|
Post by M on Dec 20, 2018 22:39:03 GMT
I'm with BJR, Salop and Scargill on this. I think Corbyn should have got behind Brexit, and his followers would have joined him. I don't understand why some left wingers aren't following the examples of Foot and Benn. I think the dithering, or lack of direction is killing Corbyn at the moment. Sometimes you do have to lead, M. I'm sure time will tell. He's dithering or playing a great game. I'm inclined to believe the moment a GE of possible we would see their/his position. Personally I want to see that the moment May's deal is voted down. I agree with the reasoning of staying quiet even if that can come across as sitting on the fence...
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Dec 20, 2018 22:46:10 GMT
I'm with BJR, Salop and Scargill on this. I think Corbyn should have got behind Brexit, and his followers would have joined him. I don't understand why some left wingers aren't following the examples of Foot and Benn. I think the dithering, or lack of direction is killing Corbyn at the moment. Sometimes you do have to lead, M. Corbyn is not a leader. He says the right things at the right time to satisfy his masses. He’s done very little actual leadership since getting the labour top job. He’s not a follower either. He is just a protest voice. Somethings you will like some you won’t depending on your own views but that is what he is. To be fair at the time labour needed a voice, the problem is most members of the party may like it but most of his MPs dont
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Dec 20, 2018 22:47:34 GMT
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Dec 20, 2018 22:52:29 GMT
Bamford talks about trade under WTO rules
|
|
|
Post by M on Dec 20, 2018 23:01:36 GMT
Bamford talks about trade under WTO rules To be fair this is the same company that when huge sanctions were getting placed on Russia they were sending equipment to India with Russian instructions so they could back to back it, to get around it so it's safe to say they can minimise any damage because they're big enough to. I also guess he's probably still a bit bitter about getting a 40m fine from the EU too.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Dec 20, 2018 23:03:07 GMT
Bamford talks about trade under WTO rules To be fair this is the same company that when huge sanctions were getting placed on Russia they were sending equipment to India with Russian instructions so they could back to back it, to get around it so it's safe to say they can minimise any damage because they're big enough to. I also guess he's probably still a bit bitter about getting a 40m fine from the EU too. Yes many unethical practices go on in industry and trade. Why were they fined £€40m
|
|
|
Post by M on Dec 20, 2018 23:09:49 GMT
To be fair this is the same company that when huge sanctions were getting placed on Russia they were sending equipment to India with Russian instructions so they could back to back it, to get around it so it's safe to say they can minimise any damage because they're big enough to. I also guess he's probably still a bit bitter about getting a 40m fine from the EU too. Yes many unethical practices go on in industry and trade. Why were they fined £€40m Anti competitive shizbits. They were pissed enough to challenge it for years getting nowhere. It's like Dyson being a big EU lovey until they told him to go and screw over something to do with trademarks. This is the same chap who wanted us to join the Euro but suddenly changed his tune to say the EU was the devil almost immediately after they did something that didn't help him make a load more money. The moment I hear big business boys and girls telling me what I should do, I invariably feel that I should do the opposite.
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Dec 20, 2018 23:19:49 GMT
Mate I've lived in London for 20+ years I meet plenty of dual nationals, my point is your right to work in the EU is so important to you that you currently live an work in the USA, do get your head around the concept of irony can you, its a thing look it up if that is the case why did expats with <15 years get a vote and those of us with >15 years not? Clearly somebody did not agree with your position pre-vote otherwise NO expats would have got a vote. I certainly don't recall feeling any different on day 15 years +1 - certainly no less British. Any yes I know what irony is - it's like goldy and silvery.. Who said anything about you getting a vote or not or you whether you are british or not, you are complaining about losing the right to work and live in Europe yet despite living outside of the UK you don't seem to want to exercise the right you feel robbed of.
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Dec 20, 2018 23:38:54 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Dec 20, 2018 23:39:36 GMT
That is interesting and not really surprising. I suppose if people don't understand what is being asked of them they are probably quite open to being persuaded one way or another (rightly or wrongly which I think is evident in both sides of the Brexit debate) but when people come to a conclusion by direction or process not many will change their mind irrespective of what facts are presented to them. Basically in light of new evidence the majority of people would always stick their fingers in their ears regardless of their political pursuasion... I suspect the only difference if this was rerun is a combination of voters from two years ago turning back up to the polls again in case they're tired of the argument and the demographic difference of more younger voters who are able to vote now and older voters who have fallen off their mortal coil. With that in mind, that's why I think we could see a difference on another vote. Using generalisations there's more younger people likely to vote who are statistically more likely to tick remain and there's less older people who are more likely to tick leave. I know that's a simplified description but the reality is the last general election saw youth turn up to the polls in greater numbers than before and I'd assume that would continue now... This is why it's so important if there is another vote that the questions are right. In one respect to honour the previous vote remain shouldn't be on the ballot, but there is another argument to say it is actually democratic to include it and that we shouldn't fear the will of the people. I appreciate many know full well what they voted for and I don't want to start that line of arguing again but nobody voted for May's deal. There's also a different demographic makeup of the electorate now too with different perspectives... It's a head spinner but I'm curious what the Brexiteers would take given those two likely simple outcomes... May's version of leave or another vote which likely includes the option of remain... “ I suspect the only difference if this was rerun is a combination of voters from two years ago turning back up to the polls again in case they're tired of the argument and the demographic difference of more younger voters who are able to vote now and older voters who have fallen off their mortal coil.” The survey is a ‘cradle to grave’ survey (with full participation from age 16) so as people drop off at one end, newer, younger participants join at the other end. The effects of this mimic the scenario above, but the Leave/Remain breakdown appears to be unaffected. I wonder if this is because many of us become more cynical (or realistic) as we get older so perhaps lots of (for example) 48 year old Remainers of the time have now become 50 year old Leavers? An area I would agree with Remainers is that in the event of another referendum, the debate would be a more informed one although there are still massive unknowns on both sides. My instinct is that Remain should not be an option on the ballot paper, however there is no denying that the country as a whole is better informed about the nature of the EU so perhaps the electorate should be given the opportunity to turn away from the EU once again. If it were, and the three options were Remain, 'Leave with May' and 'Leave with WTO' it should be understood that the 'Leave with ***' options would be added together to inform the Remain vs Leave vote and then, in the event of Leave winning, the ‘type of leave’ comes in to play. That way, Remain would have no voice in the ‘type of leave’. Is that fair or right? I don’t know.As you’ve said, it is such a head spinner. I started the Brexit campaign as a Remainer but the lack of positivity in the Remain campaign (and the negativity of project fear) changed my mind and I became a voter for Leave. Has much changed since? I still hear very little about the positive benefits of our EU membership, only about the potentially negative consequences of leaving. I also hear nothing from Remain about how it views publicity about the EU Army, continued expansion eastwards, even a potential expansion southwards in to Africa, the effect on employment and wages of so many immigrants from poorer EU areas, etc etc. I see plenty of project fear, but little positivity so, to answer my own question, has much changed from the debate two and a half years ago? I don't think it has. No I don't think that's fair. If you wish to remain but ultimately 'leave' wins, then those people who voted to remain should have just as much right to decide how we leave, even if they didn't actually want to. Ergo the question s should both be of two parts ... A) do you wish to remain or leave? B) if leave wins, do you wish to i) leave via May's deal or ii) leave on WTO rules. Option B (obviously) only becoming relevant if the winning answer to A, is to leave. And I'll suggest why remain absolutely has to be on the paper ... lots of 'leave' voters, voted in good faith, believing the promises of Gove, Johnson, Ledsom etc. during the campaign, when they claimed we absolutely would get a good deal and that we could take that to the bank. Well that certainly hasn't materialised and there are now leave voters who feel they shouldn't have to be rail roaded into having to leave with either a bad deal or no deal, when they were promised something very different and given the option of either of those (for the first time) very defined options, would actually prefer to remain.
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Dec 20, 2018 23:41:18 GMT
in full
|
|
|
Post by M on Dec 20, 2018 23:47:01 GMT
“ I suspect the only difference if this was rerun is a combination of voters from two years ago turning back up to the polls again in case they're tired of the argument and the demographic difference of more younger voters who are able to vote now and older voters who have fallen off their mortal coil.” The survey is a ‘cradle to grave’ survey (with full participation from age 16) so as people drop off at one end, newer, younger participants join at the other end. The effects of this mimic the scenario above, but the Leave/Remain breakdown appears to be unaffected. I wonder if this is because many of us become more cynical (or realistic) as we get older so perhaps lots of (for example) 48 year old Remainers of the time have now become 50 year old Leavers? An area I would agree with Remainers is that in the event of another referendum, the debate would be a more informed one although there are still massive unknowns on both sides. My instinct is that Remain should not be an option on the ballot paper, however there is no denying that the country as a whole is better informed about the nature of the EU so perhaps the electorate should be given the opportunity to turn away from the EU once again. If it were, and the three options were Remain, 'Leave with May' and 'Leave with WTO' it should be understood that the 'Leave with ***' options would be added together to inform the Remain vs Leave vote and then, in the event of Leave winning, the ‘type of leave’ comes in to play. That way, Remain would have no voice in the ‘type of leave’. Is that fair or right? I don’t know.As you’ve said, it is such a head spinner. I started the Brexit campaign as a Remainer but the lack of positivity in the Remain campaign (and the negativity of project fear) changed my mind and I became a voter for Leave. Has much changed since? I still hear very little about the positive benefits of our EU membership, only about the potentially negative consequences of leaving. I also hear nothing from Remain about how it views publicity about the EU Army, continued expansion eastwards, even a potential expansion southwards in to Africa, the effect on employment and wages of so many immigrants from poorer EU areas, etc etc. I see plenty of project fear, but little positivity so, to answer my own question, has much changed from the debate two and a half years ago? I don't think it has. No I don't think that's fair. If you wish to remain but ultimately 'leave' wins, then those people who voted to remain should have just as much right to decide how we leave, even if they didn't actually want to. Ergo the question s should both be of two parts ... A) do you wish to remain or leave? B) if remain wins, do you wish to i) leave via May's deal or ii) leave on WTO rules. Option B (obviously) only becoming relevant if the winning answer to A, is to leave. And I'll suggest why remain absolutely has to be on the paper ... lots of 'leave' voters, voted in good faith, believing the promises of Gove, Johnson, Ledsom etc. that we absolutely would get a good deal and that we could take that to the bank. Well that certainly hasn't materialised and there are now leave voters who feel they shouldn't have to be rail roaded into having to leave with either a bad deal or no deal, when they were promised something very different and given the option, would actually prefer to remain. I just had to read that twice as the first time felt like you were saying the same thing as each other until it dawned on me I'd agree with that actually
|
|
|
Post by Gods on Dec 20, 2018 23:52:08 GMT
Yes I did find that absolutely extraordinary. That people still voted leave despite the CBI, the TUC, the Treasury, the NFU, Academia, Economists, MP's, 'clebs', really anyone you could name all for the most part being pro-remain. It's a huge part of the conundrum we now find ourselves in. There is almost no one in a position of influence who actually thinks it's a good idea to leave. My personal view is that those in the brexit heartlands will regret it. The EU is undeniably a social democratic construct. If you want to slash taxes; cut welfare further; open more areas of public life to privatisation; and radically reduce regulation, from employment law to food and the environment it has long been an infuriating barrier. And that is where Rees-Mogg and the ERG group are coming from but it doesn't line up with the aims of the great dispossessed who turned out in number to vote brexit. There is no unity of purpose behind the brexit vote which is why there is no clear leadership and way forward. But, repeat to fade, that is why you shouldn't mix referendums with our system of government which is elective representation, not unless you want to get in a huge mess anyway! The only counter to that, Gods, is staunch socialists like Benn and Galloway opposed the EU, and Benn is on record as saying it is an anti socialist construct. Maybe Socialism has lost it's way if Labour are now in favour of the EU? I understand your reservations regarding the Tory right. Perhaps the left need to step up to prevent the cuts etc, that you talk about? I think people are crying out for clarity on Brexit, and Labour are missing a trick, so far. Yes I think so, good point. Just as Rees-Mogg and say Liam Fox see the EU as an obstacle to Thatcher 2.0 then Benn and Galloway and I suspect Corbyn to some extent see it as a cosy big business club and an obstacle to true socialism. Perhaps if the EU is hacking off the hard right and the hard left in roughly equal measure then, just maybe, its getting something about right!
|
|
|
Post by starkiller on Dec 21, 2018 4:01:52 GMT
|
|
|
Post by starkiller on Dec 21, 2018 4:04:11 GMT
A viewpoint from Arthur Scargill: The statement by the Labour Party Leadership that they would support a second referendum is an act of treachery for which they will never be forgiven.The ruling class have used and will continue to use every means including a media which has sought to overturn the decision of the British people in the 2016 Referendum. The ruling class and the EU will demand another referendum and another until they get the result they want. As a socialist I call for all those who call themselves socialists to condemn this act of treachery by the Labour Party Leaders and campaign for withdrawal from this bastion of Capitalism. Jeremy Corbyn's embrace of a Customs Union is a sell out to Labour right wingers Keir Starmer and Chuka Umunna. It means that Labour is now committed to free movement of workers from 27 EU countries to the UK and a single market which allows companies to move out of the UK to other EU states where workers are paid lower wages. Membership of or collaboration with the EU means Britain has to accept the tariffs (import controls) stipulated by an unelected body in Brussels.Labour’s leadership is ignoring the 60 per cent of Labour Constituencies that voted to leave the EU,something Britain could have done the day after the referendum. I call on all who want an independent Britain to make clear in any future vote their support for ‘No Deal’. 70% of Labour constituencies voted Leave. Who is representing these people, because Labour isn't? I would say they are the most marginalised and unrepresented people in the UK.
|
|
|
Post by The Drunken Communist on Dec 21, 2018 9:41:49 GMT
No I don't think that's fair. If you wish to remain but ultimately 'leave' wins, then those people who voted to remain should have just as much right to decide how we leave, even if they didn't actually want to. Ergo the question s should both be of two parts ... A) do you wish to remain or leave? B) if leave wins, do you wish to i) leave via May's deal or ii) leave on WTO rules. Option B (obviously) only becoming relevant if the winning answer to A, is to leave. And I'll suggest why remain absolutely has to be on the paper ... lots of 'leave' voters, voted in good faith, believing the promises of Gove, Johnson, Ledsom etc. during the campaign, when they claimed we absolutely would get a good deal and that we could take that to the bank. Well that certainly hasn't materialised and there are now leave voters who feel they shouldn't have to be rail roaded into having to leave with either a bad deal or no deal, when they were promised something very different and given the option of either of those (for the first time) very defined options, would actually prefer to remain. So I'm guessing when the second vote is forced upon us you'll be fine with, should Remain win, that people who voted Leave get to decide how we remain. Ergo the question should have two parts. A) Do you wish to Leave or Remain? B) If Remain wins do you wish to i) Remain & join the Euro & Schengen area or ii) Remain but not accept FoM or the ECJ, and not pay the EU a penny. Seems fair, lots of Remain voters voted in good faith, believing all the project fear that we'd be forced to eat chlorinated chicken three times per day as Russian tanks rolled down our streets the day after the vote if people voted to Leave. Well that certainly hasn't materialised and there are now many Remain voters who feel so silly for believing the lies. Although in fairness it just sounds like yet another example of a Remoaner refusing to accept the result & trying to get it over-turned.
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Dec 21, 2018 9:46:16 GMT
No I don't think that's fair. If you wish to remain but ultimately 'leave' wins, then those people who voted to remain should have just as much right to decide how we leave, even if they didn't actually want to. Ergo the question s should both be of two parts ... A) do you wish to remain or leave? B) if leave wins, do you wish to i) leave via May's deal or ii) leave on WTO rules. Option B (obviously) only becoming relevant if the winning answer to A, is to leave. And I'll suggest why remain absolutely has to be on the paper ... lots of 'leave' voters, voted in good faith, believing the promises of Gove, Johnson, Ledsom etc. during the campaign, when they claimed we absolutely would get a good deal and that we could take that to the bank. Well that certainly hasn't materialised and there are now leave voters who feel they shouldn't have to be rail roaded into having to leave with either a bad deal or no deal, when they were promised something very different and given the option of either of those (for the first time) very defined options, would actually prefer to remain. So I'm guessing when the second vote is forced upon us you'll be fine with, should Remain win, that people who voted Leave get to decide how we remain. Ergo the question should have two parts. A) Do you wish to Leave or Remain? B) If Remain wins do you wish to i) Remain & join the Euro & Schengen area or ii) Remain but not accept FoM or the ECJ, and not pay the EU a penny. Seems fair, lots of Remain voters voted in good faith, believing all the project fear that we'd be forced to eat chlorinated chicken three times per day as Russian tanks rolled down our streets the day after the vote if people voted to Leave. Well that certainly hasn't materialised and there are now many Remain voters who feel so silly for believing the lies. Although in fairness it just sounds like yet another example of a Remoaner refusing to accept the result & trying to get it over-turned. If Remain had won (& won narrowly) would Brexiteers have accepted the result? Come on unless there had been an overwhelmingly clear result one way or the other then whoever lost world have been bitching and screaming for evermore. This is the fundamental flaw with referendums, they rarely resolve anything.
|
|
|
Post by The Drunken Communist on Dec 21, 2018 10:07:16 GMT
If Remain had won (& won narrowly) would Brexiteers have accepted the result? Come on unless there had been an overwhelmingly clear result one way or the other then whoever lost world have been bitching and screaming for evermore. This is the fundamental flaw with referendums, they rarely resolve anything. I'd imagine there'd be people saying we've made the wrong choice & will regret it, but there'd be very, very few, if any, who'd be constantly droning on about how it's now only fair that we vote on how we remain... And that in that 'What kind of Remain do you want?' vote there should be an option to Leave.
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Dec 21, 2018 10:08:56 GMT
So I'm guessing when the second vote is forced upon us you'll be fine with, should Remain win, that people who voted Leave get to decide how we remain. Ergo the question should have two parts. A) Do you wish to Leave or Remain? B) If Remain wins do you wish to i) Remain & join the Euro & Schengen area or ii) Remain but not accept FoM or the ECJ, and not pay the EU a penny. Seems fair, lots of Remain voters voted in good faith, believing all the project fear that we'd be forced to eat chlorinated chicken three times per day as Russian tanks rolled down our streets the day after the vote if people voted to Leave. Well that certainly hasn't materialised and there are now many Remain voters who feel so silly for believing the lies. Although in fairness it just sounds like yet another example of a Remoaner refusing to accept the result & trying to get it over-turned. If Remain had won (& won narrowly) would Brexiteers have accepted the result? Come on unless there had been an overwhelmingly clear result one way or the other then whoever lost world have been bitching and screaming for evermore. This is the fundamental flaw with referendums, they rarely resolve anything. However once the result is decided you have to make it work. Too many people on the remain side have spent too much time moaning and bitching instead of getting on with the inevitable. It’s almost like they want it it to fail just so they can bitch “we told you so”
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Dec 21, 2018 12:52:07 GMT
i will Add if parliament had got its act together and united behind Brexit after the referendum and got the leave and remain movements to unite we would have been in a better position to get a better deal. The EU Has loved all this infighting because it’s enabled them to give us shit.
For that reason we have to go no deal. Go it alone and be forced to make it work
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Dec 21, 2018 13:39:51 GMT
If there is a second referendum there should be no option to remain on the ballot
The choice to remain has already been lost
It will be interesting to see how many of the people’s vote rabble would want another vote if remain wasn’t a option
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Dec 21, 2018 13:46:22 GMT
If there is a second referendum there should be no option to remain on the ballot The choice to remain has already been lost It will be interesting to see how many of the people’s vote rabble would want another vote if remain wasn’t a option As far as I am aware the entire push for another Referendum is driven by those who voted Remain simply because they want to undermine and reverse it. I don't think any Leaver in the public eye ( or otherwise) is asking for another Referendum. It says it all really.
|
|
|
Post by neworleanstokie on Dec 21, 2018 14:17:24 GMT
if that is the case why did expats with <15 years get a vote and those of us with >15 years not? Clearly somebody did not agree with your position pre-vote otherwise NO expats would have got a vote. I certainly don't recall feeling any different on day 15 years +1 - certainly no less British. Any yes I know what irony is - it's like goldy and silvery.. Who said anything about you getting a vote or not or you whether you are british or not, you are complaining about losing the right to work and live in Europe yet despite living outside of the UK you don't seem to want to exercise the right you feel robbed of. erm sorry mate there are plenty of comments in this thread relating to myself and others like me not having a say/vote on Brexit. As I've stated before - I don't like having something taken away from me - do you? It's irrelevant wether I am using it today - I did have plans to exercise the ability in the future. In addition though I'm sure many Leavers don't give a toss - the pure misery this had brought to 1,000s of families that comprised of different European nationalities is very sad.
|
|
|
Post by maxplonk on Dec 21, 2018 14:21:56 GMT
If there is a second referendum there should be no option to remain on the ballot The choice to remain has already been lost It will be interesting to see how many of the people’s vote rabble would want another vote if remain wasn’t a option As far as I am aware the entire push for another Referendum is driven by those who voted Remain simply because they want to undermine and reverse it. I don't think anyone in the public eye ( or otherwise) is asking for another Referendum. It says it all really.
|
|
|
Post by maxplonk on Dec 21, 2018 14:24:54 GMT
If there is a second referendum there should be no option to remain on the ballot The choice to remain has already been lost It will be interesting to see how many of the people’s vote rabble would want another vote if remain wasn’t a option As far as I am aware the entire push for another Referendum is driven by those who voted Remain simply because they want to undermine and reverse it. I don't think anyone in the public eye ( or otherwise) is asking for another Referendum. It says it all really.
|
|
|
Post by maxplonk on Dec 21, 2018 14:25:57 GMT
If there is a second referendum there should be no option to remain on the ballot The choice to remain has already been lost It will be interesting to see how many of the people’s vote rabble would want another vote if remain wasn’t a option As far as I am aware the entire push for another Referendum is driven by those who voted Remain simply because they want to undermine and reverse it. I don't think anyone in the public eye ( or otherwise) is asking for another Referendum. It says it all really.
|
|
|
Post by maxplonk on Dec 21, 2018 14:27:55 GMT
If there is a second referendum there should be no option to remain on the ballot The choice to remain has already been lost It will be interesting to see how many of the people’s vote rabble would want another vote if remain wasn’t a option As far as I am aware the entire push for another Referendum is driven by those who voted Remain simply because they want to undermine and reverse it. I don't think anyone in the public eye ( or otherwise) is asking for another Referendum. It says it all really.
|
|
|
Post by maxplonk on Dec 21, 2018 14:29:15 GMT
If there is a second referendum there should be no option to remain on the ballot The choice to remain has already been lost It will be interesting to see how many of the people’s vote rabble would want another vote if remain wasn’t a option As far as I am aware the entire push for another Referendum is driven by those who voted Remain simply because they want to undermine and reverse it. I don't think anyone in the public eye ( or otherwise) is asking for another Referendum. It says it all really.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Dec 21, 2018 14:44:16 GMT
As far as I am aware the entire push for another Referendum is driven by those who voted Remain simply because they want to undermine and reverse it. I don't think anyone in the public eye ( or otherwise) is asking for another Referendum. It says it all really. Exactly Plonk, all those who do not accept the result, Remainers, are driving the call for a Referendum and telling us that everybody has changed their minds. Could not have put it better myself
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Dec 21, 2018 15:01:50 GMT
We will come to heel.
|
|