Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Why Revoke is now very much on the table
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Why Revoke is now very much on the table
A zombie government will bring a zombie Withdrawal Agreement back to parliament next month, and in true zombie style, it will get bashed and still not really die. Ever since the first Meaningful Vote in January, when the government lost by well over 200 votes, Theresa May has been locked in a political vice where she couldn’t countenance No Deal, couldn’t accept No Brexit but couldn’t deliver any Brexit deal either – yet one of those three outcomes must ultimately conclude this phase of the process.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Zombie government is an apt description. An absolutely pathetic and sad, shuffling corpse of a government. And Boris attaching electrodes to its nipples wont do more than give it a jolt.
The man does not have a principled bone in his body.
I recall Ken tried that line on the basis the ambassador told him that.
It satisfies them, if no one else, but no one could accuse the Tories of being considerate Brexiters.
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.127103176
> Because they were doing just fine before the actually biting sanctions occurred were they?
Chavez' daughter has done very well for herself......
https://www.diariolasamericas.com/maria-gabriela-chavez-podria-ser-la-mujer-mas-rica-venezuela-n3265811
> The odds on the Australian government holding onto office have collapsed to 10/1.
>
> https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.127103176
Knifing moderate Prime Ministers and replacing them with right wing numpties not playing out well?
Colour me stunned....
> Tory policy will soon be little more than the Boris policy of meaningless but bombastic guff, and because it works with the Tory members that means the leadership contest will boil down to who can visibly orgasm the most while yelling 'Brexit!' at the top of their lungs.
Wouldn't surprise me in the least......hence Rory's poor polling....
This is Ashfield/Mansfield, so unusual local politics :-).
I’m not convinced the Betfair odds are generous.
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2019/05/27/the-teen-who-thwarted-bill-de-blasios-presidential-announcement
<i>”The following morning, Fleisher’s alarm went off at 5:55 a.m. He started writing his newsletter. “I’m Gabe Fleisher, reporting live from WUTP World HQ in my bedroom,” he typed. “It’s Thursday, May 16, 2019. 263 days until the 2020 Iowa caucuses. 537 days until Election Day 2020.” A few minutes later, de Blasio’s campaign video dropped, showing the Mayor being chauffeured around the city in a black S.U.V., to a soundtrack of horn-heavy jazz. Meanwhile, on “Good Morning America,” Stephanopoulos read de Blasio the results of a recent poll: seventy-six per cent of New York City voters felt that he shouldn’t run. Outside the studio, protesters—who, thanks to Fleisher, had got wind of the Mayor’s announcement the night before—began to gather. (De Blasio’s run has unified the city: that morning, protesters from the New York Police Department and the Black Lives Matter movement stood together, chanting “Liar!”)”</i>
Even Tulsi Gabbard has a rationale for running.
https://twitter.com/BenJames22/status/1129602837778845696
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/live/2019/may/18/australian-federal-election-2019-bill-shorten-scott-morrison-bob-hawke-polls-polling-vote-labor-coalition-liberals-australia-candidates-seats-odds-results-politics-live
Had been looking for it on their website, and notfound it.
What a hopelessly shoddy piece of work - so based on very current affairs that it will have a shelf-life of at best a couple of years.
This process lost credibility with me personally when the original set of "weekly occurrences of Islamophobia" from the MCB turned out to be dragged together from a whole decade of social media 'sharings' , and prompt action had generally been taken when the Tory Party became aware.
https://twitter.com/MuslimCouncil/status/1001914876992868352
> Guardian coverage of OZ Feds:
>
> https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/live/2019/may/18/australian-federal-election-2019-bill-shorten-scott-morrison-bob-hawke-polls-polling-vote-labor-coalition-liberals-australia-candidates-seats-odds-results-politics-live
Any website with actual numbers, rather than mind-numbing twitter-worthy posts?
Revocation would certainly be confirmation, were it needed, that we live in interesting times.
> Revoke woikd be awesome not just for this remainer but the ERG would self combust..
Revoke or No Deal? To me, this is sailing between Scylla and Charybdis. I'm not sure on which we founder but either way there seems to be a certain inevitabiity about it.
> Revoke and then what?
Years of quarreling over the EU.
Plus ca change....
> Revoke and then what?
That is precisely the question. It would do nothing to fix the glaring gulf that currently divides out politics, and risks dividing segments of our society.
Saw a glimpse of the Clash of the Titans remake. Two chaps fighting some pixels. Rather lacked the charm of the Harryhausen classic.
> Thanks to whoever posted the "Islamophobia" 'working' 'definition'. Unable to find the post now.
>
> Had been looking for it on their website, and notfound it.
>
> What a hopelessly shoddy piece of work - so based on very current affairs that it will have a shelf-life of at best a couple of years.
>
> This process lost credibility with me personally when the original set of "weekly occurrences of Islamophobia" from the MCB turned out to be dragged together from a whole decade of social media 'sharings' , and prompt action had generally been taken when the Tory Party became aware.
>
> https://twitter.com/MuslimCouncil/status/1001914876992868352
Whilst I agree that the definition is pants, I do think the Conservatives should have an inquiry into such a matter. If they're reasonably clean (as I think they are), then a fair inquiry will show it - and where there are problems, it will give pointers on where and how to how to improve.
To do otherwise risks slipping and sliding into the morass: the same sort of thinking that Labour's fallen into. "Of course we're clean; we've been anti-Racist all our lives! It's just that the Jews, I mean Israel, are absolutely horrible. Think of all those lovely fireworks the Palestinians keep firing at them, to order to brighten up their day!"
(The fact a Labour supporter could call Hamas' and Palestinian rockets 'fireworks' shows how far down the self-delusional rabbit-hole they have descended.)
> > @SquareRoot said:
> > Revoke woikd be awesome not just for this remainer but the ERG would self combust..
>
> Revoke or No Deal? To me, this is sailing between Scylla and Charybdis. I'm not sure on which we founder but either way there seems to be a certain inevitabiity about it.
Adrift might be more accurate. Sailing implies purpose.
I'm bored with Brexit, but it has achieved something positive. It's shown up MPs for what they are. Self-serving liars.
Manifestos are irrelevant, to be forgotten at will. The voters' verdict is to be ignored by these paragons of virtue who know better. Purely by virtue of being chosen from a selection of two candidates who toe the party line, and have all the faults of MPs (see above).
I was talking to one Brexit voter who is an avid Corbyn fan and he's decided to vote for Labour? Why? Because he's frightened the Labour party could have a spectacularly bad result in the Euros.
A revoke? It would solve one problem but reinforce the anti-democratic reputation of whoever did it.
> > @twistedfirestopper3 said:
> > Revoke and then what?
>
> That is precisely the question. It would do nothing to fix the glaring gulf that currently divides out politics, and risks dividing segments of our society.
We were divided 52:48 three years ago, now it's probably the other way round and more than 4%. So after Revoke we would still be divided but the economy would be in better shape than the alternative and we would be slightly less divided than the alternative. What should be done is the government should address the concerns of the areas that we're put in the position of thinking they had nothing to lose by voting Leave.
Brexit would be like the one night stand you hope your other half never finds out about.
> My main worry about Boris (among many) is he'd "see his place in History" by "standing shoulder to shoulder" with Trump in an Iran war. One of Harold Wilson's oft overlooked strengths was his repeated refusals to LBJ to join in Vietnam....especially if Macron joins in....
Yes, agree about Harold Wilson.
This time lapse is entirely possible, as long as while lots of people speak boldly of 'No Deal' no one is going to be willing to be the one responsible for actually doing it. and they won't. Not parliament, not government, not Boris, not Raab etc and not the EU.
Revoke is the more likely outcome now for these reasons.
> > @twistedfirestopper3 said:
> > Revoke and then what?
>
> That is precisely the question. It would do nothing to fix the glaring gulf that currently divides out politics, and risks dividing segments of our society.
So nothing worse than Brexit itself?
> Australian Federal Election under way. Former PM relearns about never working with children or animals.....
>
> https://twitter.com/BenJames22/status/1129602837778845696
Weird day. I'm agreeing with Carlotta about everything!
> > @JosiasJessop said:
> > > @twistedfirestopper3 said:
> > > Revoke and then what?
> >
> > That is precisely the question. It would do nothing to fix the glaring gulf that currently divides out politics, and risks dividing segments of our society.
>
> We were divided 52:48 three years ago, now it's probably the other way round and more than 4%. So after Revoke we would still be divided but the economy would be in better shape than the alternative and we would be slightly less divided than the alternative. What should be done is the government should address the concerns of the areas that we're put in the position of thinking they had nothing to lose by voting Leave.
I voted remain. I would vote remain in a second referendum (although I'd caveat that by saying it would depend on the individual question and options being sensible). However I think public opinion has not shifted as much as you think, and that a second referendum with sensible options would lead to another leave result - and perhaps by a larger margin.
Why?
Because:
*) Much if Brexit is not about fact, but about emotion, and the 'betrayal' narrative will be strong.
*) Remainers have been doing lots of howling, but making f'all effort to actually sell the good the EU does.
*) People will not like being asked the 'same' question twice, even though the original referendum was flawed and parliament has been proven to be incompetent.
> Mr. Punter, what I liked about that choice was that Scylla would definitely kill six of the crew, but Charybdis could destroy everyone (or you might survive entirely).
>
> Saw a glimpse of the Clash of the Titans remake. Two chaps fighting some pixels. Rather lacked the charm of the Harryhausen classic.
There is a start trek episode where one guy is black one side and white the other snd the other guy is the obverse. They end up fighting each other for eternity even tho their worlds have been destroyed..
> > @Morris_Dancer said:
> > Mr. Punter, what I liked about that choice was that Scylla would definitely kill six of the crew, but Charybdis could destroy everyone (or you might survive entirely).
> >
> > Saw a glimpse of the Clash of the Titans remake. Two chaps fighting some pixels. Rather lacked the charm of the Harryhausen classic.
>
> There is a start trek episode where one guy is black one side and white the other snd the other guy is the obverse. They end up fighting each other for eternity even tho their worlds have been destroyed..
I think its called the last battlefield
The only candidates 'above the Clinton line' are Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders, Kamala Harris, Pete Buttigieg, Elizabeth Warren, Beto O'Rourke, Andrew Yang, Tulsi Gabbard, Amy Klobuchar, and Cory Booker.
> > @logical_song said:
> > > @JosiasJessop said:
> > > > @twistedfirestopper3 said:
> > > > Revoke and then what?
> > >
> > > That is precisely the question. It would do nothing to fix the glaring gulf that currently divides out politics, and risks dividing segments of our society.
> >
> > We were divided 52:48 three years ago, now it's probably the other way round and more than 4%. So after Revoke we would still be divided but the economy would be in better shape than the alternative and we would be slightly less divided than the alternative. What should be done is the government should address the concerns of the areas that we're put in the position of thinking they had nothing to lose by voting Leave.
>
> I voted remain. I would vote remain in a second referendum (although I'd caveat that by saying it would depend on the individual question and options being sensible). However I think public opinion has not shifted as much as you think, and that a second referendum with sensible options would lead to another leave result - and perhaps by a larger margin.
>
> Why?
>
> Because:
> *) Much if Brexit is not about fact, but about emotion, and the 'betrayal' narrative will be strong.
> *) Remainers have been doing lots of howling, but making f'all effort to actually sell the good the EU does.
> *) People will not like being asked the 'same' question twice, even though the original referendum was flawed and parliament has been proven to be incompetent.
I agree with a lot of what you say, but the question was about Revoke.
> Revoke and then what?
>
> Then we never talk about Brexit ever again.
>
> Brexit would be like the one night stand you hope your other half never finds out about.
Any Eurovision related thoughts?
I rather like Norway and Denmark for a e/w, likely to benefit from the Scandinavian block vote.
San Marino would be fun, if only to see if the village hall is big enough to stage next years contest.
> Mr. Punter, what I liked about that choice was that Scylla would definitely kill six of the crew, but Charybdis could destroy everyone (or you might survive entirely).
>
> Saw a glimpse of the Clash of the Titans remake. Two chaps fighting some pixels. Rather lacked the charm of the Harryhausen classic.
Yes, I agree - especially if you could nominate the six to go. Let me see now....Boris, Jacob, Michael, Andrea....
Agree even more about Clash. Harryhausen was a genius.
I didn’t watch any of the semi finals this week.
Didn’t have the time.
> > @JosiasJessop said:
> > > @logical_song said:
> > > > @JosiasJessop said:
> > > > > @twistedfirestopper3 said:
> > > > > Revoke and then what?
> > > >
> > > > That is precisely the question. It would do nothing to fix the glaring gulf that currently divides out politics, and risks dividing segments of our society.
> > >
> > > We were divided 52:48 three years ago, now it's probably the other way round and more than 4%. So after Revoke we would still be divided but the economy would be in better shape than the alternative and we would be slightly less divided than the alternative. What should be done is the government should address the concerns of the areas that we're put in the position of thinking they had nothing to lose by voting Leave.
> >
> > I voted remain. I would vote remain in a second referendum (although I'd caveat that by saying it would depend on the individual question and options being sensible). However I think public opinion has not shifted as much as you think, and that a second referendum with sensible options would lead to another leave result - and perhaps by a larger margin.
> >
> > Why?
> >
> > Because:
> > *) Much if Brexit is not about fact, but about emotion, and the 'betrayal' narrative will be strong.
> > *) Remainers have been doing lots of howling, but making f'all effort to actually sell the good the EU does.
> > *) People will not like being asked the 'same' question twice, even though the original referendum was flawed and parliament has been proven to be incompetent.
>
> I agree with a lot of what you say, but the question was about Revoke.
Ahem. Yes.
I think the points still remain: revoke's a non-starter without a referendum because the public mood will not be with it.
The EU elections will show that while the notion of the EU appeals to european electorates, the reality results in them electing ever increasing numbers of politicians opposed to either immigration, integration, further expansion or eurozone austerity.
There may be the odd electorate that differs from this norm but most of the bigger electorates, are now at the point where the doubts have eaten away at their enthusiasm and belief.
> Revoke and then what?
>
> As you were , and lots of whining
>
> Is that a general rule we should apply whenever there's a referendum result that the powers that be don't like Malc? Asking for a friend.
It's not just that the powers-that-be don't like it; it's the fact that leave won by promising incompatible things to different groups of people. That's why, even after winning, leavers cannot agree the way forward.
I'd have a lot more time for your argument if the main leavers were all on-side with May's deal. But they're as split as the country.
It's a tragedy for the country that May's deal offers an (IMO) reasonable way of bodging the two leave offers, but many leavers won't accept it.
They're real, stinking winnets.
There is plenty of blame to spread around for the current mess, and sadly much of it lies with leavers and Brexiteers as well as May, her government, remainers, Labour, etc.
Mr. Punter, I agree, and would add that modern films seem to overuse CGI. I don't want match, but it seems in some cases to be detrimental.
Consider the Indiana Jones films. I suspect the Crystal Skull will age the worst, because the first three used practical effects, whereas Crystal Skull relied on CGI. Even when I first saw it, the car chase scene graphics look very obviously fake.
....
I think I have the answer. Make both front benches fight a gorgon. Whoever wins, becomes PM. If all get turned to stone, the country will somehow have to muddle through without the likes of May or Corbyn...
> > @TheScreamingEagles said:
>
> > Revoke and then what?
>
> >
>
> > Then we never talk about Brexit ever again.
>
> >
>
> > Brexit would be like the one night stand you hope your other half never finds out about.
>
>
>
> Any Eurovision related thoughts?
>
>
>
> I rather like Norway and Denmark for a e/w, likely to benefit from the Scandinavian block vote.
>
>
>
> San Marino would be fun, if only to see if the village hall is big enough to stage next years contest.
>
> Eurovision is hard to call since they changed the voting system. Is just easy to lay Le Royaume-Uni.
>
> I didn’t watch any of the semi finals this week.
>
> Didn’t have the time.
The new voting system is why my punts are e/w or top 10 placings, though skybet has some interesting requestabet specials.
> Mr. Root, I think I remember that episode.
>
> Mr. Punter, I agree, and would add that modern films seem to overuse CGI. I don't want match, but it seems in some cases to be detrimental.
>
> Consider the Indiana Jones films. I suspect the Crystal Skull will age the worst, because the first three used practical effects, whereas Crystal Skull relied on CGI. Even when I first saw it, the car chase scene graphics look very obviously fake.
>
> ....
>
> I think I have the answer. Make both front benches fight a gorgon. Whoever wins, becomes PM. If all get turned to stone, the country will somehow have to muddle through without the likes of May or Corbyn...
Hasn’t this already happened? Would explain much.
With chaos going on the public mood might change sufficiently. Revoke is really the nuclear option and to be avoided if at all possible.
I support a second vote , this whole sorry episode in the UK history started with a ref and if it’s going to be stopped really has to do so with another one.
But the MPs who want that need to recognise they have to pass something to achieve that end. Faintly hoping for it whilst voting down everything and voting for meaningless nothings ('we don't want no deal' doesn't mean anything by itself) doesn't do a damned thing.
If the Commons votes to revoke Article 50 without even another referendum however Farage will not believe his luck!
"Just stop banging on about it" is the sentiment of a lot of people who aren't noisy fringe types.
Mr. HYUFD, that's the main question. Another, related, is would there be time (or a mini-extension to allow it) for a referendum?
> https://twitter.com/BBCNews/status/1129576982637883392
>
>
>
> I think he means risks killing the Tory party, but didn’t feel it sounded very good.
The last election killed Brexit - that was obvious at 10pm on the night.
> Australian Federal Election under way. Former PM relearns about never working with children or animals.....
>
> https://twitter.com/BenJames22/status/1129602837778845696
Polls close in Australia in 40 minutes, election coverage started on ABC
https://www.abc.net.au/news/newschannel/
Much like the way YES was robbed in 2014 and the whining continues, I will whine till the next one gives us independence. I am certain it will not be all sweetness and light down south regardless of what may is chosen, there will be almost half pissed off either way, same as Scotland and it will need to be done again at some point.
> Revoke and then what?
>
> As you were , and lots of whining
>
> Is that a general rule we should apply whenever there's a referendum result that the powers that be don't like Malc? Asking for a friend.
>
> I am merely answering the question that was asked, if revoked it will be as you were and years of whining.
> Much like the way YES was robbed in 2014 and the whining continues, I will whine till the next one gives us independence. I am certain it will not be all sweetness and light down south regardless of what may is chosen, there will be almost half pissed off either way, same as Scotland and it will need to be done again at some point.
Not quite the same though, the equivalent is Yes winning in 2014 52% to 48% for No and Westminster refusing to recognise and implement the Yes to independence vote
> Mr. Jonathan, inertia might be something that's underestimated.
>
> "Just stop banging on about it" is the sentiment of a lot of people who aren't noisy fringe types.
>
> Mr. HYUFD, that's the main question. Another, related, is would there be time (or a mini-extension to allow it) for a referendum?
By October there would not be time for another referendum no, it would be revoke or no deal and the current Commons would likely vote for the former
Not really, it’s like Yes winning, but having no plan or agreement on what Yes means, spending three years arguing and then blaming everyone else for not solving their problems for them.
> > @malcolmg said:
>
> > Revoke and then what?
>
> >
>
> > As you were , and lots of whining
>
> >
>
> > Is that a general rule we should apply whenever there's a referendum result that the powers that be don't like Malc? Asking for a friend.
>
> >
>
> > I am merely answering the question that was asked, if revoked it will be as you were and years of whining.
>
> > Much like the way YES was robbed in 2014 and the whining continues, I will whine till the next one gives us independence. I am certain it will not be all sweetness and light down south regardless of what may is chosen, there will be almost half pissed off either way, same as Scotland and it will need to be done again at some point.
>
> Not quite the same though, the equivalent is Yes winning in 2014 52% to 48% for No and Westminster refusing to recognise and implement the Yes to independence vote
>
> It was a very close referendum and as I say almost half will not be happy regardless of which way they go. England is F****d for many years.
Referendums are often very divisive unless one side wins comfortably but you still should respect the result of them however close they are
>
> > Not quite the same though, the equivalent is Yes winning in 2014 52% to 48% for No and Westminster refusing to recognise and implement the Yes to independence vote
>
> Not really, it’s like Yes winning, but having no plan or agreement on what Yes means, spending three years arguing and then blaming everyone else for not solving their problems for them.
>
>
Which, of course, probably wouldn't have happened since there was a huge prospectus published long before that referendum. Opinions naturally differ on the quality of that plan,but a plan there was.
> > @Jonathan said:
> >
> > > Not quite the same though, the equivalent is Yes winning in 2014 52% to 48% for No and Westminster refusing to recognise and implement the Yes to independence vote
> >
> > Not really, it’s like Yes winning, but having no plan or agreement on what Yes means, spending three years arguing and then blaming everyone else for not solving their problems for them.
> >
> >
>
> Which, of course, probably wouldn't have happened since there was a huge prospectus published long before that referendum. Opinions naturally differ on the quality of that plan,but a plan there was.
Divisions within Yes would soon have emerged on the closeness of the relationship they wanted with the rUK exactly as they have within Leave on the relationship with the EU and of course some SNP voters even voted to leave the EU.
Plenty of Leavers produced detailed summaries of how Brexit would work but Westminster has refused to even implement Brexit so discussions on the future relationship can even properly begin
> > @Morris_Dancer said:
>
> > Mr. Jonathan, inertia might be something that's underestimated.
>
> >
>
> > "Just stop banging on about it" is the sentiment of a lot of people who aren't noisy fringe types.
>
> >
>
> > Mr. HYUFD, that's the main question. Another, related, is would there be time (or a mini-extension to allow it) for a referendum?
>
>
>
> By October there would not be time for another referendum no, it would be revoke or no deal and the current Commons would likely vote for the former
>
> Can we be not be further extensions from October? And why not? There may be a good reason, it all gets a bit confusing, but I don't know what it is.
We can but only if Macron does not veto further extensions and he originally wanted extension no further than June, October was a compromise between Macron and the rest of the EU who wanted to extend until early next year
https://twitter.com/bbcnewsnight/status/1129455332110086144?s=21
> As a Remainer the thought of revoke is very worrying . I think the only way that happens is if there’s such chaos going on outside of parliament . Say no deal can’t be stopped because the PM refuses to ask for an extension. or one isn’t granted , the pound collapses , people start panic buying , businesses start packing up and leaving big time .
>
> With chaos going on the public mood might change sufficiently. Revoke is really the nuclear option and to be avoided if at all possible.
>
> I support a second vote , this whole sorry episode in the UK history started with a ref and if it’s going to be stopped really has to do so with another one.
I think revoke would be presented as buying time, we clearly have no agreed plan for leave, no deal would be a disaster so let's put the whole thing on hold for a few years while we get our act together. In practice of course it's very unlikely that parliament would agree to invoke again later, but that will only become clear over time.
But I agree with you, it's a risky strategy and a second vote, much as I hate the idea, is probably the only realistic way forward. But it must be made clear in advance what version of "Leave" we are voting on.
It comes down whether we want to deal with the mess or face up to Farage, who will exploit any No Deal or Vassal State outcomes anyway.
We are all in denial.
It is not just the UK it's affecting either, it's the EU.
Brexit is festering like a open wound within an EU that has the parties of conservative reform, national freedoms and direct democracy likely to make advances almost across the board in the next week or so.
The electorate are fed up with both a failure to deliver and the general lack of gumption on display in our skewed parliament.
> > @Jonathan said:
> >
> > > Not quite the same though, the equivalent is Yes winning in 2014 52% to 48% for No and Westminster refusing to recognise and implement the Yes to independence vote
> >
> > Not really, it’s like Yes winning, but having no plan or agreement on what Yes means, spending three years arguing and then blaming everyone else for not solving their problems for them.
> >
> >
>
> Which, of course, probably wouldn't have happened since there was a huge prospectus published long before that referendum. Opinions naturally differ on the quality of that plan,but a plan there was.
The Brexiteers learnt from Sindyref the importance of not having a plan, so as to keep the widest spectrum of voters. It works, but then gives the mess that we are in now.
The German satirists had it right in January:
https://youtu.be/cH0jvLbVrNw
> > @malcolmg said:
> > > @malcolmg said:
> > > Much like the way YES was robbed in 2014 and the whining continues, I will whine till the next one gives us independence. I am certain it will not be all sweetness and light down south regardless of what may is chosen, there will be almost half pissed off either way, same as Scotland and it will need to be done again at some point.
> >
> > Not quite the same though, the equivalent is Yes winning in 2014 52% to 48% for No and Westminster refusing to recognise and implement the Yes to independence vote
> >
> > It was a very close referendum and as I say almost half will not be happy regardless of which way they go. England is F****d for many years.
>
> Referendums are often very divisive unless one side wins comfortably but you still should respect the result of them however close they are
Not when the Tories "win" by cheating. They overlooked the fact that seeming to win is one thing, and getting acceptance for that result is quite another.
> > @HYUFD said:
> > > @malcolmg said:
> > > > @malcolmg said:
> > > > Much like the way YES was robbed in 2014 and the whining continues, I will whine till the next one gives us independence. I am certain it will not be all sweetness and light down south regardless of what may is chosen, there will be almost half pissed off either way, same as Scotland and it will need to be done again at some point.
> > >
> > > Not quite the same though, the equivalent is Yes winning in 2014 52% to 48% for No and Westminster refusing to recognise and implement the Yes to independence vote
> > >
> > > It was a very close referendum and as I say almost half will not be happy regardless of which way they go. England is F****d for many years.
> >
> > Referendums are often very divisive unless one side wins comfortably but you still should respect the result of them however close they are
>
> Not when the Tories "win" by cheating. They overlooked the fact that seeming to win is one thing, and getting acceptance for that result is quite another.
It was technically Leave who won not the Tories, many Tories including myself voted Remain, a number of Labour voters voted Leave. Remain of course had government funded leaflets saying the benefits of staying in the EU
How do you propose they do that, Kier?
And how about if the Tories were talking about future-proofing against an incoming Labour Govt.? Preventing nationalisations for example?
What an idiot.
The BXP show the numbers of people who find leaving the EU a big deal.
If revoke is implemented then;-
Cons will not get a majority for years - and don't rely on the propaganda of Brexit being a right wing party. If and it's a big if they can keep Claire Fox and others then it will be more a party of individual rights and will not necessarily support Tories in a coalition. To me it could be more akin to the historic Liberal Party?
Labour have a different problem. If the Brexit Party can be anywhere near relevant for the northern working classes then Labour could end up becoming much more a chattering class party of navel gazers. This then leaves them competing more directly with Liberal Democrats and Greens and with minimal automatic votes to count on.
Hoping the issue will go away is a pipe dream. The EU will continue integrating and will not allow us to keep holding them back - for the next twenty years at least, with each new treaty more people will say enough is enough.
I don't believe that the Brexit Party will quite pull off all that they hope, but unless a pretty hard Brexit is now achieved they will need to be factored in to any hopes of winning a GE.
> Brexit is a huge mess that merely gets embedded in if we do pass the Withdrawal Agreement . There seems little appetite for a damage limited Brexit consisting of May's Deal plus permanent negotiations/non stop concessions to the EU. No Deal just turns a highly damaging Brexit into a catastrophic one and we will end up in the EU or "Vassal State" anyway.
>
> It comes down whether we want to deal with the mess or face up to Farage, who will exploit any No Deal or Vassal State outcomes anyway.
>
> We are all in denial.
As are Remainers who ignore the risks of a Farage premiership and the Brexit Party winning the next general election if they revoke Article 50 and cancel Brexit
> The electorate are fed up with both a failure to deliver and the general lack of gumption on display in our skewed parliament.
The electorate are fed up with the parliament it elected less than 2 years ago?
I mean, yes. Perhaps the blame lies with the electorate this time.
First results due shortly, full coverage on ABC here
https://www.abc.net.au/news/newschannel/
> Can we be not be further extensions from October? And why not? There may be a good reason, it all gets a bit confusing, but I don't know what it is.
Yes, but the (IMO perfectly reasonable) EU position is that they are tired of this soap opera, and they will only give an extension if it'll be used for something quite specific. They agreed to the extension till October on the basis that May promised that we'd really get on with it, get a bipartisan deal or whatever. She then sent Parliament off on a long holiday, after which desultory talks resumed with no expectation of success.
The EU likes Britain, by and large. They wish us well. They even wish we'd Revoke. But really they want us to stop pissing about indefinitely. An extension in October because there'a new PM and a referendum or an election imminent, OK. An extension to explore what might maybe done? NON.
> Sir Kier Starmer on Today, saying "I'm not going to play the blame game....but the Government wouldn't future-proof any deal."
>
> How do you propose they do that, Kier?
>
> And how about if the Tories were talking about future-proofing against an incoming Labour Govt.? Preventing nationalisations for example?
>
> What an idiot.
I stopped reading at "Sir".
> Sir Kier Starmer on Today, saying "I'm not going to play the blame game....but the Government wouldn't future-proof any deal."
>
> How do you propose they do that, Kier?
>
> And how about if the Tories were talking about future-proofing against an incoming Labour Govt.? Preventing nationalisations for example?
>
> What an idiot.
Future proofing is easy. Just hold and win a referendum. Then however mad the idea, future generations are obliged to implement it.
> Plenty of Leavers produced {mutually contradictory} summaries of how Brexit would work but Westminster {including leavers} has refused to even implement Brexit so discussions on the future relationship can even properly begin {because they don't agree even on the basics, which is exactly the point}
^ made my comments inline. I'm happy that we are reasonably aligned in this.
> Not convinced that either Con or Lab do well long term if revoke happens.
> The BXP show the numbers of people who find leaving the EU a big deal.
> If revoke is implemented then;-
> Cons will not get a majority for years - and don't rely on the propaganda of Brexit being a right wing party. If and it's a big if they can keep Claire Fox and others then it will be more a party of individual rights and will not necessarily support Tories in a coalition. To me it could be more akin to the historic Liberal Party?
> Labour have a different problem. If the Brexit Party can be anywhere near relevant for the northern working classes then Labour could end up becoming much more a chattering class party of navel gazers. This then leaves them competing more directly with Liberal Democrats and Greens and with minimal automatic votes to count on.
> Hoping the issue will go away is a pipe dream. The EU will continue integrating and will not allow us to keep holding them back - for the next twenty years at least, with each new treaty more people will say enough is enough.
> I don't believe that the Brexit Party will quite pull off all that they hope, but unless a pretty hard Brexit is now achieved they will need to be factored in to any hopes of winning a GE.
Claire Fox is no longer left wing, despite her pro-terrorist Revolutionary Communist Party roots. Interestingly, the Brexit Party includes a number of these other former RCP members, but they do seem to have changed their views according to what Moscow wants:
https://twitter.com/foxinsoxuk/status/1128429129433526272?s=19
Though to be fair, as the BP has published no manifesto or policy other than WTO Brexit, we really do not know if it is a left or right wing party. Currently they are thriving on ambiguity.
>
> As are Remainers who ignore the risks of a Farage premiership and the Brexit Party winning the next general election if they revoke Article 50 and cancel Brexit
>
------
Passing the deal would not only help Farage to win, but it would help him stay in power afterwards because he'd be no longer be on the hook for implementing No Deal.
"We are all in denial".
> As are Remainers who ignore the risks of a Farage premiership and the Brexit Party winning the next general election if they revoke Article 50 and cancel Brexit
If we're going to have Brexit I'd rather it was implemented by a Farage government than a Tory government: At least he's closely enough identified with the whole thing that when the thing fails most of the people who voted for it will be able to see that thing failed.
If the Tories do it the Faragists will just blame the failure on Remainers and insist that it requires something even more extreme, and either we'll end up with the Faragist government anyhow or the Tories will keep chasing after ever-more-extreme levels of Faragism.