Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » POLL ALERT: Ignore the hype. Brexit might be going badly, but

SystemSystem Posts: 11,014
edited November 2017 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » POLL ALERT: Ignore the hype. Brexit might be going badly, but that doesn’t mean people are changing their minds

There is a whiff of decay around Westminster at the moment and it is not just because parliament is falling down. The sexual harassment scandal that engulfs the government looks unlikely to end with the resignation of Michael Fallon whilst Theresa May’s premiership limps on with 53% of the British public dissatisfied with her performance as PM according to Ipsos Mori.

Read the full story here


«13456

Comments

  • Options
    kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 3,939
    Well my last comment FPT seems quite pertinent now...
  • Options
    So in essence we have a completely split country on the most important issue we face and a weak government. So where is the good news?
  • Options
    kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 3,939
    FPT

    kyf_100 said:

    kyf_100 said:

    But to all intents and purposes it still seems we are as divided as we were last year and hardly anyone at all is reaching out to meet the other side half way.
    ....
    Would a compromise be desirable or possible at this point? Or are we too far gone?

    How I am (as a Remainer) supposed to compromise? No one has been able to definitely show that there will be no economic damage from Brexit, indeed the closer it gets the more likely it looks that there will be a huge economic impact.

    The more vocal Leavers seem to care little about the economic impact as long as we "take back control" or "cut immigration". We never had control and we need immigrants from somewhere.

    So where is the overlap? Where is the common ground? For me the coming economic dislocation is the major element that will wreck lives in this country.

    How am I supposed to support a policy which I feel will be so damaging and detrimental no matter how it is implemented and which offers nothing in return? Post Brexit we will still not have control and we will still need immigrants.

    So what is the point of Brexit?
    I think you've illustrated my point quite nicely. We are where we were a year and a half ago - with a near 50/50 split down the middle of two groups of people with completely opposing objectives and points of view squaring off against each other.

    I'll confess to being a sovereignty nut who agrees with you on immigration - the economy runs on it and it will take us a long time to wean ourselves off that particular drug and would require enormous structural reforms to do so. But I can also see the point of view of a working class leaver who has seen their standard of living and pay stagnate or even fall as they have had to compete with beds-in-sheds immigrants in a neverending race to the bottom. As HUYFD has noted downthread, in many respects they are far more 'ideological' in their opposition to the EU than leavers of my ilk, who would happily accept a 'soft' Brexit.

    My point was, at this point, is there any kind of horse trading that could be sold to the public as an acceptable compromise? The answer, I suspect, is not.
    What? Only mildly wreck the economy? :)

    Sovereignty will not keep us fed nor employed.
    I am fond of the Ayn Rand quote, "in any compromise between poison and food, only poison can win". It seems as if both sides feel the other side is poison, and only they have the acceptable outcome.

    Further to your point, Beverley, no, you can't eat sovereignty. But I would rather die as a free man than live as the slave of a foreign power - you see how hyperbole gets us into these situations, no?
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,100
    Perfectly balanced between the two sides.

    No tsunami of buyer's remorse, Mr Blair.

    I would love to see some polling about how the public would view politicians canning Brexit though.
  • Options
    There's too much emphasis on the second referendum issue.

    The people who say they want that don't mean it. What they want is for Brexit to be stopped and think that is a way for it to happen. If a second referendum produced another Leave vote they would no more accept that than they did the first referendum instead they would say they wanted a third referendum and then a fourth etc.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,859
    Those numbers are pretty good, considering the relentless anti-Brexit narrative being spun by large parts of the media - especially the broadcast media.

    Most people still think the government should get on with Brexit, as we told them to do nearly 18 months ago.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,100
    Sandpit said:

    Those numbers are pretty good, considering the relentless anti-Brexit narrative being spun by large parts of the media - especially the broadcast media.

    Most people still think the government should get on with Brexit, as we told them to do nearly 18 months ago.

    ....and again in June of this year.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,100

    So in essence we have a completely split country on the most important issue we face and a weak government. So where is the good news?

    Remoaners aren't winning the argument?
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,859
    FPT:

    Sandpit said:


    I think an independent Ombudsman is a very good idea. Otherwise the temptation for parties to hush it up is almost irresistible.

    It is the Bex Bailey affair that is the most serious -- alleged rape and cover-up.

    Are you saying that is being investigated by an independent QC? Why isn’t it being investigated by the police?

    Surely, the Labour Party should be urging this (after all, it would only be matching what the Tory party did over Elphicke).

    Why aren't the police investigating it themselves ?
    They’ll only investigate if they receive a complaint. Sadly for Miss Bailey, unless she’s got witnesses or other evidence from six years ago, it will be a hard one to prosecute. It’s difficult to get a conviction or even a charge for rape unless the police have a clearly injured woman in front of them making the complaint.

    Where an independent investigator would be useful is in encouraging others to come forward. If the same name and same MO keeps coming up from unrelated victims, as in the cases of Bill Cosby, there’s a good chance that in at least one case there’s enough evidence to prosecute. The maximum sentence for rape is life imprisonment.
    Wait a moment, there are two alleged crimes.

    There is the alleged rape. And there is the alleged cover-up of the criminal activity.

    There should be evidence in the Labour party records or among her friends in the Labour party that Bex Bailey made a complaint of rape.
    That’s an interesting question for the legal eagles here - how high is the bar to prosecuting someone for aiding and abetting an offence, by coercing the victim into not reporting a crime until such time as any evidence of the crime becomes almost impossible to find?
  • Options
    I don't know how I would answer the question polled. Brexit in its current form appals me, but Britain is in no fit state to stay in the EU at present. You can't compromise with craziness: you can either fight it or let it run its course. I'm probably one of the 4% of don't knows.

    Right now, appalled Remainers should be focussing on specific subjects rather than seeking to turn the clock back. The debate that is required is not on Britain's place in Europe but on the place of immigrants in Britain and on the detail of the compromises necessary for a nation in the modern world.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,805

    There's too much emphasis on the second referendum issue.

    The people who say they want that don't mean it. What they want is for Brexit to be stopped and think that is a way for it to happen. If a second referendum produced another Leave vote they would no more accept that than they did the first referendum instead they would say they wanted a third referendum and then a fourth etc.

    I think there is a view that votes against the EU have to be held again, whereas votes in favour of the EU are decisive and binding.
  • Options
    rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,908

    There's too much emphasis on the second referendum issue.

    The people who say they want that don't mean it. What they want is for Brexit to be stopped and think that is a way for it to happen. If a second referendum produced another Leave vote they would no more accept that than they did the first referendum instead they would say they wanted a third referendum and then a fourth etc.

    I think a second referendum will only happen if there is a big demand for it. We won’t have one if the country is still so split.

    So Remain/Rejoin would probably win it comfortably.
  • Options

    There's too much emphasis on the second referendum issue.

    The people who say they want that don't mean it. What they want is for Brexit to be stopped and think that is a way for it to happen. If a second referendum produced another Leave vote they would no more accept that than they did the first referendum instead they would say they wanted a third referendum and then a fourth etc.

    I want a second referendum and would accept it would be appropriate to get on with it after a vote where people had reasonable info on the terms available.

    Whereas all those saying 'get on with it' are saying that because they fear a second referendum but can't really say do it even if the majority is now against it.

    Poll above suggests 46% to 41% against brexit whether weakly or strongly, but this doesn't seem to feature strongly in the analysis of the result?!?
  • Options

    I don't know how I would answer the question polled. Brexit in its current form appals me, but Britain is in no fit state to stay in the EU at present. You can't compromise with craziness: you can either fight it or let it run its course. I'm probably one of the 4% of don't knows.

    Right now, appalled Remainers should be focussing on specific subjects rather than seeking to turn the clock back. The debate that is required is not on Britain's place in Europe but on the place of immigrants in Britain and on the detail of the compromises necessary for a nation in the modern world.

    We need another Glorious Revolution.
  • Options
    Hmm, oops latest is 44% to 43%
  • Options


    I would love to see some polling about how the public would view politicians canning Brexit though.

    I would love to see some polling about how the public would view the canning of politicians
  • Options
    stevefstevef Posts: 1,044
    Polls whatever they show are irrelevant. Polls do not decide policy.

    We had a democratic referendum, and the People voted to leave -and by leave they did not choose to leave just in name but to declare independence from EU control over our laws and borders.

    It does not matter whether you disagree with that decision. What matters is that democracy is upheld.

    If you think the decision to leave was to mistake, then campaign for us to rejoin AFTER we have left. But to frustrate the result of a democratic election would I believe leave millions frustrated and angry, would lead to people being driven into the arms of extremists, and I fear, into violence.
  • Options
    Weird that the ‘Corbyn only did well because no one thought he had a chance’ narrative is actually a thing when during the GE itself some of the polls showing the Con leading shrinking - e.g the 5 point YouGov lead and the 1/2 point Survation lead - made front pages. Back then, some Tories also thought that that would motivate people to vote Tory, in order to secure the majority.

    It’s like some refuse to see reality, so invent a theory which is the equivalent of a comfort blanket. What parts of Corbyn’s support is going to walk away from him? Not the under 40s, who recent polling shows not only hold the Conservative party in contempt, but in large numbers see Labour as the party on their side. It definitely won’t be the students - voting Corbyn has got their concerns on the agenda, in a way that voting for anyone else wouldn’t have. The Conservative Remainers? With the way the government is handling the Brexit negotiations, no way. Labour Leavers? If they didn’t vote Tory in 2017 on the back of the immigration issue then it’s likely they will never time.

  • Options

    Perfectly balanced between the two sides.

    No tsunami of buyer's remorse, Mr Blair.

    I would love to see some polling about how the public would view politicians canning Brexit though.

    There was a YouGov poll on that I think.

    Something like 66% of the country would be appalled 33% happy.

    I took part in that poll and I was in the 66%, democracy must be respected, even if I don't like the result
  • Options
    Raheem Sterling...utter crap.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,859

    Raheem Sterling...utter crap.

    Thanks for the £49m ;)
  • Options
    On Topic: John Harris' latest Brexit piece. I think it's rather confused myself but he's consistently engaged in the topic.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/nov/05/brexit-theresa-may-economic-austerity-leave-voting
  • Options
    kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 3,939

    I don't know how I would answer the question polled. Brexit in its current form appals me, but Britain is in no fit state to stay in the EU at present. You can't compromise with craziness: you can either fight it or let it run its course. I'm probably one of the 4% of don't knows.

    Here is an ugly compromise that I think would work.

    Britain returns to the EU and says "if you give us a permanent (or, say, 50 year) opt out on free movement of people, we will join the Euro".

    Remainers love it because we get to remain and the vast majority of leavers, who voted because they were tired of seeing their living standards decline due to having to compete with beds-in-sheds immigrants, also love it. It's their jobs they want to protect, not some abstract notion of fiscal independence.

    Sovereignty nuts like me, who see the democratic deficit within the EU as the primary problem, will of course be outraged. I suspect the Conservative backbenches would riot. But we will be in the minority. The government would fall. Corbyn would come in. And a deal done.

    For those who say you need to accept the four freedoms before joining the Euro I say - fudge!

    It would not be my choice of compromise, far from it. I'd fight it every inch of the way. But the point is - I am sure there are compromises out there that are acceptable to the majority, even if they seem extremely unpalatable to some.

  • Options
    stevef said:

    Polls whatever they show are irrelevant. Polls do not decide policy.

    We had a democratic referendum, and the People voted to leave -and by leave they did not choose to leave just in name but to declare independence from EU control over our laws and borders.

    It does not matter whether you disagree with that decision. What matters is that democracy is upheld.

    If you think the decision to leave was to mistake, then campaign for us to rejoin AFTER we have left. But to frustrate the result of a democratic election would I believe leave millions frustrated and angry, would lead to people being driven into the arms of extremists, and I fear, into violence.

    So do you believe we should never have another election and continue with Con/DUP forever? Or perhaps more simply if the information changes, should people have right to change their minds?
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,254
    The YouGov survey shows a slow but steady shift away from Leave. But all such polls are pretty meaningless whilst we remain in this 'phoney Brexit' limbo. The moment of truth comes when the implications (that the Tories are desperately trying to keep obscure for as long as they can) become real.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,859
    edited November 2017
    crandles said:

    stevef said:

    Polls whatever they show are irrelevant. Polls do not decide policy.

    We had a democratic referendum, and the People voted to leave -and by leave they did not choose to leave just in name but to declare independence from EU control over our laws and borders.

    It does not matter whether you disagree with that decision. What matters is that democracy is upheld.

    If you think the decision to leave was to mistake, then campaign for us to rejoin AFTER we have left. But to frustrate the result of a democratic election would I believe leave millions frustrated and angry, would lead to people being driven into the arms of extremists, and I fear, into violence.

    So do you believe we should never have another election and continue with Con/DUP forever? Or perhaps more simply if the information changes, should people have right to change their minds?
    But what information has changed - are the EU scrapping their plans for a common army, a common finance ministry, a common currency, free movement of people but not of services, legislation being born in the unelected Commission?

    If what’s changed is that leaving is proving ‘too difficult’, that just says it’s not a club it’s a prison - and we should have left years ago.
  • Options
    EssexitEssexit Posts: 1,956
    What movement there has been could well be explained by how negotiations are seen to be going. If - and it remains a big if - we move on to trade talks soon, I wouldn't be surprised to see polls move in more strongly in favour of Brexit. Time will tell.
  • Options
    The_ApocalypseThe_Apocalypse Posts: 7,830
    edited November 2017
  • Options
    stevef said:

    Polls whatever they show are irrelevant. Polls do not decide policy.

    We had a democratic referendum, and the People voted to leave -and by leave they did not choose to leave just in name but to declare independence from EU control over our laws and borders.

    It does not matter whether you disagree with that decision. What matters is that democracy is upheld.

    If you think the decision to leave was to mistake, then campaign for us to rejoin AFTER we have left. But to frustrate the result of a democratic election would I believe leave millions frustrated and angry, would lead to people being driven into the arms of extremists, and I fear, into violence.

    Democracy did not stop on 23 June 2016. The public can change their minds and are entitled to do so before Britain leaves the EU if they so wish. Right now they don't seem likely to so wish, but if they do, that will be entirely democratic.
  • Options
    crandles said:

    stevef said:

    Polls whatever they show are irrelevant. Polls do not decide policy.

    We had a democratic referendum, and the People voted to leave -and by leave they did not choose to leave just in name but to declare independence from EU control over our laws and borders.

    It does not matter whether you disagree with that decision. What matters is that democracy is upheld.

    If you think the decision to leave was to mistake, then campaign for us to rejoin AFTER we have left. But to frustrate the result of a democratic election would I believe leave millions frustrated and angry, would lead to people being driven into the arms of extremists, and I fear, into violence.

    So do you believe we should never have another election and continue with Con/DUP forever? Or perhaps more simply if the information changes, should people have right to change their minds?
    No it means that the Con/DUP should serve for upto five years and then we should have another election.

    If in five years time after we have left a new government wanted a referendum on rejoining then so be it.
  • Options
    Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256
    edited November 2017
    FPT:

    ...

    So what is the point of Brexit?

    The point of Brexit is it was the democratic will of the country.

    And as to a compromise, then if you feel Brexit is going to be a disaster, work like a demon to mitigate that disaster - for your fellow citizens.
    Working like a demon will not mitigate Brexit. Nothing can. That is why it is so bl**dy stupid.

    Or you can just leg it to a third country.

    I have never said I am going to a 3rd country. It is a PB "fact" that I am doing so but it has no basis in reality.
  • Options
    @Stevef "Polls whatever they show are irrelevant. Polls do not decide policy " - It should beggar belief that you've posted that on a front rank political discussion site. The idea that politicians don't change policy in response to shifts in public opinion is so demonstrably untrue as to not need rebutting.

    " would lead to people being driven into the arms of extremists, and I fear, into violence." - This is crypto facistic nonsense which would be laughable if it weren't mildly disturbing. "
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,254

    FPT:

    ...

    So what is the point of Brexit?

    The point of Brexit is it was the democratic will of the country.

    And as to a compromise, then if you feel Brexit is going to be a disaster, work like a demon to mitigate that disaster - for your fellow citizens.
    Working like a demon will not mitigate Brexit. Nothing can. That is why it is so bl**dy stupid.

    Or you can just leg it to a third country.

    I have never said I am going to a 3rd country. It is a PB "fact" that I am doing so but it has no basis in reality.
    The OP's comment is absurd in any case. It is like saying that the point of the government is that it was elected.
  • Options
    stevefstevef Posts: 1,044

    @Stevef "Polls whatever they show are irrelevant. Polls do not decide policy " - It should beggar belief that you've posted that on a front rank political discussion site. The idea that politicians don't change policy in response to shifts in public opinion is so demonstrably untrue as to not need rebutting.

    " would lead to people being driven into the arms of extremists, and I fear, into violence." - This is crypto facistic nonsense which would be laughable if it weren't mildly disturbing. "

    But that is not much of an argument is it?

    If you are one of those people who think that the will of the people should be frustrated, then the fascism is all yours. I am arguing for democracy.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,859

    ttps://twitter.com/catherine_mayer/status/927097861975748609
    Good piece by Kate Maltby.

    Two things that stand out from that:
    1. Her father is friends with Mr Green
    2. The drink where he made a pass at her was to discuss her career.

    Both aggravating factors in the seriousness of the allegations, IMHO.
  • Options
    stevefstevef Posts: 1,044

    stevef said:

    Polls whatever they show are irrelevant. Polls do not decide policy.

    We had a democratic referendum, and the People voted to leave -and by leave they did not choose to leave just in name but to declare independence from EU control over our laws and borders.

    It does not matter whether you disagree with that decision. What matters is that democracy is upheld.

    If you think the decision to leave was to mistake, then campaign for us to rejoin AFTER we have left. But to frustrate the result of a democratic election would I believe leave millions frustrated and angry, would lead to people being driven into the arms of extremists, and I fear, into violence.

    Democracy did not stop on 23 June 2016. The public can change their minds and are entitled to do so before Britain leaves the EU if they so wish. Right now they don't seem likely to so wish, but if they do, that will be entirely democratic.
    But there is not going to be another referendum. Another referendum is just a device by those who do not like the result of the one on 23 June to frustrate the people. Lets keep having referendums until the people get it right.

    No. No No.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,254
    Really it just shows what a sh*t rag is the DM.
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,964
    I’m always somewhat darkly amused by the Leavers who say ‘we had a referendum, the people spoke, you lost, get over it. Or words like that.

    Back in 1975 we had a referendum, the people spoke ..... by a much, much bigger margin....and we Joined but those who didn’t like the EU, for whatever reason didn’t give up. They kept nagging away, got some people who could buy information providers on their side..... IIRC the Mail was in favour of the EU then..... and eventually we had another vote with a much small majority for Leaving.

    So why should those of us who believe we were right first time be barred from campaigning to reverse what we sincerely believe will turn out to be a disastrous decision?
  • Options
    ChameleonChameleon Posts: 3,886
    stevef said:

    stevef said:

    Polls whatever they show are irrelevant. Polls do not decide policy.

    We had a democratic referendum, and the People voted to leave -and by leave they did not choose to leave just in name but to declare independence from EU control over our laws and borders.

    It does not matter whether you disagree with that decision. What matters is that democracy is upheld.

    If you think the decision to leave was to mistake, then campaign for us to rejoin AFTER we have left. But to frustrate the result of a democratic election would I believe leave millions frustrated and angry, would lead to people being driven into the arms of extremists, and I fear, into violence.

    Democracy did not stop on 23 June 2016. The public can change their minds and are entitled to do so before Britain leaves the EU if they so wish. Right now they don't seem likely to so wish, but if they do, that will be entirely democratic.
    But there is not going to be another referendum. Another referendum is just a device by those who do not like the result of the one on 23 June to frustrate the people. Lets keep having referendums until the people get it right.

    No. No No.
    If a party promising a referendum can command a majority of the Commons to pass a referendum bill then there should be a referendum.
  • Options
    Good afternoon, everyone.

    Welcome back, Mr. Pedley.

    Indeed, whatever happens will annoy at least half the country.
  • Options
    nielhnielh Posts: 1,307
    stevef said:

    Polls whatever they show are irrelevant. Polls do not decide policy.

    We had a democratic referendum, and the People voted to leave -and by leave they did not choose to leave just in name but to declare independence from EU control over our laws and borders.

    It does not matter whether you disagree with that decision. What matters is that democracy is upheld.

    If you think the decision to leave was to mistake, then campaign for us to rejoin AFTER we have left. But to frustrate the result of a democratic election would I believe leave millions frustrated and angry, would lead to people being driven into the arms of extremists, and I fear, into violence.

    I don't think that Brexit voters would be driven in to violence if Brexit doesn't happen.Its more like they become disillusioned by democracy, which I agree is dangerous.

    People are more likely to be drawn in to violence if they lose their jobs, they can't afford to buy food/ there is no food in the shops to buy. To me it seems that those are both possibilities with a combination of a no deal Brexit and economic collapse.
  • Options
    stevef said:

    stevef said:

    Polls whatever they show are irrelevant. Polls do not decide policy.

    We had a democratic referendum, and the People voted to leave -and by leave they did not choose to leave just in name but to declare independence from EU control over our laws and borders.

    It does not matter whether you disagree with that decision. What matters is that democracy is upheld.

    If you think the decision to leave was to mistake, then campaign for us to rejoin AFTER we have left. But to frustrate the result of a democratic election would I believe leave millions frustrated and angry, would lead to people being driven into the arms of extremists, and I fear, into violence.

    Democracy did not stop on 23 June 2016. The public can change their minds and are entitled to do so before Britain leaves the EU if they so wish. Right now they don't seem likely to so wish, but if they do, that will be entirely democratic.
    But there is not going to be another referendum. Another referendum is just a device by those who do not like the result of the one on 23 June to frustrate the people. Lets keep having referendums until the people get it right.

    No. No No.
    I understand that you don't like the idea but you don't get to define democracy. There might yet be another referendum. If there is, that one will be democratic too.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,254
    stevef said:

    stevef said:

    Polls whatever they show are irrelevant. Polls do not decide policy.

    We had a democratic referendum, and the People voted to leave -and by leave they did not choose to leave just in name but to declare independence from EU control over our laws and borders.

    It does not matter whether you disagree with that decision. What matters is that democracy is upheld.

    If you think the decision to leave was to mistake, then campaign for us to rejoin AFTER we have left. But to frustrate the result of a democratic election would I believe leave millions frustrated and angry, would lead to people being driven into the arms of extremists, and I fear, into violence.

    Democracy did not stop on 23 June 2016. The public can change their minds and are entitled to do so before Britain leaves the EU if they so wish. Right now they don't seem likely to so wish, but if they do, that will be entirely democratic.
    But there is not going to be another referendum. Another referendum is just a device by those who do not like the result of the one on 23 June to frustrate the people. Lets keep having referendums until the people get it right.

    No. No No.
    There will be a second vote when it becomes clear that a majority of the public see the damage that the first vote is about to inflict on our country. The Labour Party will be its advocates, because it offers them a way off the hook of the conflict between their MPs' opinion and those of most of their constituents in 2016. The proposals to leave will be rejected decisively.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,717
    It's not hype, it's hope. Personally if things go extremely badly I wouldn't be averse to a change in direction, but it would need democratic endorsement somehow and even then there would be a great deal of trouble, but there are many waiting to see people wake up (and in the mocking hope of that can actually keep people in the dream)
  • Options
    Its not leaving the European Union that is causing the problems. Its leaving the Single Market. We don't need people to change their mind about Brexit, we need the government to change its mind about what a vote to leave the European Union actually means.

    'After several rounds of negotiation and consultation with industry and business leaders it is clear that our best destination after leaving the European Union is to rejoin the European Free Trade Association and continue our single market access via that route. We will leave the EU with no transition deal as none will be needed. Our focus now switches to strengthening our Border Force so that we can impose new restrictions on migration on day one after leaving.'

    Nutters will hate it, most people will think fair enough. People get on with their lives.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,983
    edited November 2017
    So a clear majority oppose a second referendum and the 35% of strong Remainers are equally matched by the 35% of strong Leavers.

    No change there then.
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,964

    Its not leaving the European Union that is causing the problems. Its leaving the Single Market. We don't need people to change their mind about Brexit, we need the government to change its mind about what a vote to leave the European Union actually means.

    'After several rounds of negotiation and consultation with industry and business leaders it is clear that our best destination after leaving the European Union is to rejoin the European Free Trade Association and continue our single market access via that route. We will leave the EU with no transition deal as none will be needed. Our focus now switches to strengthening our Border Force so that we can impose new restrictions on migration on day one after leaving.'

    Nutters will hate it, most people will think fair enough. People get on with their lives.

    +1 Yet another good post from Mr P
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,983
    IanB2 said:

    stevef said:

    stevef said:

    Polls whatever they show are irrelevant. Polls do not decide policy.

    We had a democratic referendum, and the People voted to leave -and by leave they did not choose to leave just in name but to declare independence from EU control over our laws and borders.

    It does not matter whether you disagree with that decision. What matters is that democracy is upheld.

    If you think the decision to leave was to mistake, then campaign for us to rejoin AFTER we have left. But to frustrate the result of a democratic election would I believe leave millions frustrated and angry, would lead to people being driven into the arms of extremists, and I fear, into violence.

    Democracy did not stop on 23 June 2016. The public can change their minds and are entitled to do so before Britain leaves the EU if they so wish. Right now they don't seem likely to so wish, but if they do, that will be entirely democratic.
    But there is not going to be another referendum. Another referendum is just a device by those who do not like the result of the one on 23 June to frustrate the people. Lets keep having referendums until the people get it right.

    No. No No.
    There will be a second vote when it becomes clear that a majority of the public see the damage that the first vote is about to inflict on our country. The Labour Party will be its advocates, because it offers them a way off the hook of the conflict between their MPs' opinion and those of most of their constituents in 2016. The proposals to leave will be rejected decisively.
    Corbyn would stay out of a second referendum campaign even if he granted one having become PM so that would likely leave Soubry, Umunna, Hammond, Sturgeon and Cable leading the Remain campaign against Boris, JRM, Farage, Hoey and Skinner leading the Leave campaign.

    The idea that would be a walkover for Remain is a non starter.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,052
    We're going to need some new polling after this.
    https://twitter.com/thesundaytimes/status/927120156844838912
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,983
    kyf_100 said:

    I don't know how I would answer the question polled. Brexit in its current form appals me, but Britain is in no fit state to stay in the EU at present. You can't compromise with craziness: you can either fight it or let it run its course. I'm probably one of the 4% of don't knows.

    Here is an ugly compromise that I think would work.

    Britain returns to the EU and says "if you give us a permanent (or, say, 50 year) opt out on free movement of people, we will join the Euro".

    Remainers love it because we get to remain and the vast majority of leavers, who voted because they were tired of seeing their living standards decline due to having to compete with beds-in-sheds immigrants, also love it. It's their jobs they want to protect, not some abstract notion of fiscal independence.

    Sovereignty nuts like me, who see the democratic deficit within the EU as the primary problem, will of course be outraged. I suspect the Conservative backbenches would riot. But we will be in the minority. The government would fall. Corbyn would come in. And a deal done.

    For those who say you need to accept the four freedoms before joining the Euro I say - fudge!

    It would not be my choice of compromise, far from it. I'd fight it every inch of the way. But the point is - I am sure there are compromises out there that are acceptable to the majority, even if they seem extremely unpalatable to some.

    Uh no. Every poll shows about 80% oppose the Euro, that is far more than support ending freedom of movement or the 52% who voted Leave.
  • Options
    justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527

    I’m always somewhat darkly amused by the Leavers who say ‘we had a referendum, the people spoke, you lost, get over it. Or words like that.

    Back in 1975 we had a referendum, the people spoke ..... by a much, much bigger margin....and we Joined but those who didn’t like the EU, for whatever reason didn’t give up. They kept nagging away, got some people who could buy information providers on their side..... IIRC the Mail was in favour of the EU then..... and eventually we had another vote with a much small majority for Leaving.

    So why should those of us who believe we were right first time be barred from campaigning to reverse what we sincerely believe will turn out to be a disastrous decision?

    We actually joined in January 1973!
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,983

    We're going to need some new polling after this.
    https://twitter.com/thesundaytimes/status/927120156844838912

    Well that will just entrench Leavers even more in their views and likely lead to a short term boost for UKIP while also winning some Remainers over to Leave as we are at least moving towards a FTA as a result of the payment.
  • Options
    YellowSubmarineYellowSubmarine Posts: 2,740
    edited November 2017

    I’m always somewhat darkly amused by the Leavers who say ‘we had a referendum, the people spoke, you lost, get over it. Or words like that.

    Back in 1975 we had a referendum, the people spoke ..... by a much, much bigger margin....and we Joined but those who didn’t like the EU, for whatever reason didn’t give up. They kept nagging away, got some people who could buy information providers on their side..... IIRC the Mail was in favour of the EU then..... and eventually we had another vote with a much small majority for Leaving.

    So why should those of us who believe we were right first time be barred from campaigning to reverse what we sincerely believe will turn out to be a disastrous decision?

    I’m always somewhat darkly amused by the Leavers who say ‘we had a referendum, the people spoke, you lost, get over it. Or words like that.

    Back in 1975 we had a referendum, the people spoke ..... by a much, much bigger margin....and we Joined but those who didn’t like the EU, for whatever reason didn’t give up. They kept nagging away, got some people who could buy information providers on their side..... IIRC the Mail was in favour of the EU then..... and eventually we had another vote with a much small majority for Leaving.

    So why should those of us who believe we were right first time be barred from campaigning to reverse what we sincerely believe will turn out to be a disastrous decision?

    Exactly. And the militant leavers know this which is why they are so desperate to close down dissent now. They have no margin nor momentum for a collosal socioeconomic rupture which is heavily based on votes against the Status Quo. Now Brexit is the Status Quo. They are terrified it's going to slip away from them which is why we get all this cult bollocks about one narrow referendum result at one point in time. The Will of the People is sacrosanct. Unless they change their minds.

    In reality the current deadlock in the polling is actually a call to arms for europhiles. In the longer term almost everything is to play for.
  • Options
    kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 3,939
    HYUFD said:

    kyf_100 said:

    I don't know how I would answer the question polled. Brexit in its current form appals me, but Britain is in no fit state to stay in the EU at present. You can't compromise with craziness: you can either fight it or let it run its course. I'm probably one of the 4% of don't knows.

    Here is an ugly compromise that I think would work.

    Britain returns to the EU and says "if you give us a permanent (or, say, 50 year) opt out on free movement of people, we will join the Euro".

    Remainers love it because we get to remain and the vast majority of leavers, who voted because they were tired of seeing their living standards decline due to having to compete with beds-in-sheds immigrants, also love it. It's their jobs they want to protect, not some abstract notion of fiscal independence.

    Sovereignty nuts like me, who see the democratic deficit within the EU as the primary problem, will of course be outraged. I suspect the Conservative backbenches would riot. But we will be in the minority. The government would fall. Corbyn would come in. And a deal done.

    For those who say you need to accept the four freedoms before joining the Euro I say - fudge!

    It would not be my choice of compromise, far from it. I'd fight it every inch of the way. But the point is - I am sure there are compromises out there that are acceptable to the majority, even if they seem extremely unpalatable to some.

    Uh no. Every poll shows about 80% oppose the Euro, that is far more than support ending freedom of movement or the 52% who voted Leave.
    But they have never been given an either / or choice.

    Let us suppose for a moment that a poll was presented in the format "would you rather keep unlimited immigration, or keep the pound?"

    Of course the pound is wildly popular, and I myself said I felt the compromise was unpalatable. But I suspect in a round of horse trading, if it were possible to keep all the benefits of EU membership, while eliminating freedom of movement of people, and the cost the EU extracted from us was Euro membership, there would be a majority consensus for that deal.

    As I said, an ugly compromise - and one which I would not support - but the point is that compromises are there to be made. The question is - why is nobody even suggesting them?
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,964
    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    stevef said:

    stevef said:

    Polls whatever they show are irrelevant. Polls do not decide policy.

    We had a democratic referendum, and the People voted to leave -and by leave they did not choose to leave just in name but to declare independence from EU control over our laws and borders.

    It does not matter whether you disagree with that decision. What matters is that democracy is upheld.

    If you think the decision to leave was to mistake, then campaign for us to rejoin AFTER we have left. But to frustrate the result of a democratic election would I believe leave millions frustrated and angry, would lead to people being driven into the arms of extremists, and I fear, into violence.

    Democracy did not stop on 23 June 2016. The public can change their minds and are entitled to do so before Britain leaves the EU if they so wish. Right now they don't seem likely to so wish, but if they do, that will be entirely democratic.
    But there is not going to be another referendum. Another referendum is just a device by those who do not like the result of the one on 23 June to frustrate the people. Lets keep having referendums until the people get it right.

    No. No No.
    There will be a second vote when it becomes clear that a majority of the public see the damage that the first vote is about to inflict on our country. The Labour Party will be its advocates, because it offers them a way off the hook of the conflict between their MPs' opinion and those of most of their constituents in 2016. The proposals to leave will be rejected decisively.
    Corbyn would stay out of a second referendum campaign even if he granted one having become PM so that would likely leave Soubry, Umunna, Hammond, Sturgeon and Cable leading the Remain campaign against Boris, JRM, Farage, Hoey and Skinner leading the Leave campaign.

    The idea that would be a walkover for Remain is a non starter.
    I suspect many people..... more than last time...... have had enough of Boris.After all, at June’s election his majority halved on a slightly bigger turnout.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,254

    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    stevef said:

    stevef said:

    Polls whatever they show are irrelevant. Polls do not decide policy.

    We had a democratic referendum, and the People voted to leave -and by leave they did not choose to leave just in name but to declare independence from EU control over our laws and borders.

    It does not matter whether you disagree with that decision. What matters is that democracy is upheld.

    If you think the decision to leave was to mistake, then campaign for us to rejoin AFTER we have left. But to frustrate the result of a democratic election would I believe leave millions frustrated and angry, would lead to people being driven into the arms of extremists, and I fear, into violence.

    Democracy did not stop on 23 June 2016. The public can change their minds and are entitled to do so before Britain leaves the EU if they so wish. Right now they don't seem likely to so wish, but if they do, that will be entirely democratic.
    But there is not going to be another referendum. Another referendum is just a device by those who do not like the result of the one on 23 June to frustrate the people. Lets keep having referendums until the people get it right.

    No. No No.
    There will be a second vote when it becomes clear that a majority of the public see the damage that the first vote is about to inflict on our country. The Labour Party will be its advocates, because it offers them a way off the hook of the conflict between their MPs' opinion and those of most of their constituents in 2016. The proposals to leave will be rejected decisively.
    Corbyn would stay out of a second referendum campaign even if he granted one having become PM so that would likely leave Soubry, Umunna, Hammond, Sturgeon and Cable leading the Remain campaign against Boris, JRM, Farage, Hoey and Skinner leading the Leave campaign.

    The idea that would be a walkover for Remain is a non starter.
    I suspect many people..... more than last time...... have had enough of Boris.After all, at June’s election his majority halved on a slightly bigger turnout.
    The one inspired decision May has made is to appoint Boris to a job that simultaneously kept him out of the country for much of the time and demonstrated his total inability to hack it in an adult job at the top of politics.
  • Options
    EssexitEssexit Posts: 1,956
    IanB2 said:

    Really it just shows what a sh*t rag is the DM.
    You call that a rag?

    https://twitter.com/TheNewEuropean/status/926767308021710853
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,052

    Its not leaving the European Union that is causing the problems. Its leaving the Single Market. We don't need people to change their mind about Brexit, we need the government to change its mind about what a vote to leave the European Union actually means.

    'After several rounds of negotiation and consultation with industry and business leaders it is clear that our best destination after leaving the European Union is to rejoin the European Free Trade Association and continue our single market access via that route. We will leave the EU with no transition deal as none will be needed. Our focus now switches to strengthening our Border Force so that we can impose new restrictions on migration on day one after leaving.'

    Nutters will hate it, most people will think fair enough. People get on with their lives.

    I find this line of argument highly disingenuous, and the idea that it could be done without a transition deal is pure fantasy.

    Leaving the EU to join EFTA has plenty of its own cliff-edge issues associated with it. We would also need massive new customs facilities overnight. We would also drop out of the EU's third party deals and wouldn't automatically join any of EFTA's. (They have renegotiation clauses as EFTA wasn't intended to expand.) It still presents existential issues for the future of Northern Ireland.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,254
    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    stevef said:

    stevef said:

    Polls whatever they show are irrelevant. Polls do not decide policy.

    We had a democratic referendum, and the People voted to leave -and by leave they did not choose to leave just in name but to declare independence from EU control over our laws and borders.

    It does not matter whether you disagree with that decision. What matters is that democracy is upheld.

    If you think the decision to leave was to mistake, then campaign for us to rejoin AFTER we have left. But to frustrate the result of a democratic election would I believe leave millions frustrated and angry, would lead to people being driven into the arms of extremists, and I fear, into violence.

    Democracy did not stop on 23 June 2016. The public can change their minds and are entitled to do so before Britain leaves the EU if they so wish. Right now they don't seem likely to so wish, but if they do, that will be entirely democratic.
    But there is not going to be another referendum. Another referendum is just a device by those who do not like the result of the one on 23 June to frustrate the people. Lets keep having referendums until the people get it right.

    No. No No.
    There will be a second vote when it becomes clear that a majority of the public see the damage that the first vote is about to inflict on our country. The Labour Party will be its advocates, because it offers them a way off the hook of the conflict between their MPs' opinion and those of most of their constituents in 2016. The proposals to leave will be rejected decisively.
    Corbyn would stay out of a second referendum campaign even if he granted one having become PM so that would likely leave Soubry, Umunna, Hammond, Sturgeon and Cable leading the Remain campaign against Boris, JRM, Farage, Hoey and Skinner leading the Leave campaign.

    The idea that would be a walkover for Remain is a non starter.
    You aren't deploying enough imagination to appreciate the changed circumstances in which such a vote will take place.
  • Options
    nielhnielh Posts: 1,307

    Its not leaving the European Union that is causing the problems. Its leaving the Single Market. We don't need people to change their mind about Brexit, we need the government to change its mind about what a vote to leave the European Union actually means.

    'After several rounds of negotiation and consultation with industry and business leaders it is clear that our best destination after leaving the European Union is to rejoin the European Free Trade Association and continue our single market access via that route. We will leave the EU with no transition deal as none will be needed. Our focus now switches to strengthening our Border Force so that we can impose new restrictions on migration on day one after leaving.'

    Nutters will hate it, most people will think fair enough. People get on with their lives.

    +1 Yet another good post from Mr P
    Just out of interest, can someone explain whether rejoiing EFTA entails accepting freedom of movement?
  • Options
    calumcalum Posts: 3,046
    A couple more post-UDI Catalonia polls just added - pointing to 75% turnout

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catalan_regional_election,_2017#Opinion_polls
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,983
    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    stevef said:

    stevef said:

    Polls whatever they show are irrelevant. Polls do not decide policy.

    We had a democratic referendum, and the People voted to leave -and by leave they did not choose to leave just in name but to declare independence from EU control over our laws and borders.

    It does not matter whether you disagree with that decision. What matters is that democracy is upheld.

    If you think the decision to leave was to mistake, then campaign for us to rejoin AFTER we have left. But to frustrate the result of a democratic election would I believe leave millions frustrated and angry, would lead to people being driven into the arms of extremists, and I fear, into violence.

    Democracy did not stop on 23 June 2016. The public can change their minds and are entitled to do so before Britain leaves the EU if they so wish. Right now they don't seem likely to so wish, but if they do, that will be entirely democratic.
    But there is not going to be another referendum. Another referendum is just a device by those who do not like the result of the one on 23 June to frustrate the people. Lets keep having referendums until the people get it right.

    No. No No.
    There will be a second vote when it becomes clear that a majority of the public see the damage that the first vote is about to inflict on our country. The Labour Party will be its advocates, because it offers them a way off the hook of the conflict between their MPs' opinion and those of most of their constituents in 2016. The proposals to leave will be rejected decisively.
    Corbyn would stay out of a second referendum campaign even if he granted one having become PM so that would likely leave Soubry, Umunna, Hammond, Sturgeon and Cable leading the Remain campaign against Boris, JRM, Farage, Hoey and Skinner leading the Leave campaign.

    The idea that would be a walkover for Remain is a non starter.
    You aren't deploying enough imagination to appreciate the changed circumstances in which such a vote will take place.
    What changed circumstances? We are moving towards a FTA with the EU now and are ending free movement, pretty much as Leave voters wanted.
  • Options

    Its not leaving the European Union that is causing the problems. Its leaving the Single Market. We don't need people to change their mind about Brexit, we need the government to change its mind about what a vote to leave the European Union actually means.

    'After several rounds of negotiation and consultation with industry and business leaders it is clear that our best destination after leaving the European Union is to rejoin the European Free Trade Association and continue our single market access via that route. We will leave the EU with no transition deal as none will be needed. Our focus now switches to strengthening our Border Force so that we can impose new restrictions on migration on day one after leaving.'

    Nutters will hate it, most people will think fair enough. People get on with their lives.

    I find this line of argument highly disingenuous, and the idea that it could be done without a transition deal is pure fantasy.

    Leaving the EU to join EFTA has plenty of its own cliff-edge issues associated with it. We would also need massive new customs facilities overnight. We would also drop out of the EU's third party deals and wouldn't automatically join any of EFTA's. (They have renegotiation clauses as EFTA wasn't intended to expand.) It still presents existential issues for the future of Northern Ireland.
    OK perhaps a bit of transition. But as for the rest of your objection, we'd stay in the EEA and Customs Union. That's the whole point...
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,983
    kyf_100 said:

    HYUFD said:

    kyf_100 said:

    I don't know how I would answer the question polled. Brexit in its current form appals me, but Britain is in no fit state to stay in the EU at present. You can't compromise with craziness: you can either fight it or let it run its course. I'm probably one of the 4% of don't knows.

    Here is an ugly compromise that I think would work.

    Britain returns to the EU and says "if you give us a permanent (or, say, 50 year) opt out on free movement of people, we will join the Euro".

    Remainers love it because we get to remain and the vast majority of leavers, who voted because they were tired of seeing their living standards decline due to having to compete with beds-in-sheds immigrants, also love it. It's their jobs they want to protect, not some abstract notion of fiscal independence.

    Sovereignty nuts like me, who see the democratic deficit within the EU as the primary problem, will of course be outraged. I suspect the Conservative backbenches would riot. But we will be in the minority. The government would fall. Corbyn would come in. And a deal done.

    For those who say you need to accept the four freedoms before joining the Euro I say - fudge!

    It would not be my choice of compromise, far from it. I'd fight it every inch of the way. But the point is - I am sure there are compromises out there that are acceptable to the majority, even if they seem extremely unpalatable to some.

    Uh no. Every poll shows about 80% oppose the Euro, that is far more than support ending freedom of movement or the 52% who voted Leave.
    But they have never been given an either / or choice.

    Let us suppose for a moment that a poll was presented in the format "would you rather keep unlimited immigration, or keep the pound?"

    Of course the pound is wildly popular, and I myself said I felt the compromise was unpalatable. But I suspect in a round of horse trading, if it were possible to keep all the benefits of EU membership, while eliminating freedom of movement of people, and the cost the EU extracted from us was Euro membership, there would be a majority consensus for that deal.

    As I said, an ugly compromise - and one which I would not support - but the point is that compromises are there to be made. The question is - why is nobody even suggesting them?
    In such circumstances voters would simply vote Leave and it would be a thumping Leave this time, I would certainly switch from Remain to Leave if Remain meant the Euro.

    Given the choice between ending free movement and joining the euro and staying in the EU or ending free movement and keeping the £ there would only be one winner and it would not be the EU!
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,983

    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    stevef said:

    stevef said:

    Polls whatever they show are irrelevant. Polls do not decide policy.

    We had a democratic referendum, and the People voted to leave -and by leave they did not choose to leave just in name but to declare independence from EU control over our laws and borders.

    It does not matter whether you disagree with that decision. What matters is that democracy is upheld.

    If you think the decision to leave was to mistake, then campaign for us to rejoin AFTER we have left. But to frustrate the result of a democratic election would I believe leave millions frustrated and angry, would lead to people being driven into the arms of extremists, and I fear, into violence.

    Democracy did not stop on 23 June 2016. The public can change their minds and are entitled to do so before Britain leaves the EU if they so wish. Right now they don't seem likely to so wish, but if they do, that will be entirely democratic.
    But there is not going to be another referendum. Another referendum is just a device by those who do not like the result of the one on 23 June to frustrate the people. Lets keep having referendums until the people get it right.

    No. No No.
    There will be a second vote when it becomes clear that a majority of the public see the damage that the first vote is about to inflict on our country. The Labour Party will be its advocates, because it offers them a way off the hook of the conflict between their MPs' opinion and those of most of their constituents in 2016. The proposals to leave will be rejected decisively.
    Corbyn would stay out of a second referendum campaign even if he granted one having become PM so that would likely leave Soubry, Umunna, Hammond, Sturgeon and Cable leading the Remain campaign against Boris, JRM, Farage, Hoey and Skinner leading the Leave campaign.

    The idea that would be a walkover for Remain is a non starter.
    I suspect many people..... more than last time...... have had enough of Boris.After all, at June’s election his majority halved on a slightly bigger turnout.
    He still leads the polls of Tory successors to May, central London and much of metropolitan UK has had enough of Boris, the rest of the country which largely voted Leave has not.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,805
    Suppose we get a second referendum, and Leave wins? Does that settle it? Or if Remain wins, but public opinion subsequently shifts back to Leave, will we get a third?
  • Options
    Mueller's team is also examining whether Flynn attempted to orchestrate the removal of a chief rival of Turkish President Recep Erdogan from the U.S. to Turkey in exchange for millions of dollars, two officials said.
  • Options
    Sean_F said:

    Suppose we get a second referendum, and Leave wins? Does that settle it? Or if Remain wins, but public opinion subsequently shifts back to Leave, will we get a third?

    Best of 5....
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181
    kyf_100 said:

    Of course the pound is wildly popular, and I myself said I felt the compromise was unpalatable. But I suspect in a round of horse trading, if it were possible to keep all the benefits of EU membership, while eliminating freedom of movement of people, and the cost the EU extracted from us was Euro membership, there would be a majority consensus for that deal.

    I think actually the key problem with that is that Britain isn't even close to meeting the requirements for Euro membership and is never likely to be now.

    That wouldn't necessarily matter of course. No country's economy with the lone exception of Luxembourg ever has been, and they still joined because essentially it's a political not an economic project.

    However, if Britain's banking system had been added to those of Spain, Greece, Cyprus, Ireland and Portugal in 2007-8 the euro would have collapsed. It almost collapsed as it was and Britain's banking sector was bigger and more damaged than all those others put together. So the EU would be taking on a huge risk if they allowed us to join especially when we have vast debts and a still significant deficit.

    I cannot see them being willing to take on a member of the Euro that carries as many economic risks as Britain at a time when it has been graphically demonstrated that we are unenthusiastic about even our semi-detached status.

    And that would be mirrored in Britain. I voted Remain because I foresaw most of the chaos that is now happening. If I were told that that would have led to Euro membership - which I thought unlikely for the reasons I have given - I would unhesitatingly have voted leave, on the basis that ten difficult and chaotic years are better than economic collapse and thirty years of war, which I could easily see arising from our membership of the Euro without the even more improbable political Union to go with it.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,359
    edited November 2017
    Sean_F said:

    Suppose we get a second referendum, and Leave wins? Does that settle it? Or if Remain wins, but public opinion subsequently shifts back to Leave, will we get a third?

    The next referendum will be the last one, the winner will be one with the highest average of three EC/EU referenda.

    By my reckoning Leave would have to get at least 65.35% in the third referendum to ensure Brexit.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181

    Sean_F said:

    Suppose we get a second referendum, and Leave wins? Does that settle it? Or if Remain wins, but public opinion subsequently shifts back to Leave, will we get a third?

    The next referendum will be the last one, the winner will be one with the highest average of three EC/EU referenda.

    By my reckoning Leave would have to get at least 65.35% in the third referendum to ensure Brexit.
    Couldn't we decide it by a wrestling match between Farage and Thornberry, no holds barred, teeth permitted?

    Winner, the country.
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    kyf_100 said:

    FPT

    kyf_100 said:

    kyf_100 said:

    But to all intents and purposes it still seems we are as divided
    ....
    Would a compromise be desirable or possible at this point? Or are we too far gone?

    How I am (as a Remainer) supposed to compromise? No one has been able to definitely show that there

    The more vocal Leavers seem to care little about the economic impact as long as we "take back control" or "cut immigration". We never had control and we need immigrants from somewhere.

    So where is the overlap? Where is the common ground? For me the coming economic dislocation is the major element that will wreck lives in this country.

    How am I supposed to support a policy which I feel will be so damaging and detrimental no matter how it is implemented and which offers nothing in return? Post Brexit we will still not have control and we will still need immigrants.

    So what is the point of Brexit?
    I think you've illustrated my point quite nicely. We are where we were a year and a half ago - with a near 50/50 split down the middle of two groups of people with completely opposing objectives and points of view squaring off against each other.

    I'll confess to being a sovereignty nut who agrees with you on immigration - the economy runs on it and it will take us a long time to wean ourselves off that particular drug and would require enormous structural reforms to do so. But I can also see the point of view of a working class leaver who has seen their standard of living and pay stagnate or even fall as they have had to compete with beds-in-sheds immigrants in a neverending race to the bottom. As HUYFD has noted downthread, in many respects they are far more 'ideological' in their opposition to the EU than leavers of my ilk, who would happily accept a 'soft' Brexit.

    My point was, at this point, is there any kind of horse trading that could be sold to the public as an acceptable compromise? The answer, I suspect, is not.
    What? Only mildly wreck the economy? :)

    Sovereignty will not keep us fed nor employed.
    I am fond of the Ayn Rand quote, "in any compromise between poison and food, only poison can win". It seems as if both sides feel the other side is poison, and only they have the acceptable outcome.

    Further to your point, Beverley, no, you can't eat sovereignty. But I would rather die as a free man than live as the slave of a foreign power - you see how hyperbole gets us into these situations, no?
    "You can't eat Sovereignty"

    We are still remembered in Ireland by our honorific title which was given to us after the famine.

    We gave away our estates (around 7% of the country) in 1 acre parcels - we couldn't save our people, but we could let them die on their own land
  • Options
    @RochdalePioneers You do seem to be getting away with an awful lot of crap at the moment #1 You've curiously stopped mentioning your Leave vote.#2 You are posting increasingly apocalyptic posts about the impact of a No Deal Brexit ( which would be a consequence of your Leave vote. #3 Your acting like a classic europhobic fantasist in pretending there is an obvious pain free alternative which allows the end of FoM while retaining all the benefits of EU membership. #4 From your comments on FoM and the Customs Union you either don't understand what the EFTA is or are simply lying. I suspect the former.

    You can pose as the voice of reason if you wish but you belong in the same circle of libertarian Brexit Hell as Dan Hannan in my view.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,052
    ydoethur said:

    And that would be mirrored in Britain. I voted Remain because I foresaw most of the chaos that is now happening. If I were told that that would have led to Euro membership - which I thought unlikely for the reasons I have given - I would unhesitatingly have voted leave, on the basis that ten difficult and chaotic years are better than economic collapse and thirty years of war, which I could easily see arising from our membership of the Euro without the even more improbable political Union to go with it.

    '...the even more improbable political union to go with it.'

    The European Community has always been a political union. People think in far too binary terms about the future development of the Eurozone and imagine that it will need a single government, but that is not the reality.
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    tallsuk said:


    I would love to see some polling about how the public would view politicians canning Brexit though.

    I would love to see some polling about how the public would view the canning of politicians
    Canning like pilchards? A little harsh!

    (Unless you meant caning...)
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    edited November 2017
    Did Apple outsource their software development of iOS 11 to a bunch of monkeys with typewriters?

    http://mashable.com/2017/11/02/ios-11-keyboard-glitch/
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,983

    ydoethur said:

    And that would be mirrored in Britain. I voted Remain because I foresaw most of the chaos that is now happening. If I were told that that would have led to Euro membership - which I thought unlikely for the reasons I have given - I would unhesitatingly have voted leave, on the basis that ten difficult and chaotic years are better than economic collapse and thirty years of war, which I could easily see arising from our membership of the Euro without the even more improbable political Union to go with it.

    '...the even more improbable political union to go with it.'

    The European Community has always been a political union. People think in far too binary terms about the future development of the Eurozone and imagine that it will need a single government, but that is not the reality.
    Which is why we should have stayed in EFTA
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,359
    edited November 2017
    ydoethur said:

    Sean_F said:

    Suppose we get a second referendum, and Leave wins? Does that settle it? Or if Remain wins, but public opinion subsequently shifts back to Leave, will we get a third?

    The next referendum will be the last one, the winner will be one with the highest average of three EC/EU referenda.

    By my reckoning Leave would have to get at least 65.35% in the third referendum to ensure Brexit.
    Couldn't we decide it by a wrestling match between Farage and Thornberry, no holds barred, teeth permitted?

    Winner, the country.
    Only if Nigel Farage wears a St George Cross mankini for the contest.
  • Options
    Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256
    kyf_100 said:

    FPT

    What? Only mildly wreck the economy? :)

    Sovereignty will not keep us fed nor employed.

    I am fond of the Ayn Rand quote, "in any compromise between poison and food, only poison can win". It seems as if both sides feel the other side is poison, and only they have the acceptable outcome.

    Further to your point, Beverley, no, you can't eat sovereignty. But I would rather die as a free man than live as the slave of a foreign power - you see how hyperbole gets us into these situations, no?
    You are calling the EU slavemasters and telling me off for hyperbole??? :D:D

  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,052
    HYUFD said:

    ydoethur said:

    And that would be mirrored in Britain. I voted Remain because I foresaw most of the chaos that is now happening. If I were told that that would have led to Euro membership - which I thought unlikely for the reasons I have given - I would unhesitatingly have voted leave, on the basis that ten difficult and chaotic years are better than economic collapse and thirty years of war, which I could easily see arising from our membership of the Euro without the even more improbable political Union to go with it.

    '...the even more improbable political union to go with it.'

    The European Community has always been a political union. People think in far too binary terms about the future development of the Eurozone and imagine that it will need a single government, but that is not the reality.
    Which is why we should have stayed in EFTA
    Which is why we left EFTA - the political power was in Brussels.
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    I’m always somewhat darkly amused by the Leavers who say ‘we had a referendum, the people spoke, you lost, get over it. Or words like that.

    Back in 1975 we had a referendum, the people spoke ..... by a much, much bigger margin....and we Joined but those who didn’t like the EU, for whatever reason didn’t give up. They kept nagging away, got some people who could buy information providers on their side..... IIRC the Mail was in favour of the EU then..... and eventually we had another vote with a much small majority for Leaving.

    So why should those of us who believe we were right first time be barred from campaigning to reverse what we sincerely believe will turn out to be a disastrous decision?

    Everyone can campaign to rejoin.

    To prevent implementation of the democratic decision is something different
  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 25,127
    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    stevef said:

    stevef said:

    Polls whatever they show are irrelevant. Polls do not decide policy.

    We had a democratic referendum, and the People voted to leave -and by leave they did not choose to leave just in name but to declare independence from EU control over our laws and borders.

    It does not matter whether you disagree with that decision. What matters is that democracy is upheld.

    If you think the decision to leave was to mistake, then campaign for us to rejoin AFTER we have left. But to frustrate the result of a democratic election would I believe leave millions frustrated and angry, would lead to people being driven into the arms of extremists, and I fear, into violence.

    Democracy did not stop on 23 June 2016. The public can change their minds and are entitled to do so before Britain leaves the EU if they so wish. Right now they don't seem likely to so wish, but if they do, that will be entirely democratic.
    But there is not going to be another referendum. Another referendum is just a device by those who do not like the result of the one on 23 June to frustrate the people. Lets keep having referendums until the people get it right.

    No. No No.
    There will be a second vote when it becomes clear that a majority of the public see the damage that the first vote is about to inflict on our country. The Labour Party will be its advocates, because it offers them a way off the hook of the conflict between their MPs' opinion and those of most of their constituents in 2016. The proposals to leave will be rejected decisively.
    Corbyn would stay out of a second referendum campaign even if he granted one having become PM so that would likely leave Soubry, Umunna, Hammond, Sturgeon and Cable leading the Remain campaign against Boris, JRM, Farage, Hoey and Skinner leading the Leave campaign.

    The idea that would be a walkover for Remain is a non starter.
    You aren't deploying enough imagination to appreciate the changed circumstances in which such a vote will take place.
    What changed circumstances? We are moving towards a FTA with the EU now and are ending free movement, pretty much as Leave voters wanted.
    Are we? Where is your evidence? Or is FTA a typo and you meant WTO?
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,983

    HYUFD said:

    ydoethur said:

    And that would be mirrored in Britain. I voted Remain because I foresaw most of the chaos that is now happening. If I were told that that would have led to Euro membership - which I thought unlikely for the reasons I have given - I would unhesitatingly have voted leave, on the basis that ten difficult and chaotic years are better than economic collapse and thirty years of war, which I could easily see arising from our membership of the Euro without the even more improbable political Union to go with it.

    '...the even more improbable political union to go with it.'

    The European Community has always been a political union. People think in far too binary terms about the future development of the Eurozone and imagine that it will need a single government, but that is not the reality.
    Which is why we should have stayed in EFTA
    Which is why we left EFTA - the political power was in Brussels.
    The political power was and is actually in Berlin.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,983

    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    stevef said:

    stevef said:

    Polls whatever they show are irrelevant. Polls do not decide policy.

    We had a democratic referendum, and the People voted to leave -and by leave they did not choose to leave just in name but to declare independence from EU control over our laws and borders.

    It does not matter whether you disagree with that decision. What matters is that democracy is upheld.

    If you think the decision to leave was to mistake, then campaign for us to rejoin AFTER we have left. But to frustrate the result of a democratic election would I believe leave millions frustrated and angry, would lead to people being driven into the arms of extremists, and I fear, into violence.

    Democracy did not stop on 23 June 2016. The public can change their minds and are entitled to do so before Britain leaves the EU if they so wish. Right now they don't seem likely to so wish, but if they do, that will be entirely democratic.
    But there is not going to be another referendum. Another referendum is just a device by those who do not like the result of the one on 23 June to frustrate the people. Lets keep having referendums until the people get it right.

    No. No No.
    There will be a second vote when it becomes clear that a majority of the public see the damage that the first vote is about to inflict on our country. The Labour Party will be its advocates, because it offers them a way off the hook of the conflict between their MPs' opinion and those of most of their constituents in 2016. The proposals to leave will be rejected decisively.
    Corbyn would stay out of a second referendum campaign even if he granted one having become PM so that would likely leave Soubry, Umunna, Hammond, Sturgeon and Cable leading the Remain campaign against Boris, JRM, Farage, Hoey and Skinner leading the Leave campaign.

    The idea that would be a walkover for Remain is a non starter.
    You aren't deploying enough imagination to appreciate the changed circumstances in which such a vote will take place.
    What changed circumstances? We are moving towards a FTA with the EU now and are ending free movement, pretty much as Leave voters wanted.
    Are we? Where is your evidence? Or is FTA a typo and you meant WTO?
    Clearly you missed WG's post earlier. So I will repost it below.
    https://twitter.com/thesundaytimes/status/927120156844838912?ref_src=twsrc^tfw&ref_url=http://politicalbetting.vanillaforums.com/discussion/5624/politicalbetting-com-blog-archive-poll-alert-ignore-the-hype-brexit-might-be-going-badly-but/p1
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Essexit said:

    IanB2 said:

    Really it just shows what a sh*t rag is the DM.
    You call that a rag?

    https://twitter.com/TheNewEuropean/status/926767308021710853
    EU supporters taking a muscular approach to democracy. How very Spanish.
  • Options
    GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,078
    calum said:

    A couple more post-UDI Catalonia polls just added - pointing to 75% turnout

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catalan_regional_election,_2017#Opinion_polls

    Still a pro-independence majority?
  • Options
    HYUFD said:

    We're going to need some new polling after this.
    https://twitter.com/thesundaytimes/status/927120156844838912

    Well that will just entrench Leavers even more in their views and likely lead to a short term boost for UKIP while also winning some Remainers over to Leave as we are at least moving towards a FTA as a result of the payment.
    If that gets us a trade deal that is fine with me
  • Options
    kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 3,939
    HYUFD said:



    In such circumstances voters would simply vote Leave and it would be a thumping Leave this time, I would certainly switch from Remain to Leave if Remain meant the Euro.

    Given the choice between ending free movement and joining the euro and staying in the EU or ending free movement and keeping the £ there would only be one winner and it would not be the EU!

    I would certainly hope so and would support you there. I'd be out on the street knocking on doors and delivering flyers.

    However, let's do a quick, dispassionate fag-packet calculation here.

    35% of the population "strongly" want to remain in the EU. One can assume that even if they have reservations about the Euro, their desire to remain in the EU trumps such reservations. That gives us our base for the deal.

    Let us then work out how many people might go for the "you can have your exemption from freedom of movement, but you must join the euro" on a descending basis, starting from our 35% base

    - of the 9% who want to remain but don't feel strongly - two thirds go for the deal, adding 6%
    - of the 8% who are undecided - 50% go for the deal, adding 5%
    - the 8% who feel weakly for leave - 25% go for the deal, adding 2%
    - of the 35% who strongly want to leave - 20% go for the deal, adding 7%
    - the 4% who don't know we'll assign a final 2%.

    That would give a hypothetical 57/43 split for remain on those terms. Not convincing, but certainly more convincing than the original result.

    The big "what if" is what if the 35% feel incredibly strongly about freedom of movement, and they see this as by far and away the number one reason to leave.

    As I put it to you before, if the choice becomes "you can have your restrictions on freedom of movement if you give up the pound", to the average man on the street, the freedom to not have his job nicked by an immigrant in a bed-in-a-shed trumps the abstract notion of fiscal independence.

    However, the average man on the street voted this way because he is sick and tired of declining living standards and wages. If he's worried at all about losing his job because of an economic cliff-edge hard brexit, he may well support remaining in the EU if he gets his exemption from freedom of movement. After all, it's protecting his job he wants, not abstract notions of sovereignty.

    So *if* 40% of strong leavers support this horse trade, double the amount I guessed in my fag packet calculation, you then have a 64 / 36 split for remain, which is pretty convincing.

    It's a thought experiment, nothing more, but it's an interesting one nonetheless. For me, Brexit is ideological - it's about sovereignty. For those who voted to protect their jobs and put more food on their plates (probably core Labour voters), a 'remain' that limited immigration but accepted the Euro might form a winning coalition with ardent pro-Europhiles.
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    ydoethur said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Of course the pound is wildly popular, and I myself said I felt the compromise was unpalatable. But I suspect in a round of horse trading, if it were possible to keep all the benefits of EU membership, while eliminating freedom of movement of people, and the cost the EU extracted from us was Euro membership, there would be a majority consensus for that deal.

    I think actually the key problem with that is that Britain isn't even close to meeting the requirements for Euro membership and is never likely to be now.

    That wouldn't necessarily matter of course. No country's economy with the lone exception of Luxembourg ever has been, and they still joined because essentially it's a political not an economic project.

    However, if Britain's banking system had been added to those of Spain, Greece, Cyprus, Ireland and Portugal in 2007-8 the euro would have collapsed. It almost collapsed as it was and Britain's banking sector was bigger and more damaged than all those others put together. So the EU would be taking on a huge risk if they allowed us to join especially when we have vast debts and a still significant deficit.

    I cannot see them being willing to take on a member of the Euro that carries as many economic risks as Britain at a time when it has been graphically demonstrated that we are unenthusiastic about even our semi-detached status.

    And that would be mirrored in Britain. I voted Remain because I foresaw most of the chaos that is now happening. If I were told that that would have led to Euro membership - which I thought unlikely for the reasons I have given - I would unhesitatingly have voted leave, on the basis that ten difficult and chaotic years are better than economic collapse and thirty years of war, which I could easily see arising from our membership of the Euro without the even more improbable political Union to go with it.
    You're a historian (or at least a history buff). Was the choice of thirty years of war really accidental? Or perhaps your subconscious?
  • Options
    Anyway it's a good piece from Keiran based on hard numbers. My advice to europhiles looking at those numbers is #1 We've nothing left to lose. A50 has been activated. We are currently leaving. #2 Leave has no margin and no momentum. #3 Leave is now the Status Quo. The process of saddling them with responsibility and attaching every grievance to them, of framing them as the elite who lied, continues apace. #4 Even amidst the Ashes there are reasons for long term hope. #5 This is also about the Next One. Even if Brexit happens establishing it a con job born of lies which brought non of the promised benefits inoculates politics against the next crazy spasm of populism.

    Even if we can't save the Status Quo we can establish the Leave horror as a Grimm's fairy tale for our grand children. Forza !
  • Options
    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    stevef said:

    stevef said:

    Polls whatever they show are irrelevant. Polls do not decide policy.

    We had a democratic referendum, and the People voted to leave -and by leave they did not choose to leave just in name but to declare independence from EU control over our laws and borders.

    It does not matter whether you disagree with that decision. What matters is that democracy is upheld.

    If you think the decision to leave was to mistake, then campaign for us to rejoin AFTER we have left. But to frustrate the result of a democratic election would I believe leave millions frustrated and angry, would lead to people being driven into the arms of extremists, and I fear, into violence.

    Democracy did not stop on 23 June 2016. The public can change their minds and are entitled to do so before Britain leaves the EU if they so wish. Right now they don't seem likely to so wish, but if they do, that will be entirely democratic.
    But there is not going to be another referendum. Another referendum is just a device by those who do not like the result of the one on 23 June to frustrate the people. Lets keep having referendums until the people get it right.

    No. No No.
    There will be a second vote when it becomes clear that a majority of the public see the damage that the first vote is about to inflict on our country. The Labour Party will be its advocates, because it offers them a way off the hook of the conflict between their MPs' opinion and those of most of their constituents in 2016. The proposals to leave will be rejected decisively.
    Corbyn would stay out of a second referendum campaign even if he granted one having become PM so that would likely leave Soubry, Umunna, Hammond, Sturgeon and Cable leading the Remain campaign against Boris, JRM, Farage, Hoey and Skinner leading the Leave campaign.

    The idea that would be a walkover for Remain is a non starter.
    You aren't deploying enough imagination to appreciate the changed circumstances in which such a vote will take place.
    I agree Soubry and even Boris may not be MP's if the election happens soon
  • Options
    HYUFD said:
    What a mess. Surely parties can find MPs who can be trusted to 'behave'?
  • Options

    ydoethur said:

    Sean_F said:

    Suppose we get a second referendum, and Leave wins? Does that settle it? Or if Remain wins, but public opinion subsequently shifts back to Leave, will we get a third?

    The next referendum will be the last one, the winner will be one with the highest average of three EC/EU referenda.

    By my reckoning Leave would have to get at least 65.35% in the third referendum to ensure Brexit.
    Couldn't we decide it by a wrestling match between Farage and Thornberry, no holds barred, teeth permitted?

    Winner, the country.
    Only if Nigel Farage wears a St George Cross mankini for the contest.
    You never go full Remoaner!
  • Options

    HYUFD said:
    What a mess. Surely parties can find MPs who can be trusted to 'behave'?
    Just appalling ( if true)
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,983
    edited November 2017
    kyf_100 said:

    HYUFD said:



    In such circumstances voters would simply vote Leave and it would be a thumping Leave this time, I would certainly switch from Remain to Leave if Remain meant the Euro.

    Given the choice between ending free movement and joining the euro and staying in the EU or ending free movement and keeping the £ there would only be one winner and it would not be the EU!

    I would certainly hope so and would support you there. I'd be out on the street knocking on doors and delivering flyers.

    However, let's do a quick, dispassionate fag-packet calculation here.

    35% of the population "strongl final 2%.

    That would give a hypothetical 57/43 split for remain on those terms. Not convincing, but certainly more convincing than the original result.

    The big "what if" is what if the 35% feel incredibly strongly about freedom of movement, and they see this as by far and away the number one reason to leave.

    As I put it to you before, if the choice becomes "you can have your restrictions on freedom of movement if you give up the pound", to the average man on the street, the freedom to not have his job nicked by an immigrant in a bed-in-a-shed trumps the abstract notion of fiscal independence.

    However, the average man on the street voted this way because he is sick and tired of declining living standards and wages. If he's worried at all about losing his job because of an economic cliff-edge hard brexit, he may well support remaining in the EU if he gets his exemption from freedom of movement. After all, it's protecting his job he wants, not abstract notions of sovereignty.

    So *if* 40% of strong leavers support this horse trade, double the amount I guessed in my fag packet calculation, you then have a 64 / 36 split for remain, which is pretty convincing.

    It's a thought experiment, nothing more, but it's an interesting one nonetheless. For me, Brexit is ideological - it's about sovereignty. For those who voted to protect their jobs and put more food on their plates (probably core Labour voters), a 'remain' that limited immigration but accepted the Euro might form a winning coalition with ardent pro-Europhiles.
    Let us do a quick number crunch of the numbers shall we.

    In 2011 an astonishing 85% of British voters opposed joining the Euro with just 9% in favour. So less than a third of Remain voters back the Euro as well of course as all the Leave voters being opposed.

    35% are Leavers who want immigration control above all, 52% just wanted to Leave the EU for immigration or sovereignty reasons, 85% will only accept the EU if it means staying out of the Euro.

    Conclusion, a non-starter.

    https://today.yougov.com/news/2011/08/15/bloombergyougov-poll-reports-no-appetite-any-more-/
  • Options
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    ydoethur said:

    And that would be mirrored in Britain. I voted Remain because I foresaw most of the chaos that is now happening. If I were told that that would have led to Euro membership - which I thought unlikely for the reasons I have given - I would unhesitatingly have voted leave, on the basis that ten difficult and chaotic years are better than economic collapse and thirty years of war, which I could easily see arising from our membership of the Euro without the even more improbable political Union to go with it.

    '...the even more improbable political union to go with it.'

    The European Community has always been a political union. People think in far too binary terms about the future development of the Eurozone and imagine that it will need a single government, but that is not the reality.
    Which is why we should have stayed in EFTA
    Which is why we left EFTA - the political power was in Brussels.
    The political power was and is actually in Berlin.
    You are David Davis and I claim my five pounds.

    https://twitter.com/DavidDavisMP/status/735770073822961664
  • Options
    kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 3,939

    Anyway it's a good piece from Keiran based on hard numbers. My advice to europhiles looking at those numbers is #1 We've nothing left to lose. A50 has been activated. We are currently leaving. #2 Leave has no margin and no momentum. #3 Leave is now the Status Quo. The process of saddling them with responsibility and attaching every grievance to them, of framing them as the elite who lied, continues apace. #4 Even amidst the Ashes there are reasons for long term hope. #5 This is also about the Next One. Even if Brexit happens establishing it a con job born of lies which brought non of the promised benefits inoculates politics against the next crazy spasm of populism.

    Even if we can't save the Status Quo we can establish the Leave horror as a Grimm's fairy tale for our grand children. Forza !

    Did it ever occur to you that people who would rather watch the country burn to a cinder just to be proven right, than pitch in and try to find a compromise that works for as many as possible, if not all, might be part of the problem?
This discussion has been closed.