Much vilified but Donald Tusk continues to remain a good friend of the UK.
His letter once again stressing the need to show the UK the highest respect . As opposed to the disgraceful actions of some UK politicians who continue to attack the EU as an enemy .
Agreed. He has impressed me. A much better representative of the EU than Juncker. Barnier has also been impressive.
The Brexit process has revealed weaknesses in Westminster and strengths in the EU.
Much vilified but Donald Tusk continues to remain a good friend of the UK.
His letter once again stressing the need to show the UK the highest respect . As opposed to the disgraceful actions of some UK politicians who continue to attack the EU as an enemy .
Agreed. He has impressed me. A much better representative of the EU than Juncker. Barnier has also been impressive.
In common with those elites of the EU, Theresa May has also specialised in warm words that turned out to bear absolutely no resemblence to the actions of substance that she pursued in negotiations. She hasn't impressed me, nor have they, to say the least.
"This is often, but incorrectly, described as proportional representation. It is really a repeat first past the post system for parties."
This statement is wrong. It is a proportional system.
The problem is, as you point out later, the small number of seats in each "region". It is frankly impossible to get a near proportional system when only three people are elected from one region, without cutting candidates up into smaller peices.
If 650 seats would be apportioned by the D'Hont system across one "region" then the result would be ver proportional.
People I know have said the most horrendous things about politicians and Brexit, people who aren't that politically engaged, that I couldn't repeat it on here as it would be a hate crime. I think the notion that Leave voters are apathetic is extremely wide of the mark.
I'm sure there are wards where canvassing for the Conservatives is pretty grim right now. But, I certainly would not want to be canvassing for Labour in a place like Pontefract, or Wakfield.
Don't be silly - any Labour canvassers can rightly say 'this is the bloody shambles you get with a Tory government'.
Nope, Labour have been voting down every version of brexit offered. They are going to get as much of the blame for this as the Tories.
Rule One: the Government is always to blame.
In ordinary circumstances, that's right. But, Labour are plainly not benefitting from the government's disarray.
So as I will start to ask anyone suggesting No Deal - what exactly do you mean by No Deal?
For a starter should we impose tariffs or should we not impose tariffs and what is the consequences in both the short medium and long term of both options.
Equally how would British farmers fare with No Deal?
And what does "remain" mean - does it mean no more EU laws or treaties without referendums - if no deal is a temporary status then so is remain.
Nope - remain means we stay in the EU in the way we previously were, implementing future laws and treaties as required as they are voted for or agreed upon as we currently do....
So yes remain is easy to explain - the EU continues as it currently is with us a member of it.
As I've answered your question how about answering mine?
People I know have said the most horrendous things about politicians and Brexit, people who aren't that politically engaged, that I couldn't repeat it on here as it would be a hate crime. I think the notion that Leave voters are apathetic is extremely wide of the mark.
I'm sure there are wards where canvassing for the Conservatives is pretty grim right now. But, I certainly would not want to be canvassing for Labour in a place like Pontefract, or Wakfield.
Don't be silly - any Labour canvassers can rightly say 'this is the bloody shambles you get with a Tory government'.
Nope, Labour have been voting down every version of brexit offered. They are going to get as much of the blame for this as the Tories.
Rule One: the Government is always to blame.
In ordinary circumstances, that's right. But, Labour are plainly not benefitting from the government's disarray.
Wishful thinking for you I fear. Little more than Tory voters not fancying Corbyn.
People I know have said the most horrendous things about politicians and Brexit, people who aren't that politically engaged, that I couldn't repeat it on here as it would be a hate crime. I think the notion that Leave voters are apathetic is extremely wide of the mark.
I'm sure there are wards where canvassing for the Conservatives is pretty grim right now. But, I certainly would not want to be canvassing for Labour in a place like Pontefract, or Wakfield.
Don't be silly - any Labour canvassers can rightly say 'this is the bloody shambles you get with a Tory government'.
Nope, Labour have been voting down every version of brexit offered. They are going to get as much of the blame for this as the Tories.
Rule One: the Government is always to blame.
In ordinary circumstances, that's right. But, Labour are plainly not benefitting from the government's disarray.
Alongside Brexit the Corbyn factor will have a massive impact on the next GE (assuming he is still there or Momentum are still in charge in the LP), God knows what's going to happen!
People I know have said the most horrendous things about politicians and Brexit, people who aren't that politically engaged, that I couldn't repeat it on here as it would be a hate crime. I think the notion that Leave voters are apathetic is extremely wide of the mark.
I'm sure there are wards where canvassing for the Conservatives is pretty grim right now. But, I certainly would not want to be canvassing for Labour in a place like Pontefract, or Wakfield.
Don't be silly - any Labour canvassers can rightly say 'this is the bloody shambles you get with a Tory government'.
Nope, Labour have been voting down every version of brexit offered. They are going to get as much of the blame for this as the Tories.
Rule One: the Government is always to blame.
In ordinary circumstances, that's right. But, Labour are plainly not benefitting from the government's disarray.
Wishful thinking for you I fear. Little more than Tory voters not fancying Corbyn.
As Corbyn is going nowhere soon which is pretty significant, Tory voters will protest by voting for the Brexit Party in the European Parliament elections, not for Corbyn Labour
Hell of a drop for M5S. Surely unusual for the larger coalition partner to get screwed over like that.
They always were all things to all people. Difficult to maintain in government. At least LN have a USP you can like or dislike.
Lega pretty much polled level with M5S by day 1 of the government, having pulled across much of the Forza vote. Forza were the minor coalition partner who got squeezed - last I looked Lega still fight elections on the Centre Right ticket, with Forza (as they have for 20+ years) and against M5S. The other thing making them look like the main partner is Salvini getting the Interior brief where he can do his thing and get in the papers far more than Di Maio.
With regards to the general anger over Brexit, I associate with some fairly heavy pro-remain segments of the population, and even they are hugely frustrated. The one sentiment that can unite the country right now is that our politicians are total c***s. With any luck the Tories and Labour will get seriously displaced in the European elections. Their total failure has lead to the absolute mess over the past 4 years.
If Brexit is revoked then I can see things getting very ugly, if 70 odd percent of the 45% still in favour of Brexit unites behind one party in a GE then it's feasible that things could get even more mental.
People I know have said the most horrendous things about politicians and Brexit, people who aren't that politically engaged, that I couldn't repeat it on here as it would be a hate crime. I think the notion that Leave voters are apathetic is extremely wide of the mark.
I'm sure there are wards where canvassing for the Conservatives is pretty grim right now. But, I certainly would not want to be canvassing for Labour in a place like Pontefract, or Wakfield.
Don't be silly - any Labour canvassers can rightly say 'this is the bloody shambles you get with a Tory government'.
Nope, Labour have been voting down every version of brexit offered. They are going to get as much of the blame for this as the Tories.
Rule One: the Government is always to blame.
In ordinary circumstances, that's right. But, Labour are plainly not benefitting from the government's disarray.
Wishful thinking for you I fear. Little more than Tory voters not fancying Corbyn.
As Corbyn is going nowhere soon which is pretty significant, Tory voters will protest by voting for the Brexit Party in the European Parliament elections, not for Corbyn Labour
Quite possibly. The government still gets the blame.
So as I will start to ask anyone suggesting No Deal - what exactly do you mean by No Deal?
For a starter should we impose tariffs or should we not impose tariffs and what is the consequences in both the short medium and long term of both options.
Equally how would British farmers fare with No Deal?
And what does "remain" mean - does it mean no more EU laws or treaties without referendums - if no deal is a temporary status then so is remain.
Nope - remain means we stay in the EU in the way we previously were, implementing future laws and treaties as required as they are voted for or agreed upon as we currently do....
So yes remain is easy to explain - the EU continues as it currently is with us a member of it.
As I've answered your question how about answering mine?
I am not in favour of any more referendums period.
They may not buy into it quite yet but if a losers revote is confirmed then there will be a vast amount of publicity given to the fact that they have been ignored and that they are being told to go back and vote again because they got it wrong the first time. A month or so of that should bring things nicely to boiling point.
"losers revote" is a bit infantile, isn't it? Nice Leaver approach to the use of the apostrophe, mind. As for "nicely to boiling point," referring back to my suggestion of the possibility of racist violence, I will just invite readers of this site to consider what it says about you.
Losers' Revote is a far more accurate description than People's Vote. The losers want another chance because they didn't like the result of the first one. That is it.
And why would any violence be 'racist'? That is just you showing your own bigotry and ignorance once again. Anyone you disagree with must, by definition be a racist. You Remain fanatics never learn.
So as I will start to ask anyone suggesting No Deal - what exactly do you mean by No Deal?
For a starter should we impose tariffs or should we not impose tariffs and what is the consequences in both the short medium and long term of both options.
Equally how would British farmers fare with No Deal?
And what does "remain" mean - does it mean no more EU laws or treaties without referendums - if no deal is a temporary status then so is remain.
Nope - remain means we stay in the EU in the way we previously were, implementing future laws and treaties as required as they are voted for or agreed upon as we currently do....
So yes remain is easy to explain - the EU continues as it currently is with us a member of it.
As I've answered your question how about answering mine?
I am not in favour of any more referendums period.
I doubt the man in the street would think that. But they (I think) will be frustrated that they are being asked the same question again with no apparent change in the UK’s status.
I think that is true. Hence, and I am one of many fervent PB Remainers who sees very little merit in a second referendum, it would have to be a Deal vs Remain option, which would allow them (us) to confirm the flavour of leaving, and thus some progress and control vs EURef 1 because lest we forget the Deal is leaving.
So why not include No Deal? Because, simply, that would be too great a degree of self harm to ask the country to inflict upon itself.
It just cant be Deal vs Remain, It would be like having Leave vs Remain without FOM. It would disenfranchise millions of voters
Deal vs Remain is the real choice parliament is faced with. Why not turn it over to the people?
For all we know, a large proportion of the votes that got Leave over the line were from people who wanted to leave with No Deal, why should they be disenfranchised because MPs changed the rules after the vote?
Getting leave over the line isn't enough - unless 100% of those who voted leave are happy with No Deal (Oborne and myself confirm that isn't the case) No Deal isn't an end state 52% of the population would be happy with.
BTW I could just about cope with No Deal were the UK to impose maximum tariffs but the idea from the ERG that tariffs should be 0 is completely and utterly insane.
No one is making you vote for it
Your statement was
"For all we know, a large proportion of the votes that got Leave over the line were from people who wanted to leave with No Deal, why should they be disenfranchised because MPs changed the rules after the vote?"
My comment was that you can equally argue that it was those after the softest possible outcome who got leave over the line...
They may not buy into it quite yet but if a losers revote is confirmed then there will be a vast amount of publicity given to the fact that they have been ignored and that they are being told to go back and vote again because they got it wrong the first time. A month or so of that should bring things nicely to boiling point.
"losers revote" is a bit infantile, isn't it? Nice Leaver approach to the use of the apostrophe, mind. As for "nicely to boiling point," referring back to my suggestion of the possibility of racist violence, I will just invite readers of this site to consider what it says about you.
Losers' Revote is a far more accurate description than People's Vote. The losers want another chance because they didn't like the result of the first one. That is it.
And why would any violence be 'racist'? That is just you showing your own bigotry and ignorance once again. Anyone you disagree with must, by definition be a racist. You Remain fanatics never learn.
I wouldn't call it a loser's revoke. May's triggering of A50 is now a completely failed project - we need to reset things and then work out whether it's possible and worth trying to leave a second time.
What we are witnessing now is natural consequence of ideological Eurosceptism conflicting with pragmatic Conservatism. They were always different things.
David Cameron's arrogance has unleashed a dirty, horrible side of British politics. Those with traditionally European liberal values shouldn't give into violence and intimidation and those here frothing about the idea of it should tread carefully, I don't think you appreciate how dangerous this is.
People I know have said the most horrendous things about politicians and Brexit, people who aren't that politically engaged, that I couldn't repeat it on here as it would be a hate crime. I think the notion that Leave voters are apathetic is extremely wide of the mark.
I'm sure there are wards where canvassing for the Conservatives is pretty grim right now. But, I certainly would not want to be canvassing for Labour in a place like Pontefract, or Wakfield.
Don't be silly - any Labour canvassers can rightly say 'this is the bloody shambles you get with a Tory government'.
Nope, Labour have been voting down every version of brexit offered. They are going to get as much of the blame for this as the Tories.
Rule One: the Government is always to blame.
In ordinary circumstances, that's right. But, Labour are plainly not benefitting from the government's disarray.
Wishful thinking for you I fear. Little more than Tory voters not fancying Corbyn.
As Corbyn is going nowhere soon which is pretty significant, Tory voters will protest by voting for the Brexit Party in the European Parliament elections, not for Corbyn Labour
Quite possibly. The government still gets the blame.
If what Lewis Goodall suggests is right it could be Labour Leavers not just Tory Leavers protesting by voting Brexit Party
Much vilified but Donald Tusk continues to remain a good friend of the UK.
His letter once again stressing the need to show the UK the highest respect . As opposed to the disgraceful actions of some UK politicians who continue to attack the EU as an enemy .
Agreed. He has impressed me. A much better representative of the EU than Juncker. Barnier has also been impressive.
The Brexit process has revealed weaknesses in Westminster and strengths in the EU.
Funny that. This is both a justification for Leaver's (we don't like the strong EU, we want independence) and Remainer's (we don't want to be governed by a bunch of .... without the checks and balances of the EU).
... and I'm suggesting that we are only at this stage thanks to a stitch up by the political elite, which the original vote was raging against.
Deal vs Remain is ludicrous. Nothing can surprise me now, the MPs are lower than the lowest of creatures, but it is demonstrably unfair.
What you don't quite seem to have got your head around is that most MPs believe, entirely sincerely, that crashing out with no deal and no transition would be utterly disastrous. I think they are right on this, but that isn't the point: the point is that they sincerely believe it.
I am not asking them to vote for No Deal at all. I have constantly said they should vote for Theresa May's deal.
What I am saying is that having a referendum where the options are Remain or one version of Leave disenfranchises voters who want to leave but don't like that version. The other versions aren't simply No Deal.
Ratifying the withdrawal agreement isn't "one version of Leave". It's the only version of Leave. The alternative is agreeing the same terms in chaotic circumstances. It would be dishonest to present it to people as an alternative.
... and I'm suggesting that we are only at this stage thanks to a stitch up by the political elite, which the original vote was raging against.
Deal vs Remain is ludicrous. Nothing can surprise me now, the MPs are lower than the lowest of creatures, but it is demonstrably unfair.
What you don't quite seem to have got your head around is that most MPs believe, entirely sincerely, that crashing out with no deal and no transition would be utterly disastrous. I think they are right on this, but that isn't the point: the point is that they sincerely believe it.
I am not asking them to vote for No Deal at all. I have constantly said they should vote for Theresa May's deal.
What I am saying is that having a referendum where the options are Remain or one version of Leave disenfranchises voters who want to leave but don't like that version. The other versions aren't simply No Deal.
It doesn't disenfranchise them. It asks them to choose which of the two available options they want. Only one policy can be implemented, so it can't be a pick-and-mix offer.
One of the options got 48% last time, the other might only get half of the 52% that won, and you call that a straight up heat?! As Alan Johnson, a Remainer, said, the public would see it as crooked.
It's not worth discussing, we will have to agree to disagree
The one big flaw in the logic of the revote crowd is that politics would just go back to business as normal after Brexit being cancelled. A far more likely outcome is a UKIP on steroids party winning about 35% of the vote, and taking us out on the hardest possible terms.
'We're going to negotiate a deal and then put it to the people in a confirmatory vote - as previously suggested by my honourable and right-honourable colleagues Jacob Rees-Mogg, David Davis, John Redwood and Boris Johnson among others'.
And she should have set up an all-party commission with representatives of remain and leave in the proportions 48-52 to decide on a negotiating mandate before triggering A50.
That is what Cameron should have done prior to the referendum!
Israel exit poll showing a tie? I don't speak Hebrew, but is 36 apiece on the screen.
Netanyahu could hold on then with more coalition partners
One exit poll shows the centre-right bloc ahead 66-54 in terms of seats, another has the centre-right and centre-left blocs tied at 60 each. One poll has Likud and Blue & White on 36 seats each, another has Blue & White ahead 37-33. Make of that what you will.
They may not buy into it quite yet but if a losers revote is confirmed then there will be a vast amount of publicity given to the fact that they have been ignored and that they are being told to go back and vote again because they got it wrong the first time. A month or so of that should bring things nicely to boiling point.
"losers revote" is a bit infantile, isn't it? Nice Leaver approach to the use of the apostrophe, mind. As for "nicely to boiling point," referring back to my suggestion of the possibility of racist violence, I will just invite readers of this site to consider what it says about you.
Losers' Revote is a far more accurate description than People's Vote. The losers want another chance because they didn't like the result of the first one. That is it.
And why would any violence be 'racist'? That is just you showing your own bigotry and ignorance once again. Anyone you disagree with must, by definition be a racist. You Remain fanatics never learn.
I called you racist because the scenario you approvingly called "things coming nicely to the boil" was of the EDL kicking German dogs to death. But if you think that is not racist, let's not quibble about it. You seem to be happy with non-racist violence. Most people aren't.
I am not a remain fanatic. I have spent a lot of the last two years here vociferously objecting to the claim that all leavers were either motivated by xenophobia or cynically prepared to ride on the coat tails of xenophobes. Turns out I was wrong about that. And I have never prior to this year advocated, or thought desirable, a further referendum. So your claims of "fanatic" "sore loser" and so on have no traction whatever.
'We're going to negotiate a deal and then put it to the people in a confirmatory vote - as previously suggested by my honourable and right-honourable colleagues Jacob Rees-Mogg, David Davis, John Redwood and Boris Johnson among others'.
And she should have set up an all-party commission with representatives of remain and leave in the proportions 48-52 to decide on a negotiating mandate before triggering A50.
That is what Cameron should have done prior to the referendum!
Indeed, put all the leavers in a room and task them with coming up with an agreed and workable Leave proposition for the referendum. They'd still be in there, arguing it out.
With regards to the general anger over Brexit, I associate with some fairly heavy pro-remain segments of the population, and even they are hugely frustrated. The one sentiment that can unite the country right now is that our politicians are total c***s. With any luck the Tories and Labour will get seriously displaced in the European elections. Their total failure has lead to the absolute mess over the past 4 years.
If Brexit is revoked then I can see things getting very ugly, if 70 odd percent of the 45% still in favour of Brexit unites behind one party in a GE then it's feasible that things could get even more mental.
Perhaps if someone started a petition that required all existing MPs to retire from parliament to make way for fresh faces? That might unite the country in a way nothing else could.
'We're going to negotiate a deal and then put it to the people in a confirmatory vote - as previously suggested by my honourable and right-honourable colleagues Jacob Rees-Mogg, David Davis, John Redwood and Boris Johnson among others'.
And she should have set up an all-party commission with representatives of remain and leave in the proportions 48-52 to decide on a negotiating mandate before triggering A50.
That is what Cameron should have done prior to the referendum!
Indeed, put all the leavers in a room and task them with coming up with an agreed and workable Leave proposition for the referendum. They'd still be in there, arguing it out.
Far from taking back control the UK's attempt to leave the EU has left it in the humiliating position of having to beg them not to throw us out and forced to accept guarantees of good behaviour like a naughty child. Possibly the worst failure on the part of the British state since the loss of the American colonies.
People I know have said the most horrendous things about politicians and Brexit, people who aren't that politically engaged, that I couldn't repeat it on here as it would be a hate crime. I think the notion that Leave voters are apathetic is extremely wide of the mark.
I'm sure there are wards where canvassing for the Conservatives is pretty grim right now. But, I certainly would not want to be canvassing for Labour in a place like Pontefract, or Wakfield.
Don't be silly - any Labour canvassers can rightly say 'this is the bloody shambles you get with a Tory government'.
Nope, Labour have been voting down every version of brexit offered. They are going to get as much of the blame for this as the Tories.
With regards to the general anger over Brexit, I associate with some fairly heavy pro-remain segments of the population, and even they are hugely frustrated. The one sentiment that can unite the country right now is that our politicians are total c***s. With any luck the Tories and Labour will get seriously displaced in the European elections. Their total failure has lead to the absolute mess over the past 4 years.
If Brexit is revoked then I can see things getting very ugly, if 70 odd percent of the 45% still in favour of Brexit unites behind one party in a GE then it's feasible that things could get even more mental.
Perhaps if someone started a petition that required all existing MPs to retire from parliament to make way for fresh faces? That might unite the country in a way nothing else could.
My cat and I would sign, from both our email addresses!
The one big flaw in the logic of the revote crowd is that politics would just go back to business as normal after Brexit being cancelled. A far more likely outcome is a UKIP on steroids party winning about 35% of the vote, and taking us out on the hardest possible terms.
If they won a majority on a workable programme that's democracy. I can't have been the only person who assumed when they voted that Cameron had a plan in a cupboard somewhere. If one had existed we'd be out now.
Good luck with defining a no deal that not only wouldn't be subject to a categorical nonsense but that all groups could agree on.
You are quite right. NO DEAL is not sufficiently definable and furthermore as others have pointed out it is an option that almost every MP of sound character and sober disposition considers in all sincerity to be unconscionable. It cannot be included in a referendum.
But rcs1000 and ilk are also right to say that it MUST be included for any referendum to have democratic legitimacy. The May Deal vs Remain would be impossible to take seriously.
So there we go. Unless we can come up with a kind of quantum mechanical referendum that both has and does not have No Deal on the ballot paper the idea is doomed.
No deal is definable. It is letting the clock run out. That could be put on a referendum ballot as an otpion. If passed it would be possible to announce this, and to prepare for this. With a 6 months notice it would be an awful situation but at least planned for. Letting the clock run out this week would be complete and utter chaos and an awful situation.
People I know have said the most horrendous things about politicians and Brexit, people who aren't that politically engaged, that I couldn't repeat it on here as it would be a hate crime. I think the notion that Leave voters are apathetic is extremely wide of the mark.
I'm sure there are wards where canvassing for the Conservatives is pretty grim right now. But, I certainly would not want to be canvassing for Labour in a place like Pontefract, or Wakfield.
Don't be silly - any Labour canvassers can rightly say 'this is the bloody shambles you get with a Tory government'.
Nope, Labour have been voting down every version of brexit offered. They are going to get as much of the blame for this as the Tories.
Rule One: the Government is always to blame.
Rule Two: Brexit has rewritten the Rules.....
Rule Three: The new rules never help you, you will suffer more than before.
'We're going to negotiate a deal and then put it to the people in a confirmatory vote - as previously suggested by my honourable and right-honourable colleagues Jacob Rees-Mogg, David Davis, John Redwood and Boris Johnson among others'.
And she should have set up an all-party commission with representatives of remain and leave in the proportions 48-52 to decide on a negotiating mandate before triggering A50.
That is what Cameron should have done prior to the referendum!
Indeed, put all the leavers in a room and task them with coming up with an agreed and workable Leave proposition for the referendum. They'd still be in there, arguing it out.
That assumes 'the enemy' would do as he requested. Instead, someone like Farage would have found some reason to be outside the room: something like: "this is an attempt to rig the system." Labour and UKIP leavers would have found reasons not to take part, meaning it was very much a Conservative leaver prospectus, which would automatically be rejected by the other 'true' leavers.
Leave wanted to win, and they fought to win, however much it debased them. But like Wil e Coyote once he finally caught Road Runner, they;re holding up a sign stating: "What now?"
They may not buy into it quite yet but if a losers revote is confirmed then there will be a vast amount of publicity given to the fact that they have been ignored and that they are being told to go back and vote again because they got it wrong the first time. A month or so of that should bring things nicely to boiling point.
"losers revote" is a bit infantile, isn't it? Nice Leaver approach to the use of the apostrophe, mind. As for "nicely to boiling point," referring back to my suggestion of the possibility of racist violence, I will just invite readers of this site to consider what it says about you.
Losers' Revote is a far more accurate description than People's Vote. The losers want another chance because they didn't like the result of the first one. That is it.
And why would any violence be 'racist'? That is just you showing your own bigotry and ignorance once again. Anyone you disagree with must, by definition be a racist. You Remain fanatics never learn.
I wouldn't call it a loser's revoke. May's triggering of A50 is now a completely failed project - we need to reset things and then work out whether it's possible and worth trying to leave a second time.
I think we can be sure it is possible, because the shambles hasn't put the SNP off Independence. They have a lot more to unpick.
People I know have said the most horrendous things about politicians and Brexit, people who aren't that politically engaged, that I couldn't repeat it on here as it would be a hate crime. I think the notion that Leave voters are apathetic is extremely wide of the mark.
I'm sure there are wards where canvassing for the Conservatives is pretty grim right now. But, I certainly would not want to be canvassing for Labour in a place like Pontefract, or Wakfield.
Don't be silly - any Labour canvassers can rightly say 'this is the bloody shambles you get with a Tory government'.
Nope, Labour have been voting down every version of brexit offered. They are going to get as much of the blame for this as the Tories.
Rule One: the Government is always to blame.
Rule Two: Brexit has rewritten the Rules.....
RULE 3: If someone says "stop", goes limp, or taps out Brexit is over.
There is a dangerous belief amongst Ultra remainers that a simple revoke means we're back to the status quo as at June 22nd 2016 and everything is tickety boo. That boat has long since sailed. There will have to be a debate about what flavour of remain we have. We're going to be at each other's throats for years.
There is a dangerous belief amongst Ultra remainers that a simple revoke means we're back to the status quo as at June 22nd 2016 and everything is tickety boo. That boat has long since sailed. There will have to be a debate about what flavour of remain we have. We're going to be at each other's throats for years.
I don't think a simple revoke is seriously possible. It would have to be revoke + referendum or revoke + GE. "We're going to be at each other's throats for years" is true of absolutely all possible outcomes from where we are now.
People I know have said the most horrendous things about politicians and Brexit, people who aren't that politically engaged, that I couldn't repeat it on here as it would be a hate crime. I think the notion that Leave voters are apathetic is extremely wide of the mark.
I'm sure there are wards where canvassing for the Conservatives is pretty grim right now. But, I certainly would not want to be canvassing for Labour in a place like Pontefract, or Wakfield.
Don't be silly - any Labour canvassers can rightly say 'this is the bloody shambles you get with a Tory government'.
Nope, Labour have been voting down every version of brexit offered. They are going to get as much of the blame for this as the Tories.
Rule One: the Government is always to blame.
Rule Two: Brexit has rewritten the Rules.....
Rule Three: The new rules never help you, you will suffer more than before.
The one big flaw in the logic of the revote crowd is that politics would just go back to business as normal after Brexit being cancelled. A far more likely outcome is a UKIP on steroids party winning about 35% of the vote, and taking us out on the hardest possible terms.
No. A far more likely result is the Brexit party, UKIP, the real Brexit party, the Conservative Brexit Party and the True Conservative Party each getting 7% of the vote and 10 seats in Westminster. On the otherside there is quite likely to be a Labour split with Momentum, Labour-Brexit, Labour Remain and Labour Democtrats.
David Cameron's arrogance has unleashed a dirty, horrible side of British politics. Those with traditionally European liberal values shouldn't give into violence and intimidation and those here frothing about the idea of it should tread carefully, I don't think you appreciate how dangerous this is.
Good luck with defining a no deal that not only wouldn't be subject to a categorical nonsense but that all groups could agree on.
You are quite right. NO DEAL is not sufficiently definable and furthermore as others have pointed out it is an option that almost every MP of sound character and sober disposition considers in all sincerity to be unconscionable. It cannot be included in a referendum.
But rcs1000 and ilk are also right to say that it MUST be included for any referendum to have democratic legitimacy. The May Deal vs Remain would be impossible to take seriously.
So there we go. Unless we can come up with a kind of quantum mechanical referendum that both has and does not have No Deal on the ballot paper the idea is doomed.
No deal is definable. It is letting the clock run out. That could be put on a referendum ballot as an otpion. If passed it would be possible to announce this, and to prepare for this. With a 6 months notice it would be an awful situation but at least planned for. Letting the clock run out this week would be complete and utter chaos and an awful situation.
So no mini deals? The like of which many Leavers have been advocating?
Hell of a drop for M5S. Surely unusual for the larger coalition partner to get screwed over like that.
They allowed themselves to be overshadowed by Salvini almost from the moment they took office.
It doesn't help that the "face" of M5S, Beppe Grillo is not a member of the government, and has struggled to find a role.
My understanding is that he - and a lot of other senior M5S people - are pretty unhappy with the current arrangement. So it's entirely possible that the current Italian coalition doesn't last.
People I know have said the most horrendous things about politicians and Brexit, people who aren't that politically engaged, that I couldn't repeat it on here as it would be a hate crime. I think the notion that Leave voters are apathetic is extremely wide of the mark.
I'm sure there are wards where canvassing for the Conservatives is pretty grim right now. But, I certainly would not want to be canvassing for Labour in a place like Pontefract, or Wakfield.
Don't be silly - any Labour canvassers can rightly say 'this is the bloody shambles you get with a Tory government'.
Nope, Labour have been voting down every version of brexit offered. They are going to get as much of the blame for this as the Tories.
Rule One: the Government is always to blame.
Rule Two: Brexit has rewritten the Rules.....
Rule Three: The new rules never help you, you will suffer more than before.
Good luck with defining a no deal that not only wouldn't be subject to a categorical nonsense but that all groups could agree on.
You are quite right. NO DEAL is not sufficiently definable and furthermore as others have pointed out it is an option that almost every MP of sound character and sober disposition considers in all sincerity to be unconscionable. It cannot be included in a referendum.
But rcs1000 and ilk are also right to say that it MUST be included for any referendum to have democratic legitimacy. The May Deal vs Remain would be impossible to take seriously.
So there we go. Unless we can come up with a kind of quantum mechanical referendum that both has and does not have No Deal on the ballot paper the idea is doomed.
No deal is definable. It is letting the clock run out. That could be put on a referendum ballot as an otpion. If passed it would be possible to announce this, and to prepare for this. With a 6 months notice it would be an awful situation but at least planned for. Letting the clock run out this week would be complete and utter chaos and an awful situation.
So no mini deals? The like of which many Leavers have been advocating?
The EU has stated that the backstop would be required for the island of Ireland before any mini deals were signed.
People I know have said the most horrendous things about politicians and Brexit, people who aren't that politically engaged, that I couldn't repeat it on here as it would be a hate crime. I think the notion that Leave voters are apathetic is extremely wide of the mark.
I'm sure there are wards where canvassing for the Conservatives is pretty grim right now. But, I certainly would not want to be canvassing for Labour in a place like Pontefract, or Wakfield.
Don't be silly - any Labour canvassers can rightly say 'this is the bloody shambles you get with a Tory government'.
Nope, Labour have been voting down every version of brexit offered. They are going to get as much of the blame for this as the Tories.
Rule One: the Government is always to blame.
Rule Two: Brexit has rewritten the Rules.....
Rule Three: The new rules never help you, you will suffer more than before.
David Cameron's arrogance has unleashed a dirty, horrible side of British politics. Those with traditionally European liberal values shouldn't give into violence and intimidation and those here frothing about the idea of it should tread carefully, I don't think you appreciate how dangerous this is.
England has gone crazy
Joining Scotland.
Scotland is fine , we want to remain in EU and no xenophobia or foreigner hating up here thank you, it is an English disease.
David Cameron's arrogance has unleashed a dirty, horrible side of British politics. Those with traditionally European liberal values shouldn't give into violence and intimidation and those here frothing about the idea of it should tread carefully, I don't think you appreciate how dangerous this is.
England has gone crazy
Joining Scotland.
Scotland is fine , we want to remain in EU and no xenophobia or foreigner hating up here thank you, it is an English disease.
David Cameron's arrogance has unleashed a dirty, horrible side of British politics. Those with traditionally European liberal values shouldn't give into violence and intimidation and those here frothing about the idea of it should tread carefully, I don't think you appreciate how dangerous this is.
England has gone crazy
Joining Scotland.
Scotland is fine , we want to remain in EU and no xenophobia or foreigner hating up here thank you, it is an English disease.
Having grown up and lived in the west of Scotland for 35 years I can confirm that this is entirely wrong. Also almost 1m Scots voted for Brexit.
The idea that Scotland thinks in one way which is fundamentally different from England is obviously wrong, just a slight difference in the balance of the numbers
So if only the EU had given in to what we wanted, all would have been well. Yes, that's a serious suggestion. A GE that the Tories lose would be better than having to rely on the DUP, they're so in love with their own grievances and posturing of their own purity.
And yes, it may well be humilating and embarrassing. Sometimes you have to eat humble pie and be embarrassed. People should be less afraid of being embarrassed if they think it is the right thing to do. Not easy for politicians, but it seems clear that people like the DUP care more about image than anything of substance.
"This is often, but incorrectly, described as proportional representation. It is really a repeat first past the post system for parties."
This statement is wrong. It is a proportional system.
The problem is, as you point out later, the small number of seats in each "region". It is frankly impossible to get a near proportional system when only three people are elected from one region, without cutting candidates up into smaller peices.
If 650 seats would be apportioned by the D'Hont system across one "region" then the result would be ver proportional.
I would be in favour of that constitutional innovation.
Surely the main question is whether David Coburn will any longer bestride the national and international stage?
Is he standing? I think he (along with practically everyone else) fell out with UKIP last year.
He's in the Brexit Party now. I doubt Coburn could resist a last hurrah of media attention which I assume he'd get as an incumbent.
I think any of the prospective MEPs getting media attention is going to be an ask but if they want a freak show I am sure he will be available.
FWIW I think the SNP just might squeeze a third, especially if there is differential voting by remainers over leavers but the Tories will have aspirations for a second. Everyone else is wasting their time (assuming that they are not all wasting their time of course).
You may have the bizarre scenario of Tories performing better in Scotland than anywhere else in the UK.
I think that might be a highly likely outcome. It also seems bizarre for Brexiteer voters to want to punish the one party that delivered an EU Ref and who did try to implement that result in the ballot box. Surely if you want to send a message to Parliament conveying your disillusionment with the current Parliamentary deadlock over Brexit, you don't want to strengthen the argument of the Remain camp that voters have changed their minds and now need another EU Ref?
Good luck with defining a no deal that not only wouldn't be subject to a categorical nonsense but that all groups could agree on.
You are quite right. NO DEAL is not sufficiently definable and furthermore as others have pointed out it is an option that almost every MP of sound character and sober disposition considers in all sincerity to be unconscionable. It cannot be included in a referendum.
But rcs1000 and ilk are also right to say that it MUST be included for any referendum to have democratic legitimacy. The May Deal vs Remain would be impossible to take seriously.
So there we go. Unless we can come up with a kind of quantum mechanical referendum that both has and does not have No Deal on the ballot paper the idea is doomed.
No deal is definable. It is letting the clock run out. That could be put on a referendum ballot as an otpion. If passed it would be possible to announce this, and to prepare for this. With a 6 months notice it would be an awful situation but at least planned for. Letting the clock run out this week would be complete and utter chaos and an awful situation.
So no mini deals? The like of which many Leavers have been advocating?
The EU has stated that the backstop would be required for the island of Ireland before any mini deals were signed.
Yes. Hence my first point that the public can't be allowed to vote such calamity upon themselves.
So if only the EU had given in to what we wanted, all would have been well. Yes, that's a serious suggestion. A GE that the Tories lose would be better than having to rely on the DUP, they're so in love with their own grievances and posturing of their own purity.
And yes, it may well be humilating and embarrassing. Sometimes you have to eat humble pie and be embarrassed. People should be less afraid of being embarrassed if they think it is the right thing to do. Not easy for politicians, but it seems clear that people like the DUP care more about image than anything of substance.
Really is time the Tories told the DUP to go f themselves
David Cameron's arrogance has unleashed a dirty, horrible side of British politics. Those with traditionally European liberal values shouldn't give into violence and intimidation and those here frothing about the idea of it should tread carefully, I don't think you appreciate how dangerous this is.
England has gone crazy
Joining Scotland.
Scotland is fine , we want to remain in EU and no xenophobia or foreigner hating up here thank you, it is an English disease.
I wouldn't put past May staying on post-long extension and European parliament elections.
She shouldn't, and it will result in nothing concretely new coming along to change the balance of the existing log-jam, but I wouldn't put it past her just braving it out and staying on.
Her fundamental problem remains the same. She have to pick a particular side and piss off the other ones, almost certainly resulting in a split of the Conservatives and/or collapse of her Government. She has to compromise on at least one of the many areas where she has refused to consider any compromise. She has to do something *different*. She seems unable to do any of these things.
Her replacement may not have any less of a dilemma but is at least considerably more likely to actually do something that results in progress of the situation, even if it does ultimately result in one of the inevitable different calamities.
David Cameron's arrogance has unleashed a dirty, horrible side of British politics. Those with traditionally European liberal values shouldn't give into violence and intimidation and those here frothing about the idea of it should tread carefully, I don't think you appreciate how dangerous this is.
England has gone crazy
Joining Scotland.
Scotland is fine , we want to remain in EU and no xenophobia or foreigner hating up here thank you, it is an English disease.
Didn't you vote to Leave?
Malcolms cognitive dissonance on this is genuinely impressive.
What you don't quite seem to have got your head around is that most MPs believe, entirely sincerely, that crashing out with no deal and no transition would be utterly disastrous. I think they are right on this, but that isn't the point: the point is that they sincerely believe it.
I am not asking them to vote for No Deal at all. I have constantly said they should vote for Theresa May's deal.
What I am saying is that having a referendum where the options are Remain or one version of Leave disenfranchises voters who want to leave but don't like that version. The other versions aren't simply No Deal.
Ratifying the withdrawal agreement isn't "one version of Leave". It's the only version of Leave. The alternative is agreeing the same terms in chaotic circumstances. It would be dishonest to present it to people as an alternative.
... and I'm suggesting that we are only at this stage thanks to a stitch up by the political elite, which the original vote was raging against.
Deal vs Remain is ludicrous. Nothing can surprise me now, the MPs are lower than the lowest of creatures, but it is demonstrably unfair.
What you don't quite seem to have got your head around is that most MPs believe, entirely sincerely, that crashing out with no deal and no transition would be utterly disastrous. I think they are right on this, but that isn't the point: the point is that they sincerely believe it.
I am not asking them to vote for No Deal at all. I have constantly said they should vote for Theresa May's deal.
What I am saying is that having a referendum where the options are Remain or one version of Leave disenfranchises voters who want to leave but don't like that version. The other versions aren't simply No Deal.
It doesn't disenfranchise them. It asks them to choose which of the two available options they want. Only one policy can be implemented, so it can't be a pick-and-mix offer.
One of the options got 48% last time, the other might only get half of the 52% that won, and you call that a straight up heat?! As Alan Johnson, a Remainer, said, the public would see it as crooked.
It's not worth discussing, we will have to agree to disagree
What option do you think would get the support of all the 52%?
Much vilified but Donald Tusk continues to remain a good friend of the UK.
His letter once again stressing the need to show the UK the highest respect . As opposed to the disgraceful actions of some UK politicians who continue to attack the EU as an enemy .
Agreed. He has impressed me. A much better representative of the EU than Juncker. Barnier has also been impressive.
The Brexit process has revealed weaknesses in Westminster and strengths in the EU.
Funny that. This is both a justification for Leaver's (we don't like the strong EU, we want independence) and Remainer's (we don't want to be governed by a bunch of .... without the checks and balances of the EU).
I always found the second argument extremely insidious. Basically it says we are too ignorant or childish to rule ourselves as a democratic country so we need someone else to impose their values upon us. There were clearly arguments for Remain even if one disagreed with them This is not one of those. It is an argument for dictatorship.
David Cameron's arrogance has unleashed a dirty, horrible side of British politics. Those with traditionally European liberal values shouldn't give into violence and intimidation and those here frothing about the idea of it should tread carefully, I don't think you appreciate how dangerous this is.
England has gone crazy
Things seem quite peaceful here in the upstairs bar of The Victoria pub in Bayswater. Methinks you’re overreacting somewhat.
People I know have said the most horrendous things about politicians and Brexit, people who aren't that politically engaged, that I couldn't repeat it on here as it would be a hate crime. I think the notion that Leave voters are apathetic is extremely wide of the mark.
I'm sure there are wards where canvassing for the Conservatives is pretty grim right now. But, I certainly would not want to be canvassing for Labour in a place like Pontefract, or Wakfield.
Don't be silly - any Labour canvassers can rightly say 'this is the bloody shambles you get with a Tory government'.
Nope, Labour have been voting down every version of brexit offered. They are going to get as much of the blame for this as the Tories.
Rule One: the Government is always to blame.
In ordinary circumstances, that's right. But, Labour are plainly not benefitting from the government's disarray.
Wishful thinking for you I fear. Little more than Tory voters not fancying Corbyn.
As Corbyn is going nowhere soon which is pretty significant, Tory voters will protest by voting for the Brexit Party in the European Parliament elections, not for Corbyn Labour
Quite possibly. The government still gets the blame.
If what Lewis Goodall suggests is right it could be Labour Leavers not just Tory Leavers protesting by voting Brexit Party
That's spot on. I'm buzzing with excitement at the opportunity to vote for Farage and his cronies.
David Cameron's arrogance has unleashed a dirty, horrible side of British politics. Those with traditionally European liberal values shouldn't give into violence and intimidation and those here frothing about the idea of it should tread carefully, I don't think you appreciate how dangerous this is.
England has gone crazy
Are you saying that 38% of your countrymen were also crazy Malcolm?
They may not buy into it quite yet but if a losers revote is confirmed then there will be a vast amount of publicity given to the fact that they have been ignored and that they are being told to go back and vote again because they got it wrong the first time. A month or so of that should bring things nicely to boiling point.
"losers revote" is a bit infantile, isn't it? Nice Leaver approach to the use of the apostrophe, mind. As for "nicely to boiling point," referring back to my suggestion of the possibility of racist violence, I will just invite readers of this site to consider what it says about you.
Losers' Revote is a far more accurate description than People's Vote. The losers want another chance because they didn't like the result of the first one. That is it.
And why would any violence be 'racist'? That is just you showing your own bigotry and ignorance once again. Anyone you disagree with must, by definition be a racist. You Remain fanatics never learn.
I wouldn't call it a loser's revoke. May's triggering of A50 is now a completely failed project - we need to reset things and then work out whether it's possible and worth trying to leave a second time.
I am damn sure you wouldn't be saying that if Remain had won and then the EU started causing problems for us. Then it would have been 'we had the vote that is it'.
And what does "remain" mean - does it mean no more EU laws or treaties without referendums - if no deal is a temporary status then so is remain.
Remain means the UK remaining a full member of the EU. There is a quite clear definition of EU membership.
Your regular reminder that (1) The concessions obtained by Cameron in 2016 will not subsist in the event of A50 revocation. Direct quote from EUCO 1/16: "It is understood that, should the result of the referendum in the United Kingdom be for it to leave the European Union, the set of arrangements referred to in paragraph 2 above will cease to exist." (2) Nobody voted for that sort of remain in the referendum. Not one. It wasn't on the ballot. (3) There are different sorts of remain. Who knew? Let's call them Premain and Cameremain, by the way. (4) Responding to a leave vote with a requirement to choose between a fairly remainy leave and an extreme remain would be, well courageous, Minister (5) Take away the vote and the fairly remainy leave option, and go straight to extremist remain? Go straight to a post-democratic country, do not collect £200, and may God have mercy on your soul.
What you don't quite seem to have got your head around is that most MPs believe, entirely sincerely, that crashing out with no deal and no transition would be utterly disastrous. I think they are right on this, but that isn't the point: the point is that they sincerely believe it.
I am not asking them to vote for No Deal at all. I have constantly said they should vote for Theresa May's deal.
What I am saying is that having a referendum where the options are Remain or one version of Leave disenfranchises voters who want to leave but don't like that version. The other versions aren't simply No Deal.
Ratifying the withdrawal agreement isn't "one version of Leave". It's the only version of Leave. The alternative is agreeing the same terms in chaotic circumstances. It would be dishonest to present it to people as an alternative.
... and I'm suggesting that we are only at this stage thanks to a stitch up by the political elite, which the original vote was raging against.
Deal vs Remain is ludicrous. Nothing can surprise me now, the MPs are lower than the lowest of creatures, but it is demonstrably unfair.
What you don't quite seem to have got your head around is that most MPs believe, entirely sincerely, that crashing out with no deal and no transition would be utterly disastrous. I think they are right on this, but that isn't the point: the point is that they sincerely believe it.
I am not asking them to vote for No Deal at all. I have constantly said they should vote for Theresa May's deal.
What I am saying is that having a referendum where the options are Remain or one version of Leave disenfranchises voters who want to leave but don't like that version. The other versions aren't simply No Deal.
It doesn't disenfranchise them. It asks them to choose which of the two available options they want. Only one policy can be implemented, so it can't be a pick-and-mix offer.
One of the options got 48% last time, the other might only get half of the 52% that won, and you call that a straight up heat?! As Alan Johnson, a Remainer, said, the public would see it as crooked.
It's not worth discussing, we will have to agree to disagree
What option do you think would get the support of all the 52%?
They may not buy into it quite yet but if a losers revote is confirmed then there will be a vast amount of publicity given to the fact that they have been ignored and that they are being told to go back and vote again because they got it wrong the first time. A month or so of that should bring things nicely to boiling point.
"losers revote" is a bit infantile, isn't it? Nice Leaver approach to the use of the apostrophe, mind. As for "nicely to boiling point," referring back to my suggestion of the possibility of racist violence, I will just invite readers of this site to consider what it says about you.
Losers' Revote is a far more accurate description than People's Vote. The losers want another chance because they didn't like the result of the first one. That is it.
And why would any violence be 'racist'? That is just you showing your own bigotry and ignorance once again. Anyone you disagree with must, by definition be a racist. You Remain fanatics never learn.
I wouldn't call it a loser's revoke. May's triggering of A50 is now a completely failed project - we need to reset things and then work out whether it's possible and worth trying to leave a second time.
I am damn sure you wouldn't be saying that if Remain had won and then the EU started causing problems for us. Then it would have been 'we had the vote that is it'.
Which way did I vote? Hint it wasn't for remain...
David Cameron's arrogance has unleashed a dirty, horrible side of British politics. Those with traditionally European liberal values shouldn't give into violence and intimidation and those here frothing about the idea of it should tread carefully, I don't think you appreciate how dangerous this is.
England has gone crazy
Joining Scotland.
Scotland is fine , we want to remain in EU and no xenophobia or foreigner hating up here thank you, it is an English disease.
They may not buy into it quite yet but if a losers revote is confirmed then there will be a vast amount of publicity given to the fact that they have been ignored and that they are being told to go back and vote again because they got it wrong the first time. A month or so of that should bring things nicely to boiling point.
"losers revote" is a bit infantile, isn't it? Nice Leaver approach to the use of the apostrophe, mind. As for "nicely to boiling point," referring back to my suggestion of the possibility of racist violence, I will just invite readers of this site to consider what it says about you.
Losers' Revote is a far more accurate description than People's Vote. The losers want another chance because they didn't like the result of the first one. That is it.
And why would any violence be 'racist'? That is just you showing your own bigotry and ignorance once again. Anyone you disagree with must, by definition be a racist. You Remain fanatics never learn.
I called you racist because the scenario you approvingly called "things coming nicely to the boil" was of the EDL kicking German dogs to death. But if you think that is not racist, let's not quibble about it. You seem to be happy with non-racist violence. Most people aren't.
I am not a remain fanatic. I have spent a lot of the last two years here vociferously objecting to the claim that all leavers were either motivated by xenophobia or cynically prepared to ride on the coat tails of xenophobes. Turns out I was wrong about that. And I have never prior to this year advocated, or thought desirable, a further referendum. So your claims of "fanatic" "sore loser" and so on have no traction whatever.
That is because you have no shame. The labels apply. You just refuse to see it.
Much vilified but Donald Tusk continues to remain a good friend of the UK. His letter once again stressing the need to show the UK the highest respect . As opposed to the disgraceful actions of some UK politicians who continue to attack the EU as an enemy .
Agreed. He has impressed me. A much better representative of the EU than Juncker. Barnier has also been impressive.
The Brexit process has revealed weaknesses in Westminster and strengths in the EU.
Funny that. This is both a justification for Leaver's (we don't like the strong EU, we want independence) and Remainer's (we don't want to be governed by a bunch of .... without the checks and balances of the EU).
I always found the second argument extremely insidious. Basically it says we are too ignorant or childish to rule ourselves as a democratic country so we need someone else to impose their values upon us. There were clearly arguments for Remain even if one disagreed with them This is not one of those. It is an argument for dictatorship.
We need the checks and balances that the EU provides, Mr Tyndall, because our present system leads to an elected dictatorship. You surely remember the name of the Tory grandee who said that? I do not want to live under a dictatorship, either a Tory dictatorship or a Socialist dictatorship.
Your argument would carry more weight if we had a decent voting system, but both Tories and Socialists are against that.
What is with political parties in foreign countries 'declaring victory' before its confirmed?
I think some of it is to do with PR. The quicker people see you as the victor the more likely you’ll be able to persuade smaller parties it would be in their interests to back you.
There is a dangerous belief amongst Ultra remainers that a simple revoke means we're back to the status quo as at June 22nd 2016 and everything is tickety boo. That boat has long since sailed. There will have to be a debate about what flavour of remain we have. We're going to be at each other's throats for years.
What you don't quite seem to have got your head around is that most MPs believe, entirely sincerely, that crashing out with no deal and no transition would be utterly disastrous. I think they are right on this, but that isn't the point: the point is that they sincerely believe it.
I am not asking them to vote for No Deal at all. I have constantly said they should vote for Theresa May's deal.
What I am saying is that having a referendum where the options are Remain or one version of Leave disenfranchises voters who want to leave but don't like that version. The other versions aren't simply No Deal.
Ratifying the withdrawal agreement isn't "one version of Leave". It's the only version of Leave. The alternative is agreeing the same terms in chaotic circumstances. It would be dishonest to present it to people as an alternative.
... and I'm suggesting that we are only at this stage thanks to a stitch up by the political elite, which the original vote was raging against.
Deal vs Remain is ludicrous. Nothing can surprise me now, the MPs are lower than the lowest of creatures, but it is demonstrably unfair.
What you don't quite seem to have got your head around is that most MPs believe, entirely sincerely, that crashing out with no deal and no transition would be utterly disastrous. I think they are right on this, but that isn't the point: the point is that they sincerely believe it.
I am not asking them to vote for No Deal at all. I have constantly said they should vote for Theresa May's deal.
What I am saying is that having a referendum where the options are Remain or one version of Leave disenfranchises voters who want to leave but don't like that version. The other versions aren't simply No Deal.
It doesn't disenfranchise them. It asks them to choose which of the two available options they want. Only one policy can be implemented, so it can't be a pick-and-mix offer.
One of the options got 48% last time, the other might only get half of the 52% that won, and you call that a straight up heat?! As Alan Johnson, a Remainer, said, the public would see it as crooked.
It's not worth discussing, we will have to agree to disagree
What option do you think would get the support of all the 52%?
Leave
May's deal does that... but the ERG nutcases won't accept it.
What option do you think would get the support of all the 52%?
Leave
The soft one keeping freedom of Movement that both me and Richard_Tyndall were happy to see or the full on No Deal version with no tariffs as advocated by people who don't know about game theory or anything beyond Year 7 economics...
What you don't quite seem to have got your head around is that most MPs believe, entirely sincerely, that crashing out with no deal and no transition would be utterly disastrous. I think they are right on this, but that isn't the point: the point is that they sincerely believe it.
I am not asking them to vote for No Deal at all. I have constantly said they should vote for Theresa May's deal.
What I am saying is that having a referendum where the options are Remain or one version of Leave disenfranchises voters who want to leave but don't like that version. The other versions aren't simply No Deal.
Ratifying the withdrawal agreement isn't "one version of Leave". It's the only version of Leave. The alternative is agreeing the same terms in chaotic circumstances. It would be dishonest to present it to people as an alternative.
... and I'm suggesting that we are only at this stage thanks to a stitch up by the political elite, which the original vote was raging against.
Deal vs Remain is ludicrous. Nothing can surprise me now, the MPs are lower than the lowest of creatures, but it is demonstrably unfair.
I am not asking them to vote for No Deal at all. I have constantly said they should vote for Theresa May's deal.
What I am saying is that having a referendum where the options are Remain or one version of Leave disenfranchises voters who want to leave but don't like that version. The other versions aren't simply No Deal.
It doesn't disenfranchise them. It asks them to choose which of the two available options they want. Only one policy can be implemented, so it can't be a pick-and-mix offer.
One of the options got 48% last time, the other might only get half of the 52% that won, and you call that a straight up heat?! As Alan Johnson, a Remainer, said, the public would see it as crooked.
It's not worth discussing, we will have to agree to disagree
What option do you think would get the support of all the 52%?
Leave
May's deal does that... but the ERG nutcases won't accept it.
That's why Parliament shouldn't have got a vote on it.
What % of the country do you think would have been crying foul play if. after we voted to Leave, PM Cameron or May or whoever it was, negotiated a deal with the EU, cabinet agreed it, and we left?
They may not buy into it quite yet but if a losers revote is confirmed then there will be a vast amount of publicity given to the fact that they have been ignored and that they are being told to go back and vote again because they got it wrong the first time. A month or so of that should bring things nicely to boiling point.
"losers revote" is a bit infantile, isn't it? Nice Leaver approach to the use of the apostrophe, mind. As for "nicely to boiling point," referring back to my suggestion of the possibility of racist violence, I will just invite readers of this site to consider what it says about you.
Losers' Revote is a far more accurate description than People's Vote. The losers want another chance because they didn't like the result of the first one. That is it.
And why would any violence be 'racist'? That is just you showing your own bigotry and ignorance once again. Anyone you disagree with must, by definition be a racist. You Remain fanatics never learn.
I wouldn't call it a loser's revoke. May's triggering of A50 is now a completely failed project - we need to reset things and then work out whether it's possible and worth trying to leave a second time.
I am damn sure you wouldn't be saying that if Remain had won and then the EU started causing problems for us. Then it would have been 'we had the vote that is it'.
Which way did I vote? Hint it wasn't for remain...
Apologies. But the point still stands even if it doesn't apply to you. A Remain vote would have 'settled the issue for our lifetimes' as we were told prior to the vote. And that would have been the case no matter how bad things got with the EU. Particularly with a 52:48 vote for Remain. It would have frightened the politicians too much for them to risk it again.
So what we have here is exactly as I called it - a losers' revote. And if we vote 'the right way' as far as they are concerned that will be it. Finished.
I am not asking them to vote for No Deal at all. I have constantly said they should vote for Theresa May's deal.
What I am saying is that having a referendum where the options are Remain or one version of Leave disenfranchises voters who want to leave but don't like that version. The other versions aren't simply No Deal.
Ratifying the withdrawal agreement isn't "one version of Leave". It's the only version of Leave. The alternative is agreeing the same terms in chaotic circumstances. It would be dishonest to present it to people as an alternative.
... and I'm suggesting that we are only at this stage thanks to a stitch up by the political elite, which the original vote was raging against.
Deal vs Remain is ludicrous. Nothing can surprise me now, the MPs are lower than the lowest of creatures, but it is demonstrably unfair.
I am not asking them to vote for No Deal at all. I have constantly said they should vote for Theresa May's deal.
What I am saying is that having a referendum where the options are Remain or one version of Leave disenfranchises voters who want to leave but don't like that version. The other versions aren't simply No Deal.
It doesn't disenfranchise them. It asks them to choose which of the two available options they want. Only one policy can be implemented, so it can't be a pick-and-mix offer.
One of the options got 48% last time, the other might only get half of the 52% that won, and you call that a straight up heat?! As Alan Johnson, a Remainer, said, the public would see it as crooked.
It's not worth discussing, we will have to agree to disagree
What option do you think would get the support of all the 52%?
Leave
May's deal does that... but the ERG nutcases won't accept it.
That's why Parliament shouldn't have got a vote on it.
What % of the country do you think would have been crying foul play if. after we voted to Leave, PM Cameron or May or whoever it was, negotiated a deal with the EU, cabinet agreed it, and we left?
OK, it's a reasonable view, I'll give you that.
Unfortunately, we cannot turn the clock back and Parliament does have a say. So how do you suggest we move forward from here.
That's why Parliament shouldn't have got a vote on it.
What % of the country do you think would have been crying foul play if. after we voted to Leave, PM Cameron or May or whoever it was, negotiated a deal with the EU, cabinet agreed it, and we left?
5-10% at most. We'd have left, with minimal fuss.
Parliament getting involved has been a disaster, especially with so many extremists on the issue.
Much vilified but Donald Tusk continues to remain a good friend of the UK. His letter once again stressing the need to show the UK the highest respect . As opposed to the disgraceful actions of some UK politicians who continue to attack the EU as an enemy .
Agreed. He has impressed me. A much better representative of the EU than Juncker. Barnier has also been impressive.
The Brexit process has revealed weaknesses in Westminster and strengths in the EU.
Funny that. This is both a justification for Leaver's (we don't like the strong EU, we want independence) and Remainer's (we don't want to be governed by a bunch of .... without the checks and balances of the EU).
I always found the second argument extremely insidious. Basically it says we are too ignorant or childish to rule ourselves as a democratic country so we need someone else to impose their values upon us. There were clearly arguments for Remain even if one disagreed with them This is not one of those. It is an argument for dictatorship.
We need the checks and balances that the EU provides, Mr Tyndall, because our present system leads to an elected dictatorship. You surely remember the name of the Tory grandee who said that? I do not want to live under a dictatorship, either a Tory dictatorship or a Socialist dictatorship.
Your argument would carry more weight if we had a decent voting system, but both Tories and Socialists are against that.
Really? So for three quarters of the twentieth century we had an elected dictatorship did we?
Meanwhile in the EU it doesn't matter who you vote for, the EU always wins.
They may not buy into it quite yet but if a losers revote is confirmed then there will be a vast amount of publicity given to the fact that they have been ignored and that they are being told to go back and vote again because they got it wrong the first time. A month or so of that should bring things nicely to boiling point.
"losers revote" is a bit infantile, isn't it? Nice Leaver approach to the use of the apostrophe, mind. As for "nicely to boiling point," referring back to my suggestion of the possibility of racist violence, I will just invite readers of this site to consider what it says about you.
Losers' Revote is a far more accurate description than People's Vote. The losers want another chance because they didn't like the result of the first one. That is it.
And why would any violence be 'racist'? That is just you showing your own bigotry and ignorance once again. Anyone you disagree with must, by definition be a racist. You Remain fanatics never learn.
I wouldn't call it a loser's revoke. May's triggering of A50 is now a completely failed project - we need to reset things and then work out whether it's possible and worth trying to leave a second time.
I am damn sure you wouldn't be saying that if Remain had won and then the EU started causing problems for us. Then it would have been 'we had the vote that is it'.
Which way did I vote? Hint it wasn't for remain...
Apologies. But the point still stands even if it doesn't apply to you. A Remain vote would have 'settled the issue for our lifetimes' as we were told prior to the vote. And that would have been the case no matter how bad things got with the EU. Particularly with a 52:48 vote for Remain. It would have frightened the politicians too much for them to risk it again.
So what we have here is exactly as I called it - a losers' revote. And if we vote 'the right way' as far as they are concerned that will be it. Finished.
It really wouldn’t. If it had been 52-48 to Remain, we’d be talking about a second referendum, the Tories would have been led by a Brexiteer, and Farage would be eyeing a seat in Parliament.
There is a dangerous belief amongst Ultra remainers that a simple revoke means we're back to the status quo as at June 22nd 2016 and everything is tickety boo. That boat has long since sailed. There will have to be a debate about what flavour of remain we have. We're going to be at each other's throats for years.
Are we?
Yes. The EU has moved on to wanting its next level of eurofederalism.
If we do Remain, chastened, it will be in the belief that politically we will play our full part in this and not try and shape the EU to our will again.
One problem adding to the whole Parliamentary Brexit deadlock talks between May and Corbyn is not so much the hardening of their red lines rather than compromising, it is in fact the hardening of the red lines of both Conservative and Labour future leadership contenders both in and outside the Cabinet and Shadow Cabinet. I imagine that both May and Corbyn's team have been inundated with messages from these various individuals with their clear red lines/resignation threats?
But outside the Labour Shadow Cabinet, just look at the balancing act of future Labour hopefuls like Lisa Nandy or Yvette Cooper. Both in strong Leave constituencies, but who will require the far more strongly remain Labour membership to vote for them in a leadership contest. Surely they must all now be hoping that if Brexit is delayed or stopped, then there will be a Labour Leadership contest followed by a GE much further down the road in the future?
A GE right now would definitely prove to be very problematic for so MPs across the HoC's. But the growing impression that the only thing that does unite the HoC's right now is the fact that our current MPs do not want a GE, and at a time when the public has never been so engaged with the shannigans at Westminster could prove toxic if they end up triggering one.
Comments
https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1115666055811276800?s=20
https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1115668024420392960?s=20
https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1115675099481497603?s=20
This statement is wrong. It is a proportional system.
The problem is, as you point out later, the small number of seats in each "region". It is frankly impossible to get a near proportional system when only three people are elected from one region, without cutting candidates up into smaller peices.
If 650 seats would be apportioned by the D'Hont system across one "region" then the result would be ver proportional.
So yes remain is easy to explain - the EU continues as it currently is with us a member of it.
As I've answered your question how about answering mine?
If Brexit is revoked then I can see things getting very ugly, if 70 odd percent of the 45% still in favour of Brexit unites behind one party in a GE then it's feasible that things could get even more mental.
It all makes sense now. The only explanation for his steadfast attempts to sabotage Brexit ..... he's a French agent.
And why would any violence be 'racist'? That is just you showing your own bigotry and ignorance once again. Anyone you disagree with must, by definition be a racist. You Remain fanatics never learn.
I don't speak Hebrew, but is 36 apiece on the screen.
It's not worth discussing, we will have to agree to disagree
I am not a remain fanatic. I have spent a lot of the last two years here vociferously objecting to the claim that all leavers were either motivated by xenophobia or cynically prepared to ride on the coat tails of xenophobes. Turns out I was wrong about that. And I have never prior to this year advocated, or thought desirable, a further referendum. So your claims of "fanatic" "sore loser" and so on have no traction whatever.
Leave wanted to win, and they fought to win, however much it debased them. But like Wil e Coyote once he finally caught Road Runner, they;re holding up a sign stating: "What now?"
PB, BBC unhelpful.
Been away for couple of days, Corbyn was on national German news. But really none the wiser for the Internet.
On the otherside there is quite likely to be a Labour split with Momentum, Labour-Brexit, Labour Remain and Labour Democtrats.
My understanding is that he - and a lot of other senior M5S people - are pretty unhappy with the current arrangement. So it's entirely possible that the current Italian coalition doesn't last.
The idea that Scotland thinks in one way which is fundamentally different from England is obviously wrong, just a slight difference in the balance of the numbers
And yes, it may well be humilating and embarrassing. Sometimes you have to eat humble pie and be embarrassed. People should be less afraid of being embarrassed if they think it is the right thing to do. Not easy for politicians, but it seems clear that people like the DUP care more about image than anything of substance.
She shouldn't, and it will result in nothing concretely new coming along to change the balance of the existing log-jam, but I wouldn't put it past her just braving it out and staying on.
Her fundamental problem remains the same. She have to pick a particular side and piss off the other ones, almost certainly resulting in a split of the Conservatives and/or collapse of her Government. She has to compromise on at least one of the many areas where she has refused to consider any compromise. She has to do something *different*. She seems unable to do any of these things.
Her replacement may not have any less of a dilemma but is at least considerably more likely to actually do something that results in progress of the situation, even if it does ultimately result in one of the inevitable different calamities.
(1) The concessions obtained by Cameron in 2016 will not subsist in the event of A50 revocation. Direct quote from EUCO 1/16: "It is understood that, should the result of the referendum in the United Kingdom be for it to leave the European Union, the set of arrangements referred to in paragraph 2 above will cease to exist."
(2) Nobody voted for that sort of remain in the referendum. Not one. It wasn't on the ballot.
(3) There are different sorts of remain. Who knew? Let's call them Premain and Cameremain, by the way.
(4) Responding to a leave vote with a requirement to choose between a fairly remainy leave and an extreme remain would be, well courageous, Minister
(5) Take away the vote and the fairly remainy leave option, and go straight to extremist remain? Go straight to a post-democratic country, do not collect £200, and may God have mercy on your soul.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/726759/Author-JK-Rowling-reveals-vile-anti-English-racist-tweets-from-Scottish-nationalists
Your argument would carry more weight if we had a decent voting system, but both Tories and Socialists are against that.
What % of the country do you think would have been crying foul play if. after we voted to Leave, PM Cameron or May or whoever it was, negotiated a deal with the EU, cabinet agreed it, and we left?
So what we have here is exactly as I called it - a losers' revote. And if we vote 'the right way' as far as they are concerned that will be it. Finished.
Unfortunately, we cannot turn the clock back and Parliament does have a say. So how do you suggest we move forward from here.
Parliament getting involved has been a disaster, especially with so many extremists on the issue.
Meanwhile in the EU it doesn't matter who you vote for, the EU always wins.
If we do Remain, chastened, it will be in the belief that politically we will play our full part in this and not try and shape the EU to our will again.
But outside the Labour Shadow Cabinet, just look at the balancing act of future Labour hopefuls like Lisa Nandy or Yvette Cooper. Both in strong Leave constituencies, but who will require the far more strongly remain Labour membership to vote for them in a leadership contest. Surely they must all now be hoping that if Brexit is delayed or stopped, then there will be a Labour Leadership contest followed by a GE much further down the road in the future?
A GE right now would definitely prove to be very problematic for so MPs across the HoC's. But the growing impression that the only thing that does unite the HoC's right now is the fact that our current MPs do not want a GE, and at a time when the public has never been so engaged with the shannigans at Westminster could prove toxic if they end up triggering one.