Corbyn got 40% and a hung Parliament last time by squeezing the LDs, Greens, SNP and UKIP rather than winning many Tory converts.
To win 45%+ and a working majority next time he needs to add Tory voters onto that total as well
Or the Tories lose votes to the other parties....
Most Tories are hardly likely to vote Green or SNP or the ardent Remain LDs, their vote is pretty solid now especially with the UKIP collapse
I don't think voters are nearly as logical as you my friend. I've voted Green, Labour, Lib Dem and Tory in my time, and I can't even remember why in some cases. I did very nearly vote UKIP even though I disagreed with their signature policy because they'd been good sports and were the only ones to campaign in my town.
The next election all depends on the Brexit outcomes, both the actual and the narrative.
If the Tories can say "we've got us into a good Brexit position, let's carry on" and it's backed up with some solid achievement's, they should win pretty easily.
May could win if she gets the UK to a good place. Even the sainted Maggie only turned her fortune's around on the back of the Falklands victory. May could still turn into the UK version of Merkle's mother of the nation if the cards fall her way.
On Corbyn, I do find it hard to believe his man of piece image surviving another 5 years. If I was in Tory high command, I'd be putting in place a long term image destruction operation in place against the old chap. We've seen he's pretty fragile under any type of real pressure.
Some young people are narcissistic and arrogant enough to think their votes should count for more. I wonder if they’ll think the same when they’re 65+?
The obvious way for the young to force a second referendum is to support a party actually proposing one.
Which of course they (mainly) refuse to do.
Of course the issue does not arise for me because as far as I am concerned the matter is closed, the war lost.
The former MP for Rochdale Simon Danczuk will not face criminal charges after a police investigation into his expenses. ... A Crown Prosecution Service spokesperson said on Tuesday: “We received a file of evidence from the Metropolitan police in relation to an allegation contrary to section 10 of the Parliamentary Standards Act of 2009. We considered the evidential test for prosecution was not met and therefore no charges were authorised.”
Some young people are narcissistic and arrogant enough to think their votes should count for more. I wonder if they’ll think the same when they’re 65+?
The obvious way for the young to force a second referendum is to support a party actually proposing one.
Which of course they (mainly) refuse to do.
Of course the issue does not arise for me because as far as I am concerned the matter is closed, the war lost.
I would be happy for the LibDems to put reversing Brexit directly in their manifesto and enforce it without referendum.
There's no constitutional need for one. And practically speaking if we want to rejoin we need to keep our negotiating position keen by not announcing we are joining before we know the terms. Giving ourselves no room to bargain is a big part of the problem we have now. Just because the Conservatives don't have the first clue how to manage running the country doesn't mean the other parties have to drop to their level.
Some young people are narcissistic and arrogant enough to think their votes should count for more. I wonder if they’ll think the same when they’re 65+?
The obvious way for the young to force a second referendum is to support a party actually proposing one.
Which of course they (mainly) refuse to do.
Of course the issue does not arise for me because as far as I am concerned the matter is closed, the war lost.
I would be happy for the LibDems to put reversing Brexit directly in their manifesto and enforce it without referendum.
There's no constitutional need for one. And practically speaking if we want to rejoin we need to keep our negotiating position keen by not announcing we are joining before we know the terms. Giving ourselves no room to bargain is a big part of the problem we have now. Just because the Conservatives don't have the first clue how to manage running the country doesn't mean the other parties have to drop to their level.
The EU seems to do these sort of things out in the open. I think it’s unlikely they’d negotiate a deal in secret. It would also be billed as the mother of all betrayals, a (real) secret plot to get the UK back in the EU.
I can't speak for anyone else, but I went into GE2017 fully intending to vote Lib Dem. I only swung to Labour at the last minute when the polls suggested they might not be doing quite as badly as I thought they were going to. Had Labour been competitive throughout the campaign I'd have switched much sooner. My logic was simple. The government is doing Brexit. Vote for the ones most likely to get rid of them.
Doughnut logic.
If you want to reverse Brexit, you need the Labour centre/right to gain control of the party.
That was rendered impossible by the GE result.
Nonsense. If public opinion shifts, Labour will follow. The large majority of the MPs are just waiting for such an opportunity
By the time public opinion has shifted (if it does), it will be too late. We'll have left.
I voted Leave, so am perfectly happy for Remainers to wait for public opinion to shift, and then Labour to shift.
Carry on Waiting, Estragon and Vladimir, Lucky and Pozzo.
Remain lost the referendum, and now they're losing the aftermath ... waiting.
Some young people are narcissistic and arrogant enough to think their votes should count for more. I wonder if they’ll think the same when they’re 65+?
The obvious way for the young to force a second referendum is to support a party actually proposing one.
Which of course they (mainly) refuse to do.
Of course the issue does not arise for me because as far as I am concerned the matter is closed, the war lost.
I would be happy for the LibDems to put reversing Brexit directly in their manifesto and enforce it without referendum.
There's no constitutional need for one. And practically speaking if we want to rejoin we need to keep our negotiating position keen by not announcing we are joining before we know the terms. Giving ourselves no room to bargain is a big part of the problem we have now. Just because the Conservatives don't have the first clue how to manage running the country doesn't mean the other parties have to drop to their level.
The EU seems to do these sort of things out in the open. I think it’s unlikely they’d negotiate a deal in secret.
But nonetheless we can have a more meaningful discussion if keep our options open. Announcing we are leaving come what may has guaranteed we will get a sub optimum offering. But of course Mr Cameron thought he was going to win...
The former MP for Rochdale Simon Danczuk will not face criminal charges after a police investigation into his expenses. ... A Crown Prosecution Service spokesperson said on Tuesday: “We received a file of evidence from the Metropolitan police in relation to an allegation contrary to section 10 of the Parliamentary Standards Act of 2009. We considered the evidential test for prosecution was not met and therefore no charges were authorised.”
Some young people are narcissistic and arrogant enough to think their votes should count for more. I wonder if they’ll think the same when they’re 65+?
The obvious way for the young to force a second referendum is to support a party actually proposing one.
Which of course they (mainly) refuse to do.
Of course the issue does not arise for me because as far as I am concerned the matter is closed, the war lost.
I would be happy for the LibDems to put reversing Brexit directly in their manifesto and enforce it without referendum.
There's no constitutional need for one. And practically speaking if we want to rejoin we need to keep our negotiating position keen by not announcing we are joining before we know the terms. Giving ourselves no room to bargain is a big part of the problem we have now. Just because the Conservatives don't have the first clue how to manage running the country doesn't mean the other parties have to drop to their level.
The EU seems to do these sort of things out in the open. I think it’s unlikely they’d negotiate a deal in secret.
But nonetheless we can have a more meaningful discussion if keep our options open. Announcing we are leaving come what may has guaranteed we will get a sub optimum offering. But of course Mr Cameron thought he was going to win...
Some young people are narcissistic and arrogant enough to think their votes should count for more. I wonder if they’ll think the same when they’re 65+?
The argument isn't that their votes should count for more; it's that their votes will be counted again, and again, and again, and again, so if this will ultimately lead to Brexit being reversed, we might as well save ourselves the hassle and cancel it now. (With the bonus for Eurosceptics that we'd keep our opt-outs.)
Implying that their opinion is fixed. It isn't.
Do tell me what Leavers are doing to persuade Remain voters to rethink. Because from here it looks like Leavers are simply cementing Remain voters in their original decision.
The issue was that a small, but influential and vocal group of Remainers started from almost the day after the vote trying to frustrate the vote. Even cases like Gina Miller - and this is setting aside the legal question she was testing - was presented (fairly or not) as an attempt to stop Brexit
Against that backdrop it’s not surprising that Leave voters dug in and became defensive: they had won, unexpectedly and against the odds, and were facing a hideous caterwauling from people with the power to take their prize away from them.
Perhaps they should have been better people and tried to reach out but o can understand why they didn’t
Theresa May ran a terrible campaign and if she had run a half-decent campaign she would have got more votes.Labour won seats like Canterbury and Kensington that they never dreamed of winning. The biggest factor of the 2017 election was the abysmal performance of the Lib Dems. Did any PB readers predict it? Not me and I still do not understand why millions of remainers in England did not vote Lib Dem.Or even now why they are still struggling to make any appeal. If the tories do not hold a 2nd referendum on Brexit I expect things to change.There will be lots of losers after Brexit and they will blame the Tories if they do not hold a 2nd referendum
If the LD vote had been slightly higher and the Lab vote slightly lower, she would have won a good majority and everyone would have said 43.4% was an excellent vote share, pretty much the same as Blair got in 1997.
Theresa May ran a terrible campaign and if she had run a half-decent campaign she would have got more votes.Labour won seats like Canterbury and Kensington that they never dreamed of winning. The biggest factor of the 2017 election was the abysmal performance of the Lib Dems. Did any PB readers predict it? Not me and I still do not understand why millions of remainers in England did not vote Lib Dem.Or even now why they are still struggling to make any appeal. If the tories do not hold a 2nd referendum on Brexit I expect things to change.There will be lots of losers after Brexit and they will blame the Tories if they do not hold a 2nd referendum
If the LD vote had been slightly higher and the Lab vote slightly lower, she would have won a good majority and everyone would have said 43.4% was an excellent vote share, pretty much the same as Blair got in 1997.
Some young people are narcissistic and arrogant enough to think their votes should count for more. I wonder if they’ll think the same when they’re 65+?
The argument isn't that their votes should count for more; it's that their votes will be counted again, and again, and again, and again, so if this will ultimately lead to Brexit being reversed, we might as well save ourselves the hassle and cancel it now. (With the bonus for Eurosceptics that we'd keep our opt-outs.)
Implying that their opinion is fixed. It isn't.
Do tell me what Leavers are doing to persuade Remain voters to rethink. Because from here it looks like Leavers are simply cementing Remain voters in their original decision.
I suspect a decent chunk of Remainers were actually 'statusquoers' - in a future referendum many of them would also vote 'Remain out' - the 15% who want to remain despite the vote are going to have a painful lifetime waiting I'd they think rejoin is ever likely.
Some young people are narcissistic and arrogant enough to think their votes should count for more. I wonder if they’ll think the same when they’re 65+?
The obvious way for the young to force a second referendum is to support a party actually proposing one.
Which of course they (mainly) refuse to do.
Of course the issue does not arise for me because as far as I am concerned the matter is closed, the war lost.
Some young people are narcissistic and arrogant enough to think their votes should count for more. I wonder if they’ll think the same when they’re 65+?
The argument isn't that their votes should count for more; it's that their votes will be counted again, and again, and again, and again, so if this will ultimately lead to Brexit being reversed, we might as well save ourselves the hassle and cancel it now. (With the bonus for Eurosceptics that we'd keep our opt-outs.)
Implying that their opinion is fixed. It isn't.
Do tell me what Leavers are doing to persuade Remain voters to rethink. Because from here it looks like Leavers are simply cementing Remain voters in their original decision.
I suspect a decent chunk of Remainers were actually 'statusquoers' - in a future referendum many of them would also vote 'Remain out' - the 15% who want to remain despite the vote are going to have a painful lifetime waiting I'd they think rejoin is ever likely.
Corbyn got 40% and a hung Parliament last time by squeezing the LDs, Greens, SNP and UKIP rather than winning many Tory converts.
To win 45%+ and a working majority next time he needs to add Tory voters onto that total as well
Or the Tories lose votes to the other parties....
Most Tories are hardly likely to vote Green or SNP or the ardent Remain LDs, their vote is pretty solid now especially with the UKIP collapse
I don't think voters are nearly as logical as you my friend. I've voted Green, Labour, Lib Dem and Tory in my time, and I can't even remember why in some cases. I did very nearly vote UKIP even though I disagreed with their signature policy because they'd been good sports and were the only ones to campaign in my town.
At local elections you still get a few Tories who vote LD locally but Tory nationally, for almost all current Tory voters the only Labour leader they have ever voted for, if they have ever voted Labour, was Blair, beyond that most of the former Kippers have returned to the Tory fold
Theresa May ran a terrible campaign and if she had run a half-decent campaign she would have got more votes.Labour won seats like Canterbury and Kensington that they never dreamed of winning. The biggest factor of the 2017 election was the abysmal performance of the Lib Dems. Did any PB readers predict it? Not me and I still do not understand why millions of remainers in England did not vote Lib Dem.Or even now why they are still struggling to make any appeal. If the tories do not hold a 2nd referendum on Brexit I expect things to change.There will be lots of losers after Brexit and they will blame the Tories if they do not hold a 2nd referendum
I can't speak for anyone else, but I went into GE2017 fully intending to vote Lib Dem. I only swung to Labour at the last minute when the polls suggested they might not be doing quite as badly as I thought they were going to. Had Labour been competitive throughout the campaign I'd have switched much sooner. My logic was simple. The government is doing Brexit. Vote for the ones most likely to get rid of them.
Even though labour are Brexit ing too?
If you don't like what the government is doing, you punish the government. End of.
Sure, but thinking further ahead there's little point in punishing it in such a way that the thing you are punishing them about still happens. There are other ways of punishing them, particularly when alternatives proposing to prevent that thing existed.
Theresa May ran a terrible campaign and if she had run a half-decent campaign she would have got more votes.Labour won seats like Canterbury and Kensington that they never dreamed of winning. The biggest factor of the 2017 election was the abysmal performance of the Lib Dems. Did any PB readers predict it? Not me and I still do not understand why millions of remainers in England did not vote Lib Dem.Or even now why they are still struggling to make any appeal. If the tories do not hold a 2nd referendum on Brexit I expect things to change.There will be lots of losers after Brexit and they will blame the Tories if they do not hold a 2nd referendum
If the LD vote had been slightly higher and the Lab vote slightly lower, she would have won a good majority and everyone would have said 43.4% was an excellent vote share, pretty much the same as Blair got in 1997.
If the Tory vote lead over LAB had been the same as the polls said a month earlier or the same as Martin Kaboom Boon said it was on eve of poll.
TM would have been a hero amongst Tories instead of a dead woman walking and Jezza would have been long gone instead of a Glastonbury hero.
Some young people are narcissistic and arrogant enough to think their votes should count for more. I wonder if they’ll think the same when they’re 65+?
The argument isn't that their votes should count for more; it's that their votes will be counted again, and again, and again, and again, so if this will ultimately lead to Brexit being reversed, we might as well save ourselves the hassle and cancel it now. (With the bonus for Eurosceptics that we'd keep our opt-outs.)
There is no special merit in the opinions of voters aged 18-24.
Some young people are narcissistic and arrogant enough to think their votes should count for more. I wonder if they’ll think the same when they’re 65+?
The argument isn't that their votes should count for more; it's that their votes will be counted again, and again, and again, and again, so if this will ultimately lead to Brexit being reversed, we might as well save ourselves the hassle and cancel it now. (With the bonus for Eurosceptics that we'd keep our opt-outs.)
There is no special merit in the opinions of voters aged 18-24.
But the fact that the young are so anti-Brexit is nonetheless an important data point. So as a remainer it has no particular salience because we still lost and have no right to overturn the democratic decision. However if you are a leaver you could take the view that although we could go through with it, maybe we really shouldn't. Do you really want to wrench a generation away from something that they value? And in any case will reverse as soon as the opportunity arises? If enough leavers started coming forward saying that kind of thing we might just be able to get ourselves out of it. Search your consciouses guys!
Some young people are narcissistic and arrogant enough to think their votes should count for more. I wonder if they’ll think the same when they’re 65+?
The argument isn't that their votes should count for more; it's that their votes will be counted again, and again, and again, and again, so if this will ultimately lead to Brexit being reversed, we might as well save ourselves the hassle and cancel it now. (With the bonus for Eurosceptics that we'd keep our opt-outs.)
There is no special merit in the opinions of voters aged 18-24.
But the fact that the young are so anti-Brexit is nonetheless an important data point. So as a remainer it has no particular salience because we still lost and have no right to overturn the democratic decision. However if you are a leaver you could take the view that although we could go through with it, maybe we really shouldn't. Do you really want to wrench a generation away from something that they value? And in any case will reverse as soon as the opportunity arises? If enough leavers started coming forward saying that kind of thing we might just be able to get ourselves out of it. Search your consciouses guys!
I mean no disrespect, but I don't see why the vote of a random 20 year old who really values EU citizenship counts for more than the vote of a random 50 year old who sees it as an imposition. Their votes are of equal value.
Some young people are narcissistic and arrogant enough to think their votes should count for more. I wonder if they’ll think the same when they’re 65+?
The argument isn't that their votes should count for more; it's that their votes will be counted again, and again, and again, and again, so if this will ultimately lead to Brexit being reversed, we might as well save ourselves the hassle and cancel it now. (With the bonus for Eurosceptics that we'd keep our opt-outs.)
Implying that their opinion is fixed. It isn't.
Do tell me what Leavers are doing to persuade Remain voters to rethink. Because from here it looks like Leavers are simply cementing Remain voters in their original decision.
The issue was that a small, but influential and vocal group of Remainers started from almost the day after the vote trying to frustrate the vote. Even cases like Gina Miller - and this is setting aside the legal question she was testing - was presented (fairly or not) as an attempt to stop Brexit
Against that backdrop it’s not surprising that Leave voters dug in and became defensive: they had won, unexpectedly and against the odds, and were facing a hideous caterwauling from people with the power to take their prize away from them.
Perhaps they should have been better people and tried to reach out but o can understand why they didn’t
Maybe some Leave voters became defensive because they objected to being derided as bigots, racists and xenophobes, not to mention thick.
Some young people are narcissistic and arrogant enough to think their votes should count for more. I wonder if they’ll think the same when they’re 65+?
The argument isn't that their votes should count for more; it's that their votes will be counted again, and again, and again, and again, so if this will ultimately lead to Brexit being reversed, we might as well save ourselves the hassle and cancel it now. (With the bonus for Eurosceptics that we'd keep our opt-outs.)
There is no special merit in the opinions of voters aged 18-24.
But the fact that the young are so anti-Brexit is nonetheless an important data point. So as a remainer it has no particular salience because we still lost and have no right to overturn the democratic decision. However if you are a leaver you could take the view that although we could go through with it, maybe we really shouldn't. Do you really want to wrench a generation away from something that they value? And in any case will reverse as soon as the opportunity arises? If enough leavers started coming forward saying that kind of thing we might just be able to get ourselves out of it. Search your consciouses guys!
Young people become older and often change their views. What happened to young pro-marketeers (as they were called) in 1975? There is no evidernce that the population will necessarily become more pro-EU simply as the result of the passage of time
Some young people are narcissistic and arrogant enough to think their votes should count for more. I wonder if they’ll think the same when they’re 65+?
The argument isn't that their votes should count for more; it's that their votes will be counted again, and again, and again, and again, so if this will ultimately lead to Brexit being reversed, we might as well save ourselves the hassle and cancel it now. (With the bonus for Eurosceptics that we'd keep our opt-outs.)
There is no special merit in the opinions of voters aged 18-24.
But the fact that the young are so anti-Brexit is nonetheless an important data point. So as a remainer it has no particular salience because we still lost and have no right to overturn the democratic decision. However if you are a leaver you could take the view that although we could go through with it, maybe we really shouldn't. Do you really want to wrench a generation away from something that they value? And in any case will reverse as soon as the opportunity arises? If enough leavers started coming forward saying that kind of thing we might just be able to get ourselves out of it. Search your consciouses guys!
There's more than one generation that values things.
Some young people are narcissistic and arrogant enough to think their votes should count for more. I wonder if they’ll think the same when they’re 65+?
The argument isn't that their votes should count for more; it's that their votes will be counted again, and again, and again, and again, so if this will ultimately lead to Brexit being reversed, we might as well save ourselves the hassle and cancel it now. (With the bonus for Eurosceptics that we'd keep our opt-outs.)
Implying that their opinion is fixed. It isn't.
Do tell me what Leavers are doing to persuade Remain voters to rethink. Because from here it looks like Leavers are simply cementing Remain voters in their original decision.
The issue was that a small, but influential and vocal group of Remainers started from almost the day after the vote trying to frustrate the vote. Even cases like Gina Miller - and this is setting aside the legal question she was testing - was presented (fairly or not) as an attempt to stop Brexit
Against that backdrop it’s not surprising that Leave voters dug in and became defensive: they had won, unexpectedly and against the odds, and were facing a hideous caterwauling from people with the power to take their prize away from them.
Perhaps they should have been better people and tried to reach out but o can understand why they didn’t
Maybe some Leave voters became defensive because they objected to being derided as bigots, racists and xenophobes, not to mention thick.
You missed off poor, old, uneducated and provincial.
Despite all the epithets from the terminally petulant, we do have to recognise that the vote was very close. May had better take account of that and fend off her lunatic fringe. However, as I have potted plants with better political judgement, she probably won't.
The head of Germany's Social Democrats (SPD), Martin Schulz, has resigned to ease preparations for a coalition government with Chancellor Angela Merkel's conservatives.
Some young people are narcissistic and arrogant enough to think their votes should count for more. I wonder if they’ll think the same when they’re 65+?
The argument isn't that their votes should count for more; it's that their votes will be counted again, and again, and again, and again, so if this will ultimately lead to Brexit being reversed, we might as well save ourselves the hassle and cancel it now. (With the bonus for Eurosceptics that we'd keep our opt-outs.)
There is no special merit in the opinions of voters aged 18-24.
But the fact that the young are so anti-Brexit is nonetheless an important data point. So as a remainer it has no particular salience because we still lost and have no right to overturn the democratic decision. However if you are a leaver you could take the view that although we could go through with it, maybe we really shouldn't. Do you really want to wrench a generation away from something that they value? And in any case will reverse as soon as the opportunity arises? If enough leavers started coming forward saying that kind of thing we might just be able to get ourselves out of it. Search your consciouses guys!
Young people become older and often change their views. What happened to young pro-marketeers (as they were called) in 1975? There is no evidernce that the population will necessarily become more pro-EU simply as the result of the passage of time
No, they will become more pro-EU as a result of the passage of Brexit.
Brexiteers face an electoral double whammy: a demographic time bomb, and a political backlash.
Some young people are narcissistic and arrogant enough to think their votes should count for more. I wonder if they’ll think the same when they’re 65+?
The argument isn't that their votes should count for more; it's that their votes will be counted again, and again, and again, and again, so if this will ultimately lead to Brexit being reversed, we might as well save ourselves the hassle and cancel it now. (With the bonus for Eurosceptics that we'd keep our opt-outs.)
There is no special merit in the opinions of voters aged 18-24.
But the fact that the young are so anti-Brexit is nonetheless an important data point. So as a remainer it has no particular salience because we still lost and have no right to overturn the democratic decision. However if you are a leaver you could take the view that although we could go through with it, maybe we really shouldn't. Do you really want to wrench a generation away from something that they value? And in any case will reverse as soon as the opportunity arises? If enough leavers started coming forward saying that kind of thing we might just be able to get ourselves out of it. Search your consciouses guys!
Young people become older and often change their views. What happened to young pro-marketeers (as they were called) in 1975? There is no evidernce that the population will necessarily become more pro-EU simply as the result of the passage of time
No, they will become more pro-EU as a result of the passage of Brexit.
Brexiteers face an electoral double whammy: a demographic time bomb, and a political backlash.
You may or may not be right. But it is a thin argument to say that Brexit should be abandoned because young people don't like it.
Some young people are narcissistic and arrogant enough to think their votes should count for more. I wonder if they’ll think the same when they’re 65+?
The argument isn't that their votes should count for more; it's that their votes will be counted again, and again, and again, and again, so if this will ultimately lead to Brexit being reversed, we might as well save ourselves the hassle and cancel it now. (With the bonus for Eurosceptics that we'd keep our opt-outs.)
There is no special merit in the opinions of voters aged 18-24.
But the fact that the young are so anti-Brexit is nonetheless an important data point. So as a remainer it has no particular salience because we still lost and have no right to overturn the democratic decision. However if you are a leaver you could take the view that although we could go through with it, maybe we really shouldn't. Do you really want to wrench a generation away from something that they value? And in any case will reverse as soon as the opportunity arises? If enough leavers started coming forward saying that kind of thing we might just be able to get ourselves out of it. Search your consciouses guys!
Young people become older and often change their views. What happened to young pro-marketeers (as they were called) in 1975? There is no evidernce that the population will necessarily become more pro-EU simply as the result of the passage of time
No, they will become more pro-EU as a result of the passage of Brexit.
Brexiteers face an electoral double whammy: a demographic time bomb, and a political backlash.
But Corbyn has been a Brexiteer for decades. Both Cameron and May wanted to stay in the EU. And the UK will leave the EU because the voters in a democratic referendum chose it, it was not imposed by any political party. And what if Brexit is a success?
Some young people are narcissistic and arrogant enough to think their votes should count for more. I wonder if they’ll think the same when they’re 65+?
The argument isn't that their votes should count for more; it's that their votes will be counted again, and again, and again, and again, so if this will ultimately lead to Brexit being reversed, we might as well save ourselves the hassle and cancel it now. (With the bonus for Eurosceptics that we'd keep our opt-outs.)
There is no special merit in the opinions of voters aged 18-24.
But the fact that the young are so anti-Brexit is nonetheless an important data point. So as a remainer it has no particular salience because we still lost and have no right to overturn the democratic decision. However if you are a leaver you could take the view that although we could go through with it, maybe we really shouldn't. Do you really want to wrench a generation away from something that they value? And in any case will reverse as soon as the opportunity arises? If enough leavers started coming forward saying that kind of thing we might just be able to get ourselves out of it. Search your consciouses guys!
Young people become older and often change their views. What happened to young pro-marketeers (as they were called) in 1975? There is no evidernce that the population will necessarily become more pro-EU simply as the result of the passage of time
No, they will become more pro-EU as a result of the passage of Brexit.
Brexiteers face an electoral double whammy: a demographic time bomb, and a political backlash.
How do you know how people will vote in the future?
Some young people are narcissistic and arrogant enough to think their votes should count for more. I wonder if they’ll think the same when they’re 65+?
The argument isn't that their votes should count for more; it's that their votes will be counted again, and again, and again, and again, so if this will ultimately lead to Brexit being reversed, we might as well save ourselves the hassle and cancel it now. (With the bonus for Eurosceptics that we'd keep our opt-outs.)
There is no special merit in the opinions of voters aged 18-24.
But the fact that the young are so anti-Brexit is nonetheless an important data point. So as a remainer it has no particular salience because we still lost and have no right to overturn the democratic decision. However if you are a leaver you could take the view that although we could go through with it, maybe we really shouldn't. Do you really want to wrench a generation away from something that they value? And in any case will reverse as soon as the opportunity arises? If enough leavers started coming forward saying that kind of thing we might just be able to get ourselves out of it. Search your consciouses guys!
Young people become older and often change their views. What happened to young pro-marketeers (as they were called) in 1975? There is no evidernce that the population will necessarily become more pro-EU simply as the result of the passage of time
No, they will become more pro-EU as a result of the passage of Brexit.
Brexiteers face an electoral double whammy: a demographic time bomb, and a political backlash.
How do you know how people will vote in the future?
I return to my earlier question. What are Leavers doing to persuade Remain supporters to rethink?
Some young people are narcissistic and arrogant enough to think their votes should count for more. I wonder if they’ll think the same when they’re 65+?
The argument isn't that their votes should count for more; it's that their votes will be counted again, and again, and again, and again, so if this will ultimately lead to Brexit being reversed, we might as well save ourselves the hassle and cancel it now. (With the bonus for Eurosceptics that we'd keep our opt-outs.)
There is no special merit in the opinions of voters aged 18-24.
But the fact that the young are so anti-Brexit is nonetheless an important data point. So as a remainer it has no particular salience because we still lost and have no right to overturn the democratic decision. However if you are a leaver you could take the view that although we could go through with it, maybe we really shouldn't. Do you really want to wrench a generation away from something that they value? And in any case will reverse as soon as the opportunity arises? If enough leavers started coming forward saying that kind of thing we might just be able to get ourselves out of it. Search your consciouses guys!
Young people become older and often change their views. What happened to young pro-marketeers (as they were called) in 1975? There is no evidernce that the population will necessarily become more pro-EU simply as the result of the passage of time
No, they will become more pro-EU as a result of the passage of Brexit.
Brexiteers face an electoral double whammy: a demographic time bomb, and a political backlash.
How do you know how people will vote in the future?
I return to my earlier question. What are Leavers doing to persuade Remain supporters to rethink?
Some young people are narcissistic and arrogant enough to think their votes should count for more. I wonder if they’ll think the same when they’re 65+?
The argument isn't that their votes should count for more; it's that their votes will be counted again, and again, and again, and again, so if this will ultimately lead to Brexit being reversed, we might as well save ourselves the hassle and cancel it now. (With the bonus for Eurosceptics that we'd keep our opt-outs.)
There is no special merit in the opinions of voters aged 18-24.
But the fact that the young are so anti-Brexit is nonetheless an important data point. So as a remainer it has no particular salience because we still lost and have no right to overturn the democratic decision. However if you are a leaver you could take the view that although we could go through with it, maybe we really shouldn't. Do you really want to wrench a generation away from something that they value? And in any case will reverse as soon as the opportunity arises? If enough leavers started coming forward saying that kind of thing we might just be able to get ourselves out of it. Search your consciouses guys!
Very few people deeply value and love the EU. The few I've met have all been very odd and often more than a little bit creepy. For most of my generation voting Remain was probably based on a group mentality and on not wanting to vote the same way as Farage. I doubt they'll care about it in a few years' time.
Some young people are narcissistic and arrogant enough to think their votes should count for more. I wonder if they’ll think the same when they’re 65+?
The argument isn't that their votes should count for more; it's that their votes will be counted again, and again, and again, and again, so if this will ultimately lead to Brexit being reversed, we might as well save ourselves the hassle and cancel it now. (With the bonus for Eurosceptics that we'd keep our opt-outs.)
There is no special merit in the opinions of voters aged 18-24.
Some young people are narcissistic and arrogant enough to think their votes should count for more. I wonder if they’ll think the same when they’re 65+?
The argument isn't that their votes should count for more; it's that their votes will be counted again, and again, and again, and again, so if this will ultimately lead to Brexit being reversed, we might as well save ourselves the hassle and cancel it now. (With the bonus for Eurosceptics that we'd keep our opt-outs.)
There is no special merit in the opinions of voters aged 18-24.
But the fact that the young are so anti-Brexit is nonetheless an important data point. So as a remainer it has no particular salience because we still lost and have no right to overturn the democratic decision. However if you are a leaver you could take the view that although we could go through with it, maybe we really shouldn't. Do you really want to wrench a generation away from something that they value? And in any case will reverse as soon as the opportunity arises? If enough leavers started coming forward saying that kind of thing we might just be able to get ourselves out of it. Search your consciouses guys!
Young people become older and often change their views. What happened to young pro-marketeers (as they were called) in 1975? There is no evidernce that the population will necessarily become more pro-EU simply as the result of the passage of time
No, they will become more pro-EU as a result of the passage of Brexit.
Brexiteers face an electoral double whammy: a demographic time bomb, and a political backlash.
But Corbyn has been a Brexiteer for decades. Both Cameron and May wanted to stay in the EU. And the UK will leave the EU because the voters in a democratic referendum chose it, it was not imposed by any political party. And what if Brexit is a success?
Corbyn doesn't really care one way or the other. He cares much more about Trident - yet was even willing to compromise on that to hold his party together.
Some young people are narcissistic and arrogant enough to think their votes should count for more. I wonder if they’ll think the same when they’re 65+?
The argument isn't that their votes should count for more; it's that their votes will be counted again, and again, and again, and again, so if this will ultimately lead to Brexit being reversed, we might as well save ourselves the hassle and cancel it now. (With the bonus for Eurosceptics that we'd keep our opt-outs.)
Implying that their opinion is fixed. It isn't.
Do tell me what Leavers are doing to persuade Remain voters to rethink. Because from here it looks like Leavers are simply cementing Remain voters in their original decision.
I suspect a decent chunk of Remainers were actually 'statusquoers' - in a future referendum many of them would also vote 'Remain out' - the 15% who want to remain despite the vote are going to have a painful lifetime waiting I'd they think rejoin is ever likely.
Talk to some young people.
I do. Almost all of my pals voted Remain. None of them go on marches. Few ever even comment about it.
The statusquoers were those who bought project fear. The number of committed 'williamglenns' or 'Foxys' in our isles is relatively low.
BBC reporting on Irish concerns at their economy on Brexit projecting a 7% hit on a no deal. Fergus O'Dowd of Fine Gael said that by 2034 the economy would lose 18 billion and that they want trade to continue much as it does now and why should Ireland suffer and lets work together.
The BBC commented that all the speculation seems that there will be a tech solution to the problem
The idea all the 27 are going to let Barnier sacrifice their economies on a political stance is for the birds
Some young people are narcissistic and arrogant enough to think their votes should count for more. I wonder if they’ll think the same when they’re 65+?
The argument isn't that their votes should count for more; it's that their votes will be counted again, and again, and again, and again, so if this will ultimately lead to Brexit being reversed, we might as well save ourselves the hassle and cancel it now. (With the bonus for Eurosceptics that we'd keep our opt-outs.)
There is no special merit in the opinions of voters aged 18-24.
But the fact that the young are so anti-Brexit is nonetheless an important data point. So as a remainer it has no particular salience because we still lost and have no right to overturn the democratic decision. However if you are a leaver you could take the view that although we could go through with it, maybe we really shouldn't. Do you really want to wrench a generation away from something that they value? And in any case will reverse as soon as the opportunity arises? If enough leavers started coming forward saying that kind of thing we might just be able to get ourselves out of it. Search your consciouses guys!
Very few people deeply value and love the EU. The few I've met have all been very odd and often more than a little bit creepy. For most of my generation voting Remain was probably based on a group mentality and on not wanting to vote the same way as Farage. I doubt they'll care about it in a few years' time.
Look at the state of this. Now you've made William cry. Go to your room and think about what you've done.
Some young people are narcissistic and arrogant enough to think their votes should count for more. I wonder if they’ll think the same when they’re 65+?
The argument isn't that their votes should count for more; it's that their votes will be counted again, and again, and again, and again, so if this will ultimately lead to Brexit being reversed, we might as well save ourselves the hassle and cancel it now. (With the bonus for Eurosceptics that we'd keep our opt-outs.)
There is no special merit in the opinions of voters aged 18-24.
But the fact that the young are so anti-Brexit is nonetheless an important data point. So as a remainer it has no particular salience because we still lost and have no right to overturn the democratic decision. However if you are a leaver you could take the view that although we could go through with it, maybe we really shouldn't. Do you really want to wrench a generation away from something that they value? And in any case will reverse as soon as the opportunity arises? If enough leavers started coming forward saying that kind of thing we might just be able to get ourselves out of it. Search your consciouses guys!
Young people become older and often change their views. What happened to young pro-marketeers (as they were called) in 1975? There is no evidernce that the population will necessarily become more pro-EU simply as the result of the passage of time
No, they will become more pro-EU as a result of the passage of Brexit.
Brexiteers face an electoral double whammy: a demographic time bomb, and a political backlash.
How do you know how people will vote in the future?
I return to my earlier question. What are Leavers doing to persuade Remain supporters to rethink?
Doing my best, Alastair. I just married a Remainer. I can only marry people one at a time.
Some young people are narcissistic and arrogant enough to think their votes should count for more. I wonder if they’ll think the same when they’re 65+?
The argument isn't that their votes should count for more; it's that their votes will be counted again, and again, and again, and again, so if this will ultimately lead to Brexit being reversed, we might as well save ourselves the hassle and cancel it now. (With the bonus for Eurosceptics that we'd keep our opt-outs.)
There is no special merit in the opinions of voters aged 18-24.
But the fact that the young are so anti-Brexit is nonetheless an important data point. So as a remainer it has no particular salience because we still lost and have no right to overturn the democratic decision. However if you are a leaver you could take the view that although we could go through with it, maybe we really shouldn't. Do you really want to wrench a generation away from something that they value? And in any case will reverse as soon as the opportunity arises? If enough leavers started coming forward saying that kind of thing we might just be able to get ourselves out of it. Search your consciouses guys!
Very few people deeply value and love the EU. The few I've met have all been very odd and often more than a little bit creepy. For most of my generation voting Remain was probably based on a group mentality and on not wanting to vote the same way as Farage. I doubt they'll care about it in a few years' time.
Look at the state of this. Now you've made William cry. Go to your room and think about what you've done.
I'd love to go to my room. Unfortunately I'm stuck standing on an effed up train out of Liverpool Street...
Some young people are narcissistic and arrogant enough to think their votes should count for more. I wonder if they’ll think the same when they’re 65+?
The argument isn't that their votes should count for more; it's that their votes will be counted again, and again, and again, and again, so if this will ultimately lead to Brexit being reversed, we might as well save ourselves the hassle and cancel it now. (With the bonus for Eurosceptics that we'd keep our opt-outs.)
There is no special merit in the opinions of voters aged 18-24.
But the fact that the young are so anti-Brexit is nonetheless an important data point. So as a remainer it has no particular salience because we still lost and have no right to overturn the democratic decision. However if you are a leaver you could take the view that although we could go through with it, maybe we really shouldn't. Do you really want to wrench a generation away from something that they value? And in any case will reverse as soon as the opportunity arises? If enough leavers started coming forward saying that kind of thing we might just be able to get ourselves out of it. Search your consciouses guys!
Young people become older and often change their views. What happened to young pro-marketeers (as they were called) in 1975? There is no evidernce that the population will necessarily become more pro-EU simply as the result of the passage of time
No, they will become more pro-EU as a result of the passage of Brexit.
Brexiteers face an electoral double whammy: a demographic time bomb, and a political backlash.
How do you know how people will vote in the future?
I return to my earlier question. What are Leavers doing to persuade Remain supporters to rethink?
You could respond to earlier replies...
You gave an explanation why they didn’t. That won’t do Leavers much good if in ten years no one has changed their minds. By then demography would ensure that they were in a definite minority.
If Leavers want their insurrection to survive, they need to find a way to reach out to their former opponents. For nearly two years they’ve been calling them traitors and saboteurs. Not the best of starts.
But Corbyn has been a Brexiteer for decades. Both Cameron and May wanted to stay in the EU. And the UK will leave the EU because the voters in a democratic referendum chose it, it was not imposed by any political party. And what if Brexit is a success?
Corbyn doesn't really care one way or the other. He cares much more about Trident - yet was even willing to compromise on that to hold his party together.
+1. Moreover, while Corbyn has criticised the EU for decades, it hasn't been a left-wing cause since the 1980s, because the Thatcher years brought about a realisation,especially among trade unions, that the EU could mitigate right-wing policies in Britain.
The interesting thing about the Labour manifesto is that it was not a Corbynista one. Although the sums did not add up, it was quite moderate and mainstream. Corbyn did not have the courage or the honesty to put forward the hard left policies that he has been espousing for decades. A 1983 style manifesto was more apt for him. Apart from the sums, it was a good manifesto. I could easily vote for it. Harold Wilson, Jim Callaghan Neil Kinnock and John Smith could all have put forward such a manifesto -and Corbyn would have accused them of betrayal of socialism for it.
The problem for Labour was the people in charge of the Party at the election. Voters did not want Corbyn as PM, Abbott as home secretary, and McDonnell as chancellor. They do not want a Labour Party controlled by 80s Militant wit a new name. They do not like the nasty people behind the scenes or on the internet threatening, and the fascist tactics.
So yes, the manifesto was good (but you couldnt fund it without raising taxes for most people) but behind it people recognised something really really nasty. Until Labour addresses that it is doomed to defeat.
I didn`t bother to take a fine toothcomb to the Labour manifesto, but I had the distinct impression at the time that they had gone through all the Lib Dem policies of the last thirty years and thrown them all together without further thought or crafting. They even added the standard Lib Dem claim that the policies had been costed (true in the case of the Lib Dems). Most untrue in the case of Labour.
So it is not surprising that it was non-Socialist and appealing. On top of which it never came under scrutiny.
But if we had ended up with a Corbyn government, I agree with Steve F. Its policies would not have looked in the slightest like the manifesto.
The Labour manifesto was rather a rush job, cut and paste, but mostly by reason of having a snap election. I wouldn't weigh it too seriously.
Labour will be more moderate in government than in their manifesto.
The realities of govt, their lack of experience at getting legislation through, the fact they have a strong centrist group who will back the manifesto but nothing more radical, opposition in the lords, the possibility of deteriorating public finances making an ambitious domestic agenda infeasible.
I mean no disrespect, but I don't see why the vote of a random 20 year old who really values EU citizenship counts for more than the vote of a random 50 year old who sees it as an imposition. Their votes are of equal value.
There is the slightly morbid point that if the next election is not until 2022, there will have been a shift in the electorate from natural causes. When the enthusiastic Corbynites in the 25-49 year old group move towards the next age range, it's an interesting question whether they will become more prone to voting Conservative and/or supporting Brexit.
Some young people are narcissistic and arrogant enough to think their votes should count for more. I wonder if they’ll think the same when they’re 65+?
The argument isn't that their votes should count for more; it's that their votes will be counted again, and again, and again, and again, so if this will ultimately lead to Brexit being reversed, we might as well save ourselves the hassle and cancel it now. (With the bonus for Eurosceptics that we'd keep our opt-outs.)
There is no special merit in the opinions of voters aged 18-24.
But the fact that the young are so anti-Brexit is nonetheless an important data point. So as a remainer it has no particular salience because we still lost and have no right to overturn the democratic decision. However if you are a leaver you could take the view that although we could go through with it, maybe we really shouldn't. Do you really want to wrench a generation away from something that they value? And in any case will reverse as soon as the opportunity arises? If enough leavers started coming forward saying that kind of thing we might just be able to get ourselves out of it. Search your consciouses guys!
Seems to me it should be left to the passage of time. If the people now young find that they retain their communal strong desire to be part of the EU, then they will bring up their own children with the mythology of what we lost/threw away.
In 40 years' time, the EU will have come to seem so very desirable that the UK can join it wholeheartedly, as a full member of the emerging USE. Or not - their choice, in their own time.
That, to me, will be a far better outcome than either trying to persuade people to abandon strongly held views on the matter or forcing a union on a population which is so divided.
The interesting thing about the Labour manifesto is that it was not a Corbynista one. Although the sums did not add up, it was quite moderate and mainstream. Corbyn did not have the courage or the honesty to put forward the hard left policies that he has been espousing for decades. A 1983 style manifesto was more apt for him. Apart from the sums, it was a good manifesto. I could easily vote for it. Harold Wilson, Jim Callaghan Neil Kinnock and John Smith could all have put forward such a manifesto -and Corbyn would have accused them of betrayal of socialism for it.
The problem for Labour was the people in charge of the Party at the election. Voters did not want Corbyn as PM, Abbott as home secretary, and McDonnell as chancellor. They do not want a Labour Party controlled by 80s Militant wit a new name. They do not like the nasty people behind the scenes or on the internet threatening, and the fascist tactics.
So yes, the manifesto was good (but you couldnt fund it without raising taxes for most people) but behind it people recognised something really really nasty. Until Labour addresses that it is doomed to defeat.
I didn`t bother to take a fine toothcomb to the Labour manifesto, but I had the distinct impression at the time that they had gone through all the Lib Dem policies of the last thirty years and thrown them all together without further thought or crafting. They even added the standard Lib Dem claim that the policies had been costed (true in the case of the Lib Dems). Most untrue in the case of Labour.
So it is not surprising that it was non-Socialist and appealing. On top of which it never came under scrutiny.
But if we had ended up with a Corbyn government, I agree with Steve F. Its policies would not have looked in the slightest like the manifesto.
The Labour manifesto was rather a rush job, cut and paste, but mostly by reason of having a snap election. I wouldn't weigh it too seriously.
Labour will be more moderate in government than in their manifesto.
The realities of govt, their lack of experience at getting legislation through, the fact they have a strong centrist group who will back the manifesto but nothing more radical, opposition in the lords, the possibility of deteriorating public finances making an ambitious domestic agenda infeasible.
Try selling that at a GE on the grounds 'do not worry about our manifesto as we will not do it'
Some young people are narcissistic and arrogant enough to think their votes should count for more. I wonder if they’ll think the same when they’re 65+?
reversed, we might as well save ourselves the hassle and cancel it now. (With the bonus for Eurosceptics that we'd keep our opt-outs.)
There is no special merit in the opinions of voters aged 18-24.
But the fact that the young are so anti-Brexit is nonetheless an important data point. So as a remainer it has no particular salience because we still lost and have no right to overturn the democratic decision. However if you are a leaver you could take the view that although we could go through with it, maybe we really shouldn't. Do you really want to wrench a generation away from something that they value? And in any case will reverse as soon as the opportunity arises? If enough leavers started coming forward saying that kind of thing we might just be able to get ourselves out of it. Search your consciouses guys!
Young people become older and often change their views. What happened to young pro-marketeers (as they were called) in 1975? There is no evidernce that the population will necessarily become more pro-EU simply as the result of the passage of time
No, they will become more pro-EU as a result of the passage of Brexit.
Brexiteers face an electoral double whammy: a demographic time bomb, and a political backlash.
How do you know how people will vote in the future?
I return to my earlier question. What are Leavers doing to persuade Remain supporters to rethink?
You could respond to earlier replies...
You gave an explanation why they didn’t. That won’t do Leavers much good if in ten years no one has changed their minds. By then demography would ensure that they were in a definite minority.
If Leavers want their insurrection to survive, they need to find a way to reach out to their former opponents. For nearly two years they’ve been calling them traitors and saboteurs. Not the best of starts.
There was fault on both sides
But until it is done then little healing can happen because there are those who insist on picking at the scabs
The interesting thing about the Labour manifesto is that it was not a Corbynista one. Although the sums did not add up, it was quite moderate and mainstream. Corbyn did not have the courage or the honesty to put forward the hard left policies that he has been espousing for decades. A 1983 style manifesto was more apt for him. Apart from the sums, it was a good manifesto. I could easily vote for it. Harold Wilson, Jim Callaghan Neil Kinnock and John Smith could all have put forward such a manifesto -and Corbyn would have accused them of betrayal of socialism for it.
The problem for Labour was the people in charge of the Party at the election. Voters did not want Corbyn as PM, Abbott as home secretary, and McDonnell as chancellor. They do not want a Labour Party controlled by 80s Militant wit a new name. They do not like the nasty people behind the scenes or on the internet threatening, and the fascist tactics.
So yes, the manifesto was good (but you couldnt fund it without raising taxes for most people) but behind it people recognised something really really nasty. Until Labour addresses that it is doomed to defeat.
I didn`t bother to take a fine toothcomb to the Labour manifesto, but I had the distinct impression at the time that they had gone through all the Lib Dem policies of the last thirty years and thrown them all together without further thought or crafting. They even added the standard Lib Dem claim that the policies had been costed (true in the case of the Lib Dems). Most untrue in the case of Labour.
So it is not surprising that it was non-Socialist and appealing. On top of which it never came under scrutiny.
But if we had ended up with a Corbyn government, I agree with Steve F. Its policies would not have looked in the slightest like the manifesto.
The Labour manifesto was rather a rush job, cut and paste, but mostly by reason of having a snap election. I wouldn't weigh it too seriously.
Labour will be more moderate in government than in their manifesto.
The realities of govt, their lack of experience at getting legislation through, the fact they have a strong centrist group who will back the manifesto but nothing more radical, opposition in the lords, the possibility of deteriorating public finances making an ambitious domestic agenda infeasible.
The issue wouldn't be Labour's pisspoor manifesto, it would be having a national security risk as Prime Minister.
Some young people are narcissistic and arrogant enough to think their votes should count for more. I wonder if they’ll think the same when they’re 65+?
The argument isn't that their votes should count for more; it's that their votes will be counted again, and again, and again, and again, so if this will ultimately lead to Brexit being reversed, we might as well save ourselves the hassle and cancel it now. (With the bonus for Eurosceptics that we'd keep our opt-outs.)
There is no special merit in the opinions of voters aged 18-24.
But the fact that the young are so anti-Brexit is nonetheless an important data point. So as a remainer it has no particular salience because we still lost and have no right to overturn the democratic decision. However if you are a leaver you could take the view that although we could go through with it, maybe we really shouldn't. Do you really want to wrench a generation away from something that they value? And in any case will reverse as soon as the opportunity arises? If enough leavers started coming forward saying that kind of thing we might just be able to get ourselves out of it. Search your consciouses guys!
Seems to me it should be left to the passage of time. If the people now young find that they retain their communal strong desire to be part of the EU, then they will bring up their own children with the mythology of what we lost/threw away.
In 40 years' time, the EU will have come to seem so very desirable that the UK can join it wholeheartedly, as a full member of the emerging USE. Or not - their choice, in their own time.
That, to me, will be a far better outcome than either trying to persuade people to abandon strongly held views on the matter or forcing a union on a population which is so divided.
Good evening, everybody.
Good evening Anne.
It might not take forty years. If the UK rejoins the EU, it will do sans opt outs, just as the western Balkan states will. That would be healthier - I don't think there's much future for countries outside the Eurozone.
Some young people are narcissistic and arrogant enough to think their votes should count for more. I wonder if they’ll think the same when they’re 65+?
The argument isn't that their votes should count for more; it's that their votes will be counted again, and again, and again, and again, so if this will ultimately lead to Brexit being reversed, we might as well save ourselves the hassle and cancel it now. (With the bonus for Eurosceptics that we'd keep our opt-outs.)
Implying that their opinion is fixed. It isn't.
Do tell me what Leavers are doing to persuade Remain voters to rethink. Because from here it looks like Leavers are simply cementing Remain voters in their original decision.
The issue was that a small, but influential and vocal group of Remainers started from almost the day after the vote trying to frustrate the vote. Even cases like Gina Miller - and this is setting aside the legal question she was testing - was presented (fairly or not) as an attempt to stop Brexit
Against that backdrop it’s not surprising that Leave voters dug in and became defensive: they had won, unexpectedly and against the odds, and were facing a hideous caterwauling from people with the power to take their prize away from them.
Perhaps they should have been better people and tried to reach out but o can understand why they didn’t
To be fair Charles, had the referendum gone the other way there would still have been a "small, but influential and vocal group... trying to frustrate the vote", just on the other side.
BBC reporting on Irish concerns at their economy on Brexit projecting a 7% hit on a no deal. Fergus O'Dowd of Fine Gael said that by 2034 the economy would lose 18 billion and that they want trade to continue much as it does now and why should Ireland suffer and lets work together.
The BBC commented that all the speculation seems that there will be a tech solution to the problem
The idea all the 27 are going to let Barnier sacrifice their economies on a political stance is for the birds
An Irish perspective on how the EU liberated them from being a vassal state of the UKU
reversed, we might as well save ourselves the hassle and cancel it now. (With the bonus for Eurosceptics that we'd keep our opt-outs.)
There is no special merit in the opinions of voters aged 18-24.
But the fact that the young are so anti-Brexit is nonetheless an important data point. So as a remainer it has no particular salience because we still lost and have no right to overturn the democratic decision. However if you are a leaver you could take the view that although we could go through with it, maybe we really shouldn't. Do you really want to wrench a generation away from something that they value? And in any case will reverse as soon as the opportunity arises? If enough leavers started coming forward saying that kind of thing we might just be able to get ourselves out of it. Search your consciouses guys!
Young people become older and often change their views. What happened to young pro-marketeers (as they were called) in 1975? There is no evidernce that the population will necessarily become more pro-EU simply as the result of the passage of time
No, they will become more pro-EU as a result of the passage of Brexit.
Brexiteers face an electoral double whammy: a demographic time bomb, and a political backlash.
How do you know how people will vote in the future?
I return to my earlier question. What are Leavers doing to persuade Remain supporters to rethink?
You could respond to earlier replies...
You gave an explanation why they didn’t. That won’t do Leavers much good if in ten years no one has changed their minds. By then demography would ensure that they were in a definite minority.
If Leavers want their insurrection to survive, they need to find a way to reach out to their former opponents. For nearly two years they’ve been calling them traitors and saboteurs. Not the best of starts.
There was fault on both sides
But until it is done then little healing can happen because there are those who insist on picking at the scabs
You’re missing the point. In two different ways this is Leave’s problem. First, if Brexit is to be anything other than dismal, Leave need some form of consensus and not a divided country. Secondly, their voters will die off quite quickly and unless replaced they will soon be in a minority. Where are the replacements going to come from? Leave hasn’t exactly been conducting a charm offensive.
BBC reporting on Irish concerns at their economy on Brexit projecting a 7% hit on a no deal. Fergus O'Dowd of Fine Gael said that by 2034 the economy would lose 18 billion and that they want trade to continue much as it does now and why should Ireland suffer and lets work together.
The BBC commented that all the speculation seems that there will be a tech solution to the problem
The idea all the 27 are going to let Barnier sacrifice their economies on a political stance is for the birds
An Irish perspective on how the EU liberated them from being a vassal state of the UKU
Some young people are narcissistic and arrogant enough to think their votes should count for more. I wonder if they’ll think the same when they’re 65+?
The argument isn't that their votes should count for more; it's that their votes will be counted again, and again, and again, and again, so if this will ultimately lead to Brexit being reversed, we might as well save ourselves the hassle and cancel it now. (With the bonus for Eurosceptics that we'd keep our opt-outs.)
Implying that their opinion is fixed. It isn't.
Do tell me what Leavers are doing to persuade Remain voters to rethink. Because from here it looks like Leavers are simply cementing Remain voters in their original decision.
The issue was that a small, but influential and vocal group of Remainers started from almost the day after the vote trying to frustrate the vote. Even cases like Gina Miller - and this is setting aside the legal question she was testing - was presented (fairly or not) as an attempt to stop Brexit
Against that backdrop it’s not surprising that Leave voters dug in and became defensive: they had won, unexpectedly and against the odds, and were facing a hideous caterwauling from people with the power to take their prize away from them.
Perhaps they should have been better people and tried to reach out but o can understand why they didn’t
To be fair Charles, had the referendum gone the other way there would still have been a "small, but influential and vocal group... trying to frustrate the vote", just on the other side.
Not quite - the leavers would have continued to campaign for change but not to overturn the decision.
It’s the difference between supporting a campaign to Rejoin (which is legitimate) and trying to prevent Brexit occurring (which is not)
The interesting thing about the Labour manifesto is that it was not a Corbynista one. Although the sums did not add up, it was quite moderate and mainstream. Corbyn did not have the courage or the honesty to put forward the hard left policies that he has been espousing for decades. A 1983 style manifesto was more apt for him. Apart from the sums, it was a good manifesto. I could easily vote for it. Harold Wilson, Jim Callaghan Neil Kinnock and John Smith could all have put forward such a manifesto -and Corbyn would have accused them of betrayal of socialism for it.
The problem for Labour was the people in charge of the Party at the election. Voters did not want Corbyn as PM, Abbott as home secretary, and McDonnell as chancellor. They do not want a Labour Party controlled by 80s Militant wit a new name. They do not like the nasty people behind the scenes or on the internet threatening, and the fascist tactics.
So yes, the manifesto was good (but you couldnt fund it without raising taxes for most people) but behind it people recognised something really really nasty. Until Labour addresses that it is doomed to defeat.
I didn`t bother to take a fine toothcomb to the Labour manifesto, but I had the distinct impression at the time that they had gone through all the Lib Dem policies of the last thirty years and thrown them all together without further thought or crafting. They even added the standard Lib Dem claim that the policies had been costed (true in the case of the Lib Dems). Most untrue in the case of Labour.
So it is not surprising that it was non-Socialist and appealing. On top of which it never came under scrutiny.
But if we had ended up with a Corbyn government, I agree with Steve F. Its policies would not have looked in the slightest like the manifesto.
The Labour manifesto was rather a rush job, cut and paste, but mostly by reason of having a snap election. I wouldn't weigh it too seriously.
Labour will be more moderate in government than in their manifesto.
The realities of govt, their lack of experience at getting legislation through, the fact they have a strong centrist group who will back the manifesto but nothing more radical, opposition in the lords, the possibility of deteriorating public finances making an ambitious domestic agenda infeasible.
The issue wouldn't be Labour's pisspoor manifesto, it would be having a national security risk as Prime Minister.
Corbyn would be much less likely to take us into a foreign war. And we’d get Liam Fox out of Cabinet too...
Some young people are narcissistic and arrogant enough to think their votes should count for more. I wonder if they’ll think the same when they’re 65+?
The argument isn't that their votes should count for more; it's that their votes will be counted again, and again, and again, and again, so if this will ultimately lead to Brexit being reversed, we might as well save ourselves the hassle and cancel it now. (With the bonus for Eurosceptics that we'd keep our opt-outs.)
There is no special merit in the opinions of voters aged 18-24.
But the fact that the young are so anti-Brexit is nonetheless an important data point. So as a remainer it has no particular salience because we still lost and have no right to overturn the democratic decision. However if you are a leaver you could take the view that although we could go through with it, maybe we really shouldn't. Do you really want to wrench a generation away from something that they value? And in any case will reverse as soon as the opportunity arises? If enough leavers started coming forward saying that kind of thing we might just be able to get ourselves out of it. Search your consciouses guys!
Seems to me it should be left to the passage of time. If the people now young find that they retain their communal strong desire to be part of the EU, then they will bring up their own children with the mythology of what we lost/threw away.
In 40 years' time, the EU will have come to seem so very desirable that the UK can join it wholeheartedly, as a full member of the emerging USE. Or not - their choice, in their own time.
That, to me, will be a far better outcome than either trying to persuade people to abandon strongly held views on the matter or forcing a union on a population which is so divided.
Good evening, everybody.
Good evening Anne.
It might not take forty years. If the UK rejoins the EU, it will do sans opt outs, just as the western Balkan states will. That would be healthier - I don't think there's much future for countries outside the Eurozone.
Do tell me what Leavers are doing to persuade Remain voters to rethink. Because from here it looks like Leavers are simply cementing Remain voters in their original decision.
The issue was that a small, but influential and vocal group of Remainers started from almost the day after the vote trying to frustrate the vote. Even cases like Gina Miller - and this is setting aside the legal question she was testing - was presented (fairly or not) as an attempt to stop Brexit
Against that backdrop it’s not surprising that Leave voters dug in and became defensive: they had won, unexpectedly and against the odds, and were facing a hideous caterwauling from people with the power to take their prize away from them.
Perhaps they should have been better people and tried to reach out but o can understand why they didn’t
To be fair Charles, had the referendum gone the other way there would still have been a "small, but influential and vocal group... trying to frustrate the vote", just on the other side.
Not quite - the leavers would have continued to campaign for change but not to overturn the decision.
It’s the difference between supporting a campaign to Rejoin (which is legitimate) and trying to prevent Brexit occurring (which is not)
There is nothing illegitimate about campaigning to prevent Brexit occurring. Of all the Leave tropes, this is the oddest.
It may well be a forlorn hope, but campaigners are entitled to try to change the public's mind before Britain leaves the EU.
reversed, we might as well save ourselves the hassle and cancel it now. (With the bonus for Eurosceptics that we'd keep our opt-outs.)
There is no special merit in the opinions of voters aged 18-24.
But the fact that the young are so anti-Brexit is nonetheless an important data point. lue? And in any case will reverse as soon as the opportunity arises? If enough leavers started coming forward saying that kind of thing we might just be able to get ourselves out of it. Search your consciouses guys!
Young people become older and often change their views. What happened to young pro-marketeers (as they were called) in 1975? There is no evidernce that the population will necessarily become more pro-EU simply as the result of the passage of time
No, they will become more pro-EU as a result of the passage of Brexit.
Brexiteers face an electoral double whammy: a demographic time bomb, and a political backlash.
How do you know how people will vote in the future?
I return to my earlier question. What are Leavers doing to persuade Remain supporters to rethink?
You could respond to earlier replies...
You gave an explanation why they didn’t. That won’t do Leavers much good if in ten years no one has changed their minds. By then demography would ensure that they were in a definite minority.
If Leavers want their insurrection to survive, they need to find a way to reach out to their former opponents. For nearly two years they’ve been calling them traitors and saboteurs. Not the best of starts.
There was fault on both sides
But until it is done then little healing can happen because there are those who insist on picking at the scabs
You’re missing the point. In two different ways this is Leave’s problem. First, if Brexit is to be anything other than dismal, Leave need some form of consensus and not a divided country. Secondly, their voters will die off quite quickly and unless replaced they will soon be in a minority. Where are the replacements going to come from? Leave hasn’t exactly been conducting a charm offensive.
You’ve made quite clear you don’t want to be charmed. The polls suggest a clear majority wants Brexit done (they may not have voted for it but they accept that the majority did)
BBC reporting on Irish concerns at their economy on Brexit projecting a 7% hit on a no deal. Fergus O'Dowd of Fine Gael said that by 2034 the economy would lose 18 billion and that they want trade to continue much as it does now and why should Ireland suffer and lets work together.
The BBC commented that all the speculation seems that there will be a tech solution to the problem
The idea all the 27 are going to let Barnier sacrifice their economies on a political stance is for the birds
An Irish perspective on how the EU liberated them from being a vassal state of the UKU
BBC reporting on Irish concerns at their economy on Brexit projecting a 7% hit on a no deal. Fergus O'Dowd of Fine Gael said that by 2034 the economy would lose 18 billion and that they want trade to continue much as it does now and why should Ireland suffer and lets work together.
The BBC commented that all the speculation seems that there will be a tech solution to the problem
The idea all the 27 are going to let Barnier sacrifice their economies on a political stance is for the birds
An Irish perspective on how the EU liberated them from being a vassal state of the UKU
I return to my earlier question. What are Leavers doing to persuade Remain supporters to rethink?
You could respond to earlier replies...
You gave an explanation why they didn’t. That won’t do Leavers much good if in ten years no one has changed their minds. By then demography would ensure that they were in a definite minority.
If Leavers want their insurrection to survive, they need to find a way to reach out to their former opponents. For nearly two years they’ve been calling them traitors and saboteurs. Not the best of starts.
There was fault on both sides
But until it is done then little healing can happen because there are those who insist on picking at the scabs
You’re missing the point. In two different ways this is Leave’s problem. First, if Brexit is to be anything other than dismal, Leave need some form of consensus and not a divided country. Secondly, their voters will die off quite quickly and unless replaced they will soon be in a minority. Where are the replacements going to come from? Leave hasn’t exactly been conducting a charm offensive.
You’ve made quite clear you don’t want to be charmed. The polls suggest a clear majority wants Brexit done (they may not have voted for it but they accept that the majority did)
I would be one of the many voters who didn't vote for Brexit and who regards it as democratically necessary that it be seen through to its bitter conclusion. Bear that in mind before assuming that the public is phlegmatic about the prospect.
The interesting thing about the Labour manifesto is that it was not a Corbynista one. Although the sums did not add up, it was quite moderate and mainstream. Corbyn did not have the courage or the honesty to put forward the hard left policies that he has been espousing for decades. A 1983 style e in charge of the Party at the election. Voters did not want Corbyn as PM, Abbott as home secretary, and McDonnell as chancellor. They do not want a Labour Party controlled by 80s Militant wit a new name. They do not like the nasty people behind the scenes or on the internet threatening, and the fascist tactics.
So yes, the manifesto was good (but you couldnt fund it without raising taxes for most people) but behind it people recognised something really really nasty. Until Labour addresses that it is doomed to defeat.
I didn`t bother to take a fine toothcomb to the Labour manifesto, but I had the distinct impression at the time that they had gone through all the Lib Dem policies of the last thirty years and thrown them all together without further thought or crafting. They even added the standard Lib Dem claim that the policies had been costed (true in the case of the Lib Dems). Most untrue in the case of Labour.
So it is not surprising that it was non-Socialist and appealing. On top of which it never came under scrutiny.
But if we had ended up with a Corbyn government, I agree with Steve F. Its policies would not have looked in the slightest like the manifesto.
The Labour manifesto was rather a rush job, cut and paste, but mostly by reason of having a snap election. I wouldn't weigh it too seriously.
Labour will be more moderate in government than in their manifesto.
The realities of govt, their lack of experience at getting legislation through, the fact they have a strong centrist group who will back the manifesto but nothing more radical, opposition in the lords, the possibility of deteriorating public finances making an ambitious domestic agenda infeasible.
Try selling that at a GE on the grounds 'do not worry about our manifesto as we will not do it'
The manifesto was great in my view. I hope it does happen for the most part. . This isn’t a political selling point - it’s a projection of what I think the reality will be... govts tens to struggle to deliver on their reform agendas in full. They have to compromise etc.
and I suppose maybe I’m making an attempt to reassure the pb.com Tory community not to panic...
Some young people are narcissistic and arrogant enough to think their votes should count for more. I wonder if they’ll think the same when they’re 65+?
The argument isn't that their votes should count for more; it's that their votes will be counted again, and again, and again, and again, so if this will ultimately lead to Brexit being reversed, we might as well save ourselves the hassle and cancel it now. (With the bonus for Eurosceptics that we'd keep our opt-outs.)
There is no special merit in the opinions of voters aged 18-24.
But the fact that the young are so anti-Brexit is nonetheless an important data point. So as a remainer it has no particular salience because we still lost and have no right to overturn the democratic decision. However if you are a leaver you could take the view that although we could go through with it, maybe we really shouldn't. Do you really want to wrench a generation away from something that they value? And in any case will reverse as soon as the opportunity arises? If enough leavers started coming forward saying that kind of thing we might just be able to get ourselves out of it. Search your consciouses guys!
Young people become older and often change their views. What happened to young pro-marketeers (as they were called) in 1975? There is no evidernce that the population will necessarily become more pro-EU simply as the result of the passage of time
No, they will become more pro-EU as a result of the passage of Brexit.
Brexiteers face an electoral double whammy: a demographic time bomb, and a political backlash.
How do you know how people will vote in the future?
I return to my earlier question. What are Leavers doing to persuade Remain supporters to rethink?
All that one can do is re-state one's arguments. Events will determine how Brexit is seen by future generations of voters. If it's a horror show, no doubt they'll wish to rejoin. If it turns out to be okay, then a natural bias towards the status quo will ensure that staying out of the EU is the received wisdom.
@tnewtondunn: Nerves in No10 tonight about Boris's big speech tomorrow - two drafts (and counting) have already been submitted for vetting and rewriting. More on it later.
But the fact that the young are so anti-Brexit is nonetheless an important data point. So as a remainer it has no particular salience because we still lost and have no right to overturn the democratic decision. However if you are a leaver you could take the view that although we could go through with it, maybe we really shouldn't. Do you really want to wrench a generation away from something that they value? And in any case will reverse as soon as the opportunity arises? If enough leavers started coming forward saying that kind of thing we might just be able to get ourselves out of it. Search your consciouses guys!
Young people become older and often change their views. What happened to young pro-marketeers (as they were called) in 1975? There is no evidernce that the population will necessarily become more pro-EU simply as the result of the passage of time
No, they will become more pro-EU as a result of the passage of Brexit.
Brexiteers face an electoral double whammy: a demographic time bomb, and a political backlash.
How do you know how people will vote in the future?
I return to my earlier question. What are Leavers doing to persuade Remain supporters to rethink?
All that one can do is re-state one's arguments. Events will determine how Brexit is seen by future generations of voters. If it's a horror show, no doubt they'll wish to rejoin. If it turns out to be okay, then a natural bias towards the status quo will ensure that staying out of the EU is the received wisdom.
That's far too complacent. Leave's conduct before and since the referendum has ensured that many voters will regard it as a horror show, whatever the objective facts. The disgust for Leave is visceral for many.
Leave need to start showing that they have some interest in the large numbers of people who didn't vote for Leave and who so far think it's a mistake.
BBC reporting on Irish concerns at their economy on Brexit projecting a 7% hit on a no deal. Fergus O'Dowd of Fine Gael said that by 2034 the economy would lose 18 billion and that they want trade to continue much as it does now and why should Ireland suffer and lets work together.
The BBC commented that all the speculation seems that there will be a tech solution to the problem
The idea all the 27 are going to let Barnier sacrifice their economies on a political stance is for the birds
An Irish perspective on how the EU liberated them from being a vassal state of the UKU
The interesting thing about the Labour manifesto is that it was not a Corbynista one. Although the sums did not add up, it was quite moderate and mainstream. Corbyn did not have the courage or the honesty to put forward the hard left policies that he has been espousing for decades. A 1983 style e in charge of the Party at the election. Voters did not want Corbyn as PM, Abbott as home secretary, and McDonnell as chancellor. They do not want a Labour Party controlled by 80s Militant wit a new name. They do not like the nasty people behind the scenes or on the internet threatening, and the fascist tactics.
So yes, the manifesto was good (but you couldnt fund it without raising taxes for most people) but behind it people recognised something really really nasty. Until Labour addresses that it is doomed to defeat.
I didn`t bother to take a fine toothcomb to the Labour manifesto, but I had the distinct impression at the time that they had gone through all the Lib Dem policies of the last thirty years and thrown them all together without further thought or crafting. They even added the standard Lib Dem claim that the policies had been costed (true in the case of the Lib Dems). Most untrue in the case of Labour.
So it is not surprising that it was non-Socialist and appealing. On top of which it never came under scrutiny.
But if we had ended up with a Corbyn government, I agree with Steve F. Its policies would not have looked in the slightest like the manifesto.
The Labour manifesto was rather a rush job, cut and paste, but mostly by reason of having a snap election. I wouldn't weigh it too seriously.
Labour will be more moderate in government than in their manifesto.
The realities of govt, their lack of experience at getting legislation through, the fact they have a strong centrist group who will back the manifesto but nothing more radical, opposition in the lords, the possibility of deteriorating public finances making an ambitious domestic agenda infeasible.
Try selling that at a GE on the grounds 'do not worry about our manifesto as we will not do it'
The manifesto was great in my view. I hope it does happen for the most part. . This isn’t a political selling point - it’s a projection of what I think the reality will be... govts tens to struggle to deliver on their reform agendas in full. They have to compromise etc.
and I suppose maybe I’m making an attempt to reassure the pb.com Tory community not to panic...
The only way the Country will give labour a real chance of government is to get rid of Corbyn and McDonnell
I return to my earlier question. What are Leavers doing to persuade Remain supporters to rethink?
You could respond to earlier replies...
You gave an explanation why they didn’t. That won’t do Leavers much good if in ten years no one has changed their minds. By then demography would ensure that they were in a definite minority.
If Leavers want their insurrection to survive, they need to find a way to reach out to their former opponents. For nearly two years they’ve been calling them traitors and saboteurs. Not the best of starts.
There was fault on both sides
But until it is done then little healing can happen because there are those who insist on picking at the scabs
You’re missing the point. In two different ways this is Leave’s problem. First, if Brexit is to be anything other than dismal, Leave need some form of consensus and not a divided country. Secondly, their voters will die off quite quickly and unless replaced they will soon be in a minority. Where are the replacements going to come from? Leave hasn’t exactly been conducting a charm offensive.
You’ve made quite clear you don’t want to be charmed. The polls suggest a clear majority wants Brexit done (they may not have voted for it but they accept that the majority did)
I would be one of the many voters who didn't vote for Brexit and who regards it as democratically necessary that it be seen through to its bitter conclusion. Bear that in mind before assuming that the public is phlegmatic about the prospect.
As long as there is no evidence of anyone changing their mind the decision can't be changed. But I can't see anything illegitimate about attempting to persuade people to change their mind - though I obviously haven't worked out how to actually do it myself yet.
On the subject of Brexit, I already see our fisheries and agriculture policies being much better and more sustainable outside the EU.
I put that almost entirely down to Gove.
It's telling that when the Government has competent ministers with vision, who can paint a picture of what'll be different and how it'll be be better, Brexit looks far more positive.
Theresa May is not that person - far too technocratic - but it looks very much to me like Government policy is converging on high alignment in manufactured goods with intercontinental supply chains, and divergence in services and future digital tech.
@tnewtondunn: Nerves in No10 tonight about Boris's big speech tomorrow - two drafts (and counting) have already been submitted for vetting and rewriting. More on it later.
Boris speaking about Brexit... what could possibly go wrong?
Some young people are narcissistic and arrogant enough to think their votes should count for more. I wonder if they’ll think the same when they’re 65+?
The argument isn't that their votes should count for more; it's that their votes will be counted again, and again, and again, and again, so if this will ultimately lead to Brexit being reversed, we might as well save ourselves the hassle and cancel it now. (With the bonus for Eurosceptics that we'd keep our opt-outs.)
There is no special merit in the opinions of voters aged 18-24.
But h your consciouses guys!
Young people become older and often change their views. What happened to young pro-marketeers (as they were called) in 1975? There is no evidernce that the population will necessarily become more pro-EU simply as the result of the passage of time
No, they will become more pro-EU as a result of the passage of Brexit.
Brexiteers face an electoral double whammy: a demographic time bomb, and a political backlash.
How do you know how people will vote in the future?
I return to my earlier question. What are Leavers doing to persuade Remain supporters to rethink?
All that one can do is re-state one's arguments. Events will determine how Brexit is seen by future generations of voters. If it's a horror show, no doubt they'll wish to rejoin. If it turns out to be okay, then a natural bias towards the status quo will ensure that staying out of the EU is the received wisdom.
Yes I agree. I suspect a moderately negative impact on the UK would still not lead us to rejoin.
But also I think perceptions will likely matter. An unrelated recession (especially if focused in UK) would still be bad news for Brexit sticking. A global upturn in growth will really help keep us out.
On the subject of Brexit, I already see our fisheries and agriculture policies being much better and more sustainable outside the EU.
I put that almost entirely down to Gove.
It's telling that when the Government has competent ministers with vision, who can paint a picture of what'll be different and how it'll be be better, Brexit looks far more positive.
Theresa May is not that person - far too technocratic - but it looks very much to me like Government policy is converging on high alignment in manufactured goods with intercontinental supply chains, and divergence in services and future digital tech.
Genuine question Casino - what makes you say that about our post-EU fisheries and agriculture policies? Do you have a link to some information?
I return to my earlier question. What are Leavers doing to persuade Remain supporters to rethink?
You could respond to earlier replies...
You gave an explanation why they didn’t. That won’t do Leavers much good if in ten years no one has changed their minds. By then demography would ensure that they were in a definite minority.
If Leavers want their insurrection to survive, they need to find a way to reach out to their former opponents. For nearly two years they’ve been calling them traitors and saboteurs. Not the best of starts.
There was fault on both sides
But until it is done then little healing can happen because there are those who insist on picking at the scabs
You’re missing the point. In two different ways this is Leave’s problem. First, if Brexit is to be anything other than dismal, Leave need some form of consensus and not a divided country. Secondly, their voters will die off quite quickly and unless replaced they will soon be in a minority. Where are the replacements going to come from? Leave hasn’t exactly been conducting a charm offensive.
You’ve made quite clear you don’t want to be charmed. The polls suggest a clear majority wants Brexit done (they may not have voted for it but they accept that the majority did)
I would be one of the many voters who didn't vote for Brexit and who regards it as democratically necessary that it be seen through to its bitter conclusion. Bear that in mind before assuming that the public is phlegmatic about the prospect.
Alastair, with the greatest of respect, you are neither representative of, nor understand, the British people
It's telling that when the Government has competent ministers with vision, who can paint a picture of what'll be different and how it'll be be better, Brexit looks far more positive.
On the subject of Brexit, I already see our fisheries and agriculture policies being much better and more sustainable outside the EU.
I put that almost entirely down to Gove.
It's telling that when the Government has competent ministers with vision, who can paint a picture of what'll be different and how it'll be be better, Brexit looks far more positive.
Theresa May is not that person - far too technocratic - but it looks very much to me like Government policy is converging on high alignment in manufactured goods with intercontinental supply chains, and divergence in services and future digital tech.
Which if true is a bloody nuisance if you are a small business that does manufacturing and selling services related to that manufacturing. Like I do.
BBC reporting on Irish concerns at their economy on Brexit projecting a 7% hit on a no deal. Fergus O'Dowd of Fine Gael said that by 2034 the economy would lose 18 billion and that they want trade to continue much as it does now and why should Ireland suffer and lets work together.
The BBC commented that all the speculation seems that there will be a tech solution to the problem
The idea all the 27 are going to let Barnier sacrifice their economies on a political stance is for the birds
An Irish perspective on how the EU liberated them from being a vassal state of the UKU
I think Brexit has woken up a lot of previously fairly indifferent people to how much they want to Remain part of the European mainstream, as well as a large number who very much do not.
As cultural values persist longer than economics, I think there will be a grudge against the Brexiteers on the Tory side for at least as long as against Tories in mining areas or Scotland. Several decades, and an active Rejoin campaign whatever the economic results. The grass is always greener.
Demographics may be key, as youngsters age and fertile EU citizens naturalise.
But the fact that the young are so anti-Brexit is nonetheless an important data point. So as a remainer it has no particular salience because we still lost and have no right to overturn the democratic decision. However if you are a leaver you could take the view that although we could go through with it, maybe we really shouldn't. Do you really want to wrench a generation away from something that they value? And in any case will reverse as soon as the opportunity arises? If enough leavers started coming forward saying that kind of thing we might just be able to get ourselves out of it. Search your consciouses guys!
Young people become older and often change their views. What happened to young pro-marketeers (as they were called) in 1975? There is no evidernce that the population will necessarily become more pro-EU simply as the result of the passage of time
No, they will become more pro-EU as a result of the passage of Brexit.
Brexiteers face an electoral double whammy: a demographic time bomb, and a political backlash.
How do you know how people will vote in the future?
I return to my earlier question. What are Leavers doing to persuade Remain supporters to rethink?
All that one can do is re-state one's arguments. Events will determine how Brexit is seen by future generations of voters. If it's a horror show, no doubt they'll wish to rejoin. If it turns out to be okay, then a natural bias towards the status quo will ensure that staying out of the EU is the received wisdom.
That's far too complacent. Leave's conduct before and since the referendum has ensured that many voters will regard it as a horror show, whatever the objective facts. The disgust for Leave is visceral for many.
Leave need to start showing that they have some interest in the large numbers of people who didn't vote for Leave and who so far think it's a mistake.
I think that Theresa May's government will win over Remain voters like Carlotta Vance, HYUFD, John O, Ydoethur. I don't think that there is anything they could do to win over you, or voters who share your beliefs.
On the subject of Brexit, I already see our fisheries and agriculture policies being much better and more sustainable outside the EU.
I put that almost entirely down to Gove.
It's telling that when the Government has competent ministers with vision, who can paint a picture of what'll be different and how it'll be be better, Brexit looks far more positive.
Theresa May is not that person - far too technocratic - but it looks very much to me like Government policy is converging on high alignment in manufactured goods with intercontinental supply chains, and divergence in services and future digital tech.
Genuine question Casino - what makes you say that about our post-EU fisheries and agriculture policies? Do you have a link to some information?
Scottish Fishermen have been anti EU throughout. I remember the anger of my father in law, a highly successful Scottish skipper, before we joined the EU
On the subject of Brexit, I already see our fisheries and agriculture policies being much better and more sustainable outside the EU.
I put that almost entirely down to Gove.
It's telling that when the Government has competent ministers with vision, who can paint a picture of what'll be different and how it'll be be better, Brexit looks far more positive.
Theresa May is not that person - far too technocratic - but it looks very much to me like Government policy is converging on high alignment in manufactured goods with intercontinental supply chains, and divergence in services and future digital tech.
Genuine question Casino - what makes you say that about our post-EU fisheries and agriculture policies? Do you have a link to some information?
Scottish Fishermen have been anti EU throughout. I remember the anger of my father in law, a highly successful Scottish skipper, before we joined the EU
South coast fisherman have always been opposed to it as well. And I can see their point. Never worked out why so many farmers are anti-EU though. I am sure someone on here can enlighten me.
But the fact that the young are so anti-Brexit is nonetheless an important data point. So as a remainer it has no particular salience because we still lost and have no right to overturn the democratic decision. However if you are a leaver you could take the view that although we could go through with it, maybe we really shouldn't. Do you really want to wrench a generation away from something that they value? And in any case will reverse as soon as the opportunity arises? If enough leavers started coming forward saying that kind of thing we might just be able to get ourselves out of it. Search your consciouses guys!
Young people become older and often change their views. What happened to young pro-marketeers (as they were called) in 1975? There is no evidernce that the population will necessarily become more pro-EU simply as the result of the passage of time
No, they will become more pro-EU as a result of the passage of Brexit.
Brexiteers face an electoral double whammy: a demographic time bomb, and a political backlash.
How do you know how people will vote in the future?
I return to my earlier question. What are Leavers doing to persuade Remain supporters to rethink?
All that one can do is re-state one's arguments. Events will determine how Brexit is seen by future generations of voters. If it's a horror show, no doubt they'll wish to rejoin. If it turns out to be okay, then a natural bias towards the status quo will ensure that staying out of the EU is the received wisdom.
That's far too complacent. Leave's conduct before and since the referendum has ensured that many voters will regard it as a horror show, whatever the objective facts. The disgust for Leave is visceral for many.
Leave need to start showing that they have some interest in the large numbers of people who didn't vote for Leave and who so far think it's a mistake.
I think that Theresa May's government will win over Remain voters like Carlotta Vance, HYUFD, John O, Ydoethur. I don't think that there is anything they could do to win over you, or voters who share your beliefs.
Theresa May’s government currently has the support of those Conservatives who prize Conservative government over all else. But it has lost at least as many Leave voters as it has gained Remain voters.
Where are the next batch of recruits coming from? It isn’t even trying.
But the fact that the young are so anti-Brexit is nonetheless an important data point. So as a remainer it has no particular salience because we still lost and have no right to overturn the democratic decision. However if you are a leaver you could take the view that although we could go through with it, maybe we really shouldn't. Do you really want to wrench a generation away from something that they value? And in any case will reverse as soon as the opportunity arises? If enough leavers started coming forward saying that kind of thing we might just be able to get ourselves out of it. Search your consciouses guys!
Young people become older and often change their views. What happened to young pro-marketeers (as they were called) in 1975? There is no evidernce that the population will necessarily become more pro-EU simply as the result of the passage of time
No, they will become more pro-EU as a result of the passage of Brexit.
Brexiteers face an electoral double whammy: a demographic time bomb, and a political backlash.
How do you know how people will vote in the future?
I return to my earlier question. What are Leavers doing to persuade Remain supporters to rethink?
All that one can do is re-state one's arguments. Events will determine how Brexit is seen by future generations of voters. If it's a horror show, no doubt they'll wish to rejoin. If it turns out to be okay, then a natural bias towards the status quo will ensure that staying out of the EU is the received wisdom.
That's far too complacent. Leave's conduct before and since the referendum has ensured that many voters will regard it as a horror show, whatever the objective facts. The disgust for Leave is visceral for many.
Leave need to start showing that they have some interest in the large numbers of people who didn't vote for Leave and who so far think it's a mistake.
I think that Theresa May's government will win over Remain voters like Carlotta Vance, HYUFD, John O, Ydoethur. I don't think that there is anything they could do to win over you, or voters who share your beliefs.
TM is likely to win over 65%+ when she does a deal, which she will. The extremes on both sides will exist and some will quite properly campaign to re-join which may or may not happen but probably not in my lifetime
Comments
If the Tories can say "we've got us into a good Brexit position, let's carry on" and it's backed up with some solid achievement's, they should win pretty easily.
May could win if she gets the UK to a good place. Even the sainted Maggie only turned her fortune's around on the back of the Falklands victory. May could still turn into the UK version of Merkle's mother of the nation if the cards fall her way.
On Corbyn, I do find it hard to believe his man of piece image surviving another 5 years. If I was in Tory high command, I'd be putting in place a long term image destruction operation in place against the old chap. We've seen he's pretty fragile under any type of real pressure.
...
A Crown Prosecution Service spokesperson said on Tuesday: “We received a file of evidence from the Metropolitan police in relation to an allegation contrary to section 10 of the Parliamentary Standards Act of 2009. We considered the evidential test for prosecution was not met and therefore no charges were authorised.”
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/13/former-mp-simon-danczuk-not-face-charges-expenses-labour-rochdale
I voted Leave, so am perfectly happy for Remainers to wait for public opinion to shift, and then Labour to shift.
Carry on Waiting, Estragon and Vladimir, Lucky and Pozzo.
Remain lost the referendum, and now they're losing the aftermath ... waiting.
Labour 29,305
Simon Danczuk 883
Against that backdrop it’s not surprising that Leave voters dug in and became defensive: they had won, unexpectedly and against the odds, and were facing a hideous caterwauling from people with the power to take their prize away from them.
Perhaps they should have been better people and tried to reach out but o can understand why they didn’t
TM would have been a hero amongst Tories instead of a dead woman walking and Jezza would have been long gone instead of a Glastonbury hero.
Fortunately the Electors decided against if
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/feb/13/police-numbers-drop-by-1200-in-six-months-as-wage-bill-frozen
The £4.46bn figure for 160 games is less Sky and BT paid in the current cycle, where they forked out £5.14bn for 168 live games.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-43052024
Despite all the epithets from the terminally petulant, we do have to recognise that the vote was very close. May had better take account of that and fend off her lunatic fringe. However, as I have potted plants with better political judgement, she probably won't.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-43052436
Brexiteers face an electoral double whammy: a demographic time bomb, and a political backlash.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-43051249
He was detained as part of an investigation into a corruption scandal dating back to his time as Guatemala's finance minister.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-43046966
http://brilliantmaps.com/europe-relationships/
The statusquoers were those who bought project fear. The number of committed 'williamglenns' or 'Foxys' in our isles is relatively low.
The BBC commented that all the speculation seems that there will be a tech solution to the problem
The idea all the 27 are going to let Barnier sacrifice their economies on a political stance is for the birds
If Leavers want their insurrection to survive, they need to find a way to reach out to their former opponents. For nearly two years they’ve been calling them traitors and saboteurs. Not the best of starts.
The realities of govt, their lack of experience at getting legislation through, the fact they have a strong centrist group who will back the manifesto but nothing more radical, opposition in the lords, the possibility of deteriorating public finances making an ambitious domestic agenda infeasible.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5384051/Fmr-Canadian-minister-says-Illuminati-controls-world.html
In 40 years' time, the EU will have come to seem so very desirable that the UK can join it wholeheartedly, as a full member of the emerging USE. Or not - their choice, in their own time.
That, to me, will be a far better outcome than either trying to persuade people to abandon strongly held views on the matter or forcing a union on a population which is so divided.
Good evening, everybody.
But until it is done then little healing can happen because there are those who insist on picking at the scabs
It might not take forty years. If the UK rejoins the EU, it will do sans opt outs, just as the western Balkan states will. That would be healthier - I don't think there's much future for countries outside the Eurozone.
https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/fintan-o-toole-irexit-would-be-the-end-of-irish-nationalism-1.3389695?mode=amp&__twitter_impression=true
It’s the difference between supporting a campaign to Rejoin (which is legitimate) and trying to prevent Brexit occurring (which is not)
And we’d get Liam Fox out of Cabinet too...
https://youtu.be/7zVfeAkJmU4
It may well be a forlorn hope, but campaigners are entitled to try to change the public's mind before Britain leaves the EU.
“the Taoiseach of Northern Ireland Edna Kelly”.
This is a great lecture (the final conclusion is fairly left wing but isn’t central to his argument).
https://vimeo.com/247411379
.
This isn’t a political selling point - it’s a projection of what I think the reality will be... govts tens to struggle to deliver on their reform agendas in full. They have to compromise etc.
and I suppose maybe I’m making an attempt to reassure the pb.com Tory community not to panic...
Leave need to start showing that they have some interest in the large numbers of people who didn't vote for Leave and who so far think it's a mistake.
I put that almost entirely down to Gove.
It's telling that when the Government has competent ministers with vision, who can paint a picture of what'll be different and how it'll be be better, Brexit looks far more positive.
Theresa May is not that person - far too technocratic - but it looks very much to me like Government policy is converging on high alignment in manufactured goods with intercontinental supply chains, and divergence in services and future digital tech.
I suspect a moderately negative impact on the UK would still not lead us to rejoin.
But also I think perceptions will likely matter. An unrelated recession (especially if focused in UK) would still be bad news for Brexit sticking. A global upturn in growth will really help keep us out.
KIDDING !!!
I think Brexit has woken up a lot of previously fairly indifferent people to how much they want to Remain part of the European mainstream, as well as a large number who very much do not.
As cultural values persist longer than economics, I think there will be a grudge against the Brexiteers on the Tory side for at least as long as against Tories in mining areas or Scotland. Several decades, and an active Rejoin campaign whatever the economic results. The grass is always greener.
Demographics may be key, as youngsters age and fertile EU citizens naturalise.
Where are the next batch of recruits coming from? It isn’t even trying.