem of what the question and options should be remains (ahem), as well as Parliamentary arithmetic.
Why would people who refuse to accept the result of one referendum that went against them suddenly accept the result of a second referendum that went against them?
This is why the ERG cannot give a proper plan, why all Farage can say is rubbish like: "everyone knows what Brexit means", or May the equally ludicrous "Brexit means Brexit."
And this is all down to the laziness of leavers; often the same ones who failed to achieve anything in two years in charge of departments. Idiots who cry about a plan, without being able to produce an alternative.
1) Cameron could've insisted on an 'official' Leave perspective ahead of calling a referendum.
2) May is ultimately responsible for the unholy cocktail of prevarication and capitulation that has characterised the negotiations to date. She undercut her [Leave] Brexit Secretary with a proposal that has drawn criticism from EU-sceptic Conservatives, pro-EU Conservatives, and the EU. That cannot be considered the fault of Leave generally or any Leave politician in particular.
The lack of will on the part of government, however, is, at least for now. That might conceivably change in the event of no deal (and the government might then not be in control of events anyway) but I’m expecting a deal.
Finally, public opinion hasn’t yet changed all that much. There are signs that it is ebbing away slowly from Leave but not quickly enough to merit a third referendum yet. Another 52:48 result either way would solve nothing.
JM "If we come out, we are out, that's it. Its not politically credible to go back and say, 'we've reconsidered lets have another referendum', if we vote to stay out, we are out and we'll have to get on with it"
PA " I will forgive no one who does not accept the sovereign voice of the British people once it has spoken whether it is by 1% or 20%"
NC "There will be some people who, like those Japanese soldiers who kept fighting the last war because no one had told them it had ended, in some pacific island, who carry on arguing and arguing... the rest of us will just move on, carry on with the rest of our lives"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6IpvkJaKJwY
Basically, you're saying Cameron should have done what leavers were too lazy to do, and something that would have actively helped leave.
On 2), May is in a fairly impossible situation; *whatever* decision her government makes will upset large parts of her government, party and the wider country. It might have been good if the leave ministers who have flounced out had produced a credible plan, or in fact done any effing work, in their two years in position. As they didn't, my sympathy for them is about as high as Corbyn's is for Israelis.
Good friend of Lord JohnO Of PB could be first in line to succeed Theresa when we're finally rid of her at this rate.
What we have now from Major, Clegg etc is the equivalent of Farage & Boris going round saying "We still think the EU is as shit as it was before the last referendum, let's have another one", had Remain won
We were all so innocent ...
"Basically, you're saying Cameron should have done what leavers were too lazy to do, and something that would have actively helped leave."
I think you're forgetting the practicalities of this. Leavers wanted a referendum on the EU in the manifesto. The Government were in charge of the timings and the actual question. Otherwise the question would have been "Do we leave and embrace freedom, or do we stay and fester as subservient nation?"
The Government - basically the cabinet fronted by the PM - arranged things and stopped the civil service doing their job, that of producing options to consider. You have to face that fact. Then having lost, he did a 'Brave Sir Robin' and he bravely turned his tail and fled.
To blame random leavers for not doing the Government's job is silly, and you're not generally silly. Should I, as a private citizen have taken it upon myself to produce a set of options because the Government not only failed but actively failed in its duty?
2) In pineapple an acceptable topping for pizza
3) Is FPTP superior to AV
4) Is Hannibal a superior general to Caesar
The correct answer to all of the above is no.
Nobody is saying that people cannot campaign for that.
But that's not what the second referendum supporters want is it.
‘A f***ing nightmare’ is just the male superlative version of ‘a bloody difficult woman’; it’s quite obviously a sincere compliment.
If, for example, the civil service had produced a paper that laid out the practical effects of leaving Euratom, Brexiteers would have cried Project fear and treachery.
It was not possible to produce a sensible plan for leaving then, or indeed now.
After all, the Catalonians have their defecating Christmas logs - there are some quite inexplicable Christmas traditions.
AV isn't proportional and was rejected by the UK voters in 2011.
Sultanas in curries is infinitely worse than pineapple on pizza.
Alexander ventured as far east as India, much further than either Hannibal or Caesar.
He saw Roxanne and he seized 'er.
What the second referendum supporters want is for the result to be blocked..
Which is totally different.
It is perfectly reasonable to say that people who were in that position had spent that time thinking through not just what they wanted, but what that would be and how to get it.
They didn't, and hadn't. Instead, they are Wile E Coyote the one time he caught Roadrunner: holding up a sign saying: "Now what do I do?"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soup_or_Sonic
It also would have been rather impossible - and pointless IMO - for the civil service to produce alternatives, as the reaction from leavers would have rendered them utterly pointless as they would have been dismissed before the referendum, meaning they'd have no force afterwards. Just go back and read threads on here pre-referendum.