Brexit: give me a positive effect... V

[Brian]

It’s a bit more complicated than that, I think, though. It required a certain amount of tactical voting, and the Lib Dems didn’t make that any easier by their anti-Labour positioning. All the Tories needed to do was fragment the opposition. It’s a bit unfair to put the blame on the voters, faced with several options, when really it should have been for the pro-remain parties to put up a coherent front which people could have got behind. I think, had that happened, the outcome might have looked different. We’ll never know, so speculation is a bit pointless, but my main point is that it’s not right to blame the voters when the pro-remain parties all spectacularly fail to offer something they can work with.

That’s what I meant in my last post when I said, “why didn’t they organise themselves to actually do something?”. The tories/brexit party managed to do just that, remain supporting parties failed badly. If the leaders of SNP, LibDem, Plaid and others are as good as some say, why did they not get realistic about the situation? Only 2 parties can win a GE in the UK, they must know that. Instead, all we had was bickering and outright laughable shite from Swinson. After listening to her, how anyone voted LibDem other than on tactical grounds is a mystery to me. Why the party ever voted her as leader is another mystery.

Without analysing the results as I CBA, I believe Labour lost out on a lot of seats by a relatively small number, there could have been a major difference with a strategy from the remain parties.

In the end though, because these pro-remain parties couldn’t agree a strategy it was down to the voters to do what they considered best for stopping brexit if that was their motivation. Did LibDem supporters really believe they would win the GE outright and get to revoke A50? I doubt it. Did SNP and Plaid voters think their vote was going to help Labour win and get a second referendum? I doubt that too.

Everyone surely knew Labour was the only chance of stopping the tories.

Sadly this.

You’ve changed your mind then? Earlier it was all down to just the leave voters. Someone other than me recognises an issue existed beyond the simplicity of just leave voters and you give it the thumbs up.

History isn’t going to show Brexit was all down to 17.2m who voted leave.

 

[Colin Barron]

The problem with Labour’s rather last minute 2nd referendum commitment was not the message, it was the messenger. After 4 years of Corbyn fog (apart from his immediate call to trigger Article 50), hardly anyone believed anything he said by the time the general election rolled around. It’s all a bit academic anyway as there is no equivalence between a general election and a referendum. Brexit (in all its forms) was really done and dusted in 2016 - "Brexit Means Brexit", etc.

The equivalence of the 2019 general election and a referendum was that the GE removed many of the remainers from Westminster, and removed all talk of 2nd ref or just forgetting the referendum took place. I suppose in one way you may be correct in that a 2nd ref may have resulted in calls for a 3rd ref if the electorate gave the wrong answer again.

 

[Brian]

Out Parliamentary democracy has embedded in it the concept of a ‘loyal opposition’. The idea being to test and challenge the proposals of the elected government, to improve them and also to give a voice to those who didn’t vote for the party of government.

Essentially, then, it is a cornerstone of UK parliamentary politics that dissent gets a voice, and the ‘losing’ side doesn’t just roll over and support the winning side in everything it proposes.

Why should it be different for the post-referendum issues and proposals for Brexit?

Those who argue that remainers should just suck it up, and stfu, ‘because democracy’ seem not to understand how our democracy is supposed to work.

It shouldn’t be different and isn’t.

I haven’t seen many (if any) posts here telling remain supporters to stfu.

 

[tonerei]

It is fairly obvious that all the opposition parties failed to grasp the nettle and come to an agreed arrangement on tactical voting. Lots of people in all those parties are to blame. That was last chance saloon. But they couldn't rise to that challenge. I don't think it was ever even flown as an idea. Labour tried to straddle the fence more than likely because it knew a big chunk of their vote were leavers.

Any Tory MP who went over to the remain side were trounced at the ballot box. Which brings it neatly back to the electorate who voted in enough numbers for Brexit Tory party which they would have been aware was led by the ERG. Labour areas (Red wall) voted Tory or deserted Labour and hey presto the UK got the result it voted for.

Is that all you want remain people to admit to? If so can somebody who supports hard Brexit or Brexit list off all the benefits just around the corner?

That’s what I meant in my last post when I said, “why didn’t they organise themselves to actually do something?”. The tories/brexit party managed to do just that, remain supporting parties failed badly. If the leaders of SNP, LibDem, Plaid and others are as good as some say, why did they not get realistic about the situation? Only 2 parties can win a GE in the UK, they must know that. Instead, all we had was bickering and outright laughable shite from Swinson. After listening to her, how anyone voted LibDem other than on tactical grounds is a mystery to me. Why the party ever voted her as leader is another mystery.

Without analysing the results as I CBA, I believe Labour lost out on a lot of seats by a relatively small number, there could have been a major difference with a strategy from the remain parties.

In the end though, because these pro-remain parties couldn’t agree a strategy it was down to the voters to do what they considered best for stopping brexit if that was their motivation. Did LibDem supporters really believe they would win the GE outright and get to revoke A50? I doubt it. Did SNP and Plaid voters think their vote was going to help Labour win and get a second referendum? I doubt that too.

Everyone surely knew Labour was the only chance of stopping the tories.


You’ve changed your mind then? Earlier it was all down to just the leave voters. Someone other than me recognises an issue existed beyond the simplicity of just leave voters and you give it the thumbs up.

History isn’t going to show Brexit was all down to 17.2m who voted leave.

 

[Brian]

Did Labour unequivocally offer a second ref, or was it contingent on something else ("if the Tories don't get a good deal" or something)? I don't remember it being a feature of their 2019 GE campaigning.

No, Labour offered a second referendum.

They would themselves negotiate a deal, then offer it to a confirmatory referendum, IIRC.
Whether cancelling the whole brexshithouse would be on the table in that referendum was assigned constructive ambiguity level 10.
Quite a good fudge, but unfortunately arrived at about three years too late. Years of fence sitting and magic grandpa open goal misses had poisoned the well.

Wrong.

OK, so hardly a nailed down, clear cut way to stop Brexit.

No, it was well nailed down.

Are you starting to see why there is more to this than 17.2m leave voters versus 16.1m remain voters in a single referendum?

 

[Sue Pertwee-Tyr]

It shouldn’t be different and isn’t.

I haven’t seen many (if any) posts here telling remain supporters to stfu.

I think the most commonly expressed phrase, here and just about everywhere else, was something like ‘you lost, gerroverit’. So, a tad politer than stfu, but the sentiment isn’t a hair’s breadth removed, is it?

 

[Brian]

It is fairly obvious that all the opposition parties failed to grasp the nettle and come to an agreed arrangement on tactical voting. Lots of people in all those parties are to blame. That was last chance saloon. But they couldn't rise to that challenge. I don't think it was ever even flown as an idea. Labour tried to straddle the fence more than likely because it knew a big chunk of their vote were leavers.

Any Tory MP who went over to the remain side were trounced at the ballot box. Which brings it neatly back to the electorate who voted in enough numbers for Brexit Tory party which they would have been aware was led by the ERG. Labour areas (Red wall) voted Tory or deserted Labour and hey presto the UK got the result it voted for.

Is that all you want remain people to admit to? If so can somebody who supports hard Brexit or Brexit list off all the benefits just around the corner?

I don’t care if anybody admits to whatever it is you’re on about there.

 

[Brian]

I think the most commonly expressed phrase, here and just about everywhere else, was something like ‘you lost, gerroverit’. So, a tad politer than stfu, but the sentiment isn’t a hair’s breadth removed, is it?

Haven’t seen it used here, Steve, other than by remain supporters saying they’re sick of seeing it. Are you sure you’re not talking about facebook or tw*tter? I agree it is no different to ‘stfu’.

fwiw I think it’s just another infantile thing to say if people are using it and it doesn’t help.

Edit: Thinking about it, I’ve noticed ‘gerroverit’ used here a lot by Hugh, as sarcasm, obvs.

 

[Sue Pertwee-Tyr]

Haven’t seen it used here, Steve, other than by remain supporters saying they’re sick of seeing it. Are you sure you’re not talking about facebook or tw*tter?

fwiw I think it’s just another infantile thing to say if people are using it and it doesn’t help.

To be fair, no, I can’t remember seeing it here (except as a paraphrase of something said by a Leave supporter) and not being a Facebook or Twitter user I can’t really say, which is why I characterised it as ‘something like’. The message itself, however was similarly blunt, so the paraphrase isn’t all that wide of the mark. The sentiment behind it was clear.

 

[Kirk]

Taken from The System... thread. Carole Cadwalladr TED talk.

https://www.ted.com/talks/carole_cadwalladr_facebook_s_role_in_brexit_and_the_threat_to_democracy

 

[Kirk]

A positive if this were to happen, which is very unlikely because a deal will be done, is that the only way is up, would be no federal United States of Europe for us. What started out as the EEC for ease of trading, or at least that is what the electorate were sold, changed each year in a quest for federal control. Apart from the UK subsidy for these aspirations the are better off without us; they can now progress the vision.

Kudos to you for making an attempt to identify a (potential) ‘benefit'. Admittedly, it’s a tad BRDF but no matter it’s more than EV and Secret Ballot have mustered so far. This deal you mention - any ideas on how that will look?

 

[Colin Barron]

Kudos to you for making an attempt to identify a (potential) ‘benefit'. Admittedly, it’s a tad BRDF but no matter it’s more than EV and Secret Ballot have mustered so far. This deal you mention - any ideas on how that will look?

There will be some level playing field tie up with ECJ dictating and some compromise on fishing.
The EU are still smiling https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-says-landmark-budget-deal-adds-pressure-on-uk-in-brexit-talks/
They have raised 5 billion from the magic money tree for handouts to cover fishing losses.

 

[farfromthesun]

No, it was well nailed down.

Not entirely, since there were several obstacles to overcome before it got to that point. It wasn't "if Labour win we will offer a second ref straight off the bat", which would have been more straightforward and had greater engagement from the electorate.

 

[tuga]

Tails of The BrExit...at 56ºC

Fintan O’Toole: Brexit is like having to listen to someone else’s dreams
The epic story of liberation has become mesmerisingly tedious
https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/...-time-on-government-waffle-1.4320806?mode=amp

 

[ff1d1l]

Wrong.

Oh, they won?
I hadn't noticed.
That's nice.

Shall I tell you how I voted?
Shan't!

 

[Brian]

Not entirely, since there were several obstacles to overcome before it got to that point. It wasn't "if Labour win we will offer a second ref straight off the bat", which would have been more straightforward and had greater engagement from the electorate.

I since noticed the post from drood. I think he’s explained it very well and it was a realistic alternative to a tory hard brexit.

If people decided not to vote Labour even though they were being offered what they wanted....well, it’s basically the point I’m making. They need to look at themselves if they’re complaining about brexit.

Oh, they won?
I hadn't noticed.
That's nice.

Shall I tell you how I voted?
Shan't!

What are you babbling on about, man?

What makes you think I’m interested in how you voted? I couldn’t care less, but if you wanted to stop brexit as a top priority, you needed to cast your vote accordingly to give that a chance. If you didn’t, well...your problem.

 

[zarniwoop]

That’s what I meant in my last post when I said, “why didn’t they organise themselves to actually do something?”.

Unite to Remain attempted to do just that (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unite_to_Remain) in 60 constituencies across England and Wales. It was just LD, Plaid and Green though because Labour declined to be part of it.

If the leaders of SNP, LibDem, Plaid and others are as good as some say, why did they not get realistic about the situation? Only 2 parties can win a GE in the UK, they must know that.

But not only 2 parties can win individual constituencies. There are many where the best chance of defeating the Tories is not Labour. Your criticism of the SNP, for example, seems wildly misplaced if you consider their wins from the Tories in 2019.

Also, coalition governments are a thing.

In the end though, because these pro-remain parties couldn’t agree a strategy it was down to the voters to do what they considered best for stopping brexit if that was their motivation. Did LibDem supporters really believe they would win the GE outright and get to revoke A50? I doubt it. Did SNP and Plaid voters think their vote was going to help Labour win and get a second referendum? I doubt that too.

Everyone surely knew Labour was the only chance of stopping the tories.

You can't expect pro-Remain or anti-Tory voters to be able to tap into some kind of hive mentality and operate as one. It requires organisation from the Parties themselves - see earlier point about Unite to Remain.

Without analysing the results as I CBA, I believe Labour lost out on a lot of seats by a relatively small number, there could have been a major difference with a strategy from the remain parties.

I checked the figures. In the 48 seats Labour lost to the Tories in England and Wales, if every LD, Green and PC voter had instead voted Labour, to compensate for all the Labour voters switching to the Tories, 23 seats would still have gone blue and the Tories would still have a 30 seat majority.

 

[stevec67]

The problem with Labour’s rather last minute 2nd referendum commitment was not the message, it was the messenger. After 4 years of Corbyn fog (apart from his immediate call to trigger Article 50), hardly anyone believed anything he said by the time the general election rolled around.

Quite. I was paying attention and I didn't see or hear any commitment to a 2nd ref. I just saw someone ineffectual sitting on the fence. I still voted for them, because I wouldn't vote Conservative if you put a gun to my head and the other parties in my constituency are a dead loss. I think the Libs lost their deposit in one of the recent GEs.

 

[farfromthesun]

Seems fairly clear that "Vote Labour = Stop Brexit" wasn't really a thing, then.

 

[TheDecameron]

Brian, it’s pin the tail on the donkey time,