European Parliament elections

[SteveS1]

People who voted leave have no need for another ref, this is what you seem to be missing. Why would leavers be all over another ref when we are currently in the middle of Brexit. Only those who voted remain want another ref in the hope of a remain result as this is the only way Brexit will be stopped in the short term. Otherwise years could pass by before it's eventual demise, which I fully expect to happen, outside of a second ref.

Even leaving aside your slight condescension, they would be happy with one if they thought they would win it.

They voted Leave as the option on the ballot, but were allowed a variety of interpretations of what that might mean in terms of the future. A vote that actually means voting for something specific deal (or none), rather than against the EU in general would be a different ball game.

This arises because the first vote was advisory and framed accordingly. The fact that some people don't want to treat it like that doesn't alter it. Hence the problems with implementing an advisory choice rather than a specific deal.

 

[Lee T]

Even leaving aside your slight condescension, they would be happy with one if they thought they would win it.

They voted Leave as the option on the ballot, but were allowed a variety of interpretations of what that might mean in terms of the future. A vote that actually means voting for something specific deal (or none), rather than against the EU in general would be a different ball game.

This arises because the first vote was advisory and framed accordingly. The fact that some people don't want to treat it like that doesn't alter it. Hence the problems with implementing an advisory choice rather than a specific deal.

I think you're wrong, as someone who voted leave I have no interest in another ref. If it was nailed on guaranteed leave would win I would still have no interest as it would change nothing if leave won.

 

[Tony L]

People who voted leave have no need for another ref, this is what you seem to be missing. Why would leavers be all over another ref when we are currently in the middle of Brexit.

An awful lot of leavers will have already lost their jobs by now (auto, aviation, steel, financial industries etc etc etc), plus many pensioners will be seeing their assets diminishing and costs increase. The penny as to what Brexit means may just be starting to drop. It is clear some people like you are unaffected and just don’t care about the pain and hardship it will cause others, but I’m sure many will be feeling or at least seeing the impact already.

 

[SteveS1]

I think you're wrong, as someone who voted leave I have no interest in another ref. If it was nailed on guaranteed leave would win I would still have no interest as it would change nothing if leave won.

Suppose it's not all about you?

 

[gassor]

I think you're wrong, as someone who voted leave I have no interest in another ref. If it was nailed on guaranteed leave would win I would still have no interest as it would change nothing if leave won.

So you wouldn't mind if the country steers itself into a hard Brexit, you wouldn't want to say 'hang on, this is not a good idea'?

 

[Sue Pertwee-Tyr]

I don't understand what you mean by this not being about party politics. It's a party political system, in which you vote for parties. If you mean, you just want to express yourself, regardless of the consequences, then work away. But the consequence is that the Faragists will have the biggest British party in the European Parliament - which will in turn strengthen him and other Brexiteers in UK politics. You don't like Brexit, but you'll have made it harder to resist.

I think the likely outcome is that the UKIP seats will go to the Faragists. UKIP is already one of the largest holders of seats, so that doesn't represent a particularly significant change. The mistake, I think, is to focus on which party will represent us in the EU, and to assume that if it's Brexit, that's a problem. In reality, if we Brexit, then it's irrelevant because they won't be sitting and representing us. If we don't Brexit, then the Faragists taking the seats previously occupied by UKIP wouldn't be a massive change.

So, voting in this election isn't about keeping Farage's mob out, its about registering your support for a party which represents what you want. For me, that's going to be the Greens. Unequivocally pro-EU, and a vote for them is a clear message. According to their election literature, they polled 7.1% in this region (North West) last time, and estimate that with 8%, they'd gain a seat. If I can help push them over that threshold, and if similar happens in other regions, we could easily double the number of Green MEPs, but more importantly, we could show indisputable support for a Remain party, which could not be, um, misinterpreted as a vote for Leave, in the way that a vote for Labour surely would be.

This thread puts it rather well, I think:

https://twitter.com/ottocrat/status/1129051735148892162

Electing Remainer MEPs is a second-order goal, they won’t have any power to stop Brexit themselves.

 

[stevec67]

What happened the last time. A link is fine if you don't feel like writing.

"No rise in student fees"
Oh, hang on.

all the integrity of a snake trying to escape a corner.

 

[Tony L]

"No rise in student fees"
Oh, hang on.

all the integrity of a snake trying to escape a corner.

Not good at all, but that pales into insignificance compared to lying to the nation/HoC in order to join a US Republican-led regime-change war in the middle-east!

 

[droodzilla]

Not good at all, but that pales into insignificance compared to lying to the nation/HoC in order to join a US Republican-led regime-change war in the middle-east!

Yes. Shame on Corbyn for that.

 

[HarryB]

An awful lot of leavers will have already lost their jobs by now (auto, aviation, steel, financial industries etc etc etc), plus many pensioners will be seeing their assets diminishing and costs increase. The penny as to what Brexit means may just be starting to drop. It is clear some people like you are unaffected and just don’t care about the pain and hardship it will cause others, but I’m sure many will be feeling or at least seeing the impact already.

The statistics ruin your argument completely. Isn't employment at a record high? Isn't unemployment at a record low? The are the stats that Brexiters will throw at you so you need to be prepared.

 

[HarryB]

Yes. Shame on Corbyn for that.

Exactly. The LibDems were a bunch of duplicitous chancers and Blair was a war mongering pink Tory. But never mind that if Tony has a chance to blame Corbyn, he'll take it even if it makes him look ridiculous. LibDem apologists always love a bit of whataboutism

 

[droodzilla]

Exactly. The LibDems were a bunch of duplicitous chancers and Blair was a war mongering pink Tory. But never mind that if Tony has a chance to blame Corbyn, he'll take it even if it makes him look ridiculous. LibDem apologists always love a bit of whataboutism

I don't think Tony was really trying to blame Corbyn for Iraq (that would be very silly indeed). But I think it's worth underlining the stark difference between Blair's Labour and Corbyn's Labour whenever the issue of Iraq is brought up. A Corbyn-led Labour government would never commit the atrocities Blair's government did, (all based on a pack of lies).

 

[Tony L]

I don't think Tony was really trying to blame Corbyn for Iraq (that would be very silly indeed). But I think it's worth underlining the stark difference between Blair's Labour and Corbyn's Labour whenever the issue of Iraq is brought up.

I clearly wasn’t doing either, I’m just irritated by the recursive screechy tribalism shown by some Corbyn fanbois here. Much honestly reads like someone like Toby Young, Melanie Philips or whoever trolling as a Momentum stereotype in order to discredit the left.

 

[droodzilla]

Drood, we have had plenty of hard left commentators telling us how simply awful those Lib Dems are for their involvement in austerity.

Presumably the logic being that by trying to limit or influence the extent of Tory intentions, they themselves became even more responsible for austerity than the Tories themselves. Nobody seemed interested in the possibility that without the Lib Dem influence, Tory austerity might have been even worse. So for the Lib Dems - all downside and no credit whatsoever. Collaborator scum, should have known better even if that led to full Tory government etc. etc.

When it comes to Brexit, these same people seem to think that playing midwife of otherwise enabling Tory Brexit will leave Labour unsullied, untainted and with credit in the bank just in time for the GE. I would argue that both these over simplifications were and are ridiculous. That both Lib Dem and Labour can argue with justification, that without their intervention it would be worse.

But the thing is, much more is expected by activists and helping the Tories in any way, however well intentioned, will lead to a price being paid. Add this to an already Marmite leader up against a Tory refresh and I think you are being remarkably optimistic. We'll see.

I'm not sure if I qualify as a hard left commentator so I can only state the facts as I see them.

The key difference between the Lib-Dems and Labour's position is that the LDs were part of the government: Cameron needed LD votes to govern so they had considerable power in the coalition. They failed to capitalise on this power, most notably in their failure to secure a referendum on PR. Instead, they played stupid games with the lives of the poorest and most vulnerable members of society: https://www.libdemvoice.org/a-mistake-from-the-coalition-years-that-we-never-repeat-57482.html. It's good to see a Lib-Dem calling out Poly Mackenzie on this horrific tweet. Compare and contrast the DUP's leverage over Theresa May's government.

On "enabling a Tory Brexit" you're going to have to cash that out for me as Labour have consistently opposed both May's deal and a No Deal Brexit, and have whipped twice in favour of a confirmatory vote. The only concrete example of "enabling" I can think of is that Labour didn't oppose the triggering of Article 50. That might have been a mistake but, arguably, if they had opposed it, May could have secured a bigger majority in a snap general election, and there would now be no hope of stopping Brexit.

PS: Until yesterday I believed, based on what I'd read on this forum, that Labour had voted for the EU referendum in the first place. It turns out that all but a handful of Labour MPs abstained on that vote - as did the Lib-Dems. Did the Lib-Dems enable a Tory Brexit too?

 

[SteveS1]

I'm not sure if I qualify as a hard left commentator so I can only state the facts as I see them.

The key difference between the Lib-Dems and Labour's position is that the LDs were part of the government: Cameron needed LD votes to govern so they had considerable power in the coalition. They failed to capitalise on this power, most notably in their failure to secure a referendum on PR. Instead, they played stupid games with the lives of the poorest and most vulnerable members of society: https://www.libdemvoice.org/a-mistake-from-the-coalition-years-that-we-never-repeat-57482.html. It's good to see a Lib-Dem calling out Poly Mackenzie on this horrific tweet. Compare and contrast the DUP's leverage over Theresa May's government.

On "enabling a Tory Brexit" you're going to have to cash that out for me as Labour have consistently opposed both May's deal and a No Deal Brexit, and have whipped twice in favour of a confirmatory vote. The only concrete example of "enabling" I can think of is that Labour didn't oppose the triggering of Article 50. That might have been a mistake but, arguably, if they had opposed it, May could have secured a bigger majority in a snap general election, and there would now be no hope of stopping Brexit.

PS: Until yesterday I believed, based on what I'd read on this forum, that Labour had voted for the EU referendum in the first place. It turns out that all but a handful of Labour MPs abstained on that vote - as did the Lib-Dems. Did the Lib-Dems enable a Tory Brexit too?

I think you have misunderstood the point I was making. I’m not defending the Lib Dem’s performance in the coalition, far from it. The only point I would concede from them is that refusal to join a coalition would have led to an undiluted Tory government within months. But that is all conjecture of course.

My point is that Labour are risking and indeed polls indicate, are actually losing plenty of support with a similar tactic on a different subject, possibly because of the lack of enthusiasm of Corbyn and some others for the EU. Possibly not. I’m not sure it matters exactly why. What is puzzling is the lack of drive to adjust to what is clearly a quickly changing position before they lose too much support.

 

[droodzilla]

I clearly wasn’t doing either, I’m just irritated by the recursive screechy tribalism shown by some Corbyn fanbois here. Much honestly reads like someone like Toby Young, Melanie Philips or whoever trolling as a Momentum stereotype in order to discredit the left.

It's called having principles. Principles that include not enabling the demonisation and hounding (often to death) of the poorest and most vulnerable members of society. Polly Mackenzie's infamous plastic bag tweet (https://twitter.com/pollymackenzie/status/986904092810326016?lang=en - offensive original tweet now deleted) is emblemmatic. Only people to whom the suffering of the poor is an entirely abstract concept would gamble with their lives in such a callous manner.

Meanwhile, here's a story about the legacy of Lib-Dem enabled Tory austerity:

https://thepoorsideof.life/2019/05/...s-torturous-dont-believe-the-dwps-propaganda/

There are thousand more where that came from.

A year after the coalition ends, Cameron calls the EU referendum, and the rest is history.

 

[Lee T]

An awful lot of leavers will have already lost their jobs by now (auto, aviation, steel, financial industries etc etc etc), plus many pensioners will be seeing their assets diminishing and costs increase. The penny as to what Brexit means may just be starting to drop. It is clear some people like you are unaffected and just don’t care about the pain and hardship it will cause others, but I’m sure many will be feeling or at least seeing the impact already.

If leavers wanted another ref, I imagine some sort of petition would be in the running or a march to state they had changed their minds. I have seen nothing of the sort so unless you have figure to quote those who have lost their jobs & voted leave but now want to remain & they lost their job because of Brexit which hasn't even reached the most important stage as yet, then it's just personal bias towards remain . Your last sentence is beyond hilarious BTW as you know absolutely nothing about me on a personal level, just your way of attacking the poster while dodging the AUP, some here are masters at it..

 

[droodzilla]

I think you have misunderstood the point I was making. I’m not defending the Lib Dem’s performance in the coalition, far from it. The only point I would concede from them is that refusal to join a coalition would have led to an undiluted Tory government within months. But that is all conjecture of course.

My point is that Labour are risking and indeed polls indicate, are actually losing plenty of support with a similar tactic on a different subject, possibly because of the lack of enthusiasm of Corbyn and some others for the EU. Possibly not. I’m not sure it matters exactly why. What is puzzling is the lack of drive to adjust to what is clearly a quickly changing position before they lose too much support.

Fair enough. My point is simply that the rise of the far-right ought to galvanise the opposition. I hope people will do the right thing if faced with the prospect of (e.g.) a Brexit Party/Conservative coalition (but I agree it's not a given).

For what its worth, I'm now at the point where I wish the Labour Party would come out more clearly in favour of a confirmatory vote but I don't feel "angry" or "betrayed" because: (a) I understand the internal and external pressures the party faces; (b) I don't see a second referendum as an unalloyed good (in truth, I remain quite ambivalent about it).

 

[HarryB]

I'm not sure if I qualify as a hard left commentator so I can only state the facts as I see them.

The key difference between the Lib-Dems and Labour's position is that the LDs were part of the government: Cameron needed LD votes to govern so they had considerable power in the coalition. They failed to capitalise on this power, most notably in their failure to secure a referendum on PR. Instead, they played stupid games with the lives of the poorest and most vulnerable members of society: https://www.libdemvoice.org/a-mistake-from-the-coalition-years-that-we-never-repeat-57482.html. It's good to see a Lib-Dem calling out Poly Mackenzie on this horrific tweet. Compare and contrast the DUP's leverage over Theresa May's government.

On "enabling a Tory Brexit" you're going to have to cash that out for me as Labour have consistently opposed both May's deal and a No Deal Brexit, and have whipped twice in favour of a confirmatory vote. The only concrete example of "enabling" I can think of is that Labour didn't oppose the triggering of Article 50. That might have been a mistake but, arguably, if they had opposed it, May could have secured a bigger majority in a snap general election, and there would now be no hope of stopping Brexit.

PS: Until yesterday I believed, based on what I'd read on this forum, that Labour had voted for the EU referendum in the first place. It turns out that all but a handful of Labour MPs abstained on that vote - as did the Lib-Dems. Did the Lib-Dems enable a Tory Brexit too?

Great post. But I fear you're wasting your time on here.

As I've said many times this is 100% a Tory Brexit. It came about to prevent the disintegration of the Conservative Party. If there's any justice there'll be no Tory Party to speak of in a few months time and no Brexit either.

If that comes about, Corbyn and the Labour Party can take most of the credit for that. Brexit has been a minefield for Labour and nobody in the party would pretend otherwise. But the top team have played a blinder. The remainers on here should thank them. If it wasn't for Labour, we'd have Brexit by now.

 

[Lee T]

Fair enough. My point is simply that the rise of the far-right ought to galvanise the opposition. I hope people will do the right thing if faced with the prospect of (e.g.) a Brexit Party/Conservative coalition (but I agree it's not a given).

For what its worth, I'm now at the point where I wish the Labour Party would come out more clearly in favour of a confirmatory vote but I don't feel "angry" or "betrayed" because: (a) I understand the internal and external pressures the party faces; (b) I don't see a second referendum as an unalloyed good (in truth, I remain quite ambivalent about it).

Do you not feel another vote could well cause more problems. If leave won again, we are back where are, if remain win, leave will consider this being a binding decision as an insult to democracy, there will be no winners come a second ref. The country will divide further.