Brexit at Glasto?

[Scott129]

52 minutes ago, kingbadger said:

This is by far the worst government and Prime Minister in my lifetime, yet Corbyn-led Labour is still trailing massively in polling. That tells you all you need to know about his leadership and handling of Brexit.

The majority of voters voted brexit and the majority of constituencies voted brexit. The tories are seen as the party of Brexit, with labour weighing up supporting a second referendum. Given that its very difficult for the tories to poll less than 35-40%. 

They were ahead in the last survation poll at least ?

[eFestivals]

3 minutes ago, Scott129 said:

He's come out since leaving office and said he believes in neoliberal economics. Its not a case of sacrificing your principles to achieve electorally, it is a case of his principles being neoliberalism. 

No, Blair believed in 'The Third Way'. It has its own name, and even has its own wiki page.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Way

It may or may not be a crock of self-contradictary shite, but it's still a different thing to what you claim of it.

Remember, even Corbyn claims to believe in market prices; his point is the market is skewed.

 

3 minutes ago, Scott129 said:

A Corbyn majority government (if it happened) would achieve better and longer lasting change for the majority of the country in one term than Blair did in 3

I live to be surprised.  

But there's just about zero chance of that happening, anyway. Which is a big part of the sad point. 

[gigpusher]

1 minute ago, Scott129 said:

The majority of voters voted brexit and the majority of constituencies voted brexit. The tories are seen as the party of Brexit, with labour weighing up supporting a second referendum. Given that its very difficult for the tories to poll less than 35-40%. 

They were ahead in the last survation poll at least ?

I disagree with that as one of the key things is that the referendum brought out people to vote who usually aren't voters (I believe about 3 million of them). This is the key mistake that both Conservative and Labour are making. The people will go back to not voting. The 48% are people who will always vote so actually a majority of voters ie people who are actively interested in politics and see it as a moral duty to vote in all elections. These people are being failed by both parties and so many of them feel politically homeless. Some cling to the parties they've always voted for albeit begging them to see reason. Others like myself just really wish Labour would show up and listen to what all the experts are saying and stick to their principles of looking after working class Britain which would be to remain in the EU. 

Politicians should have principles not be so populist as just to go with what a majority want even if it will in have an awful impact on all areas of society. The majority of people want capital punishment but we're not bringing that back. 

[Keithy]

24 minutes ago, Scott129 said:

A Corbyn majority government (if it happened) would achieve better and longer lasting change for the majority of the country in one term than Blair did in 3

Perhaps he might. But, and this is the really crucial part, he'll never be in a majority government to achieve it.

To achieve anything you need to be in power. And that requires compromising your aims to achieve a broad consensus of the electorate so you are elected.

[eFestivals]

Well, those lovely EU geezers have told May where to shove her idea of having brexit during Glastonbury, so that's a result at least.  

[eFestivals]

15 minutes ago, Keithy said:

achieve a broad consensus of the electorate so you are elected.

... AND in order to not have too much public resistance to a programme of change, which slows down the implementation, and makes it more difficult to implement.

And just as important is to gain some political benefit from what gets done. Re-nationalising the railways would be a great thing, but by itself there's negative political benefit from it as Corbyn is then the guy in charge when things go wrong (and they do go wrong) and when prices rise (and prices always rise). And if there's going to be greater spending on the railways the money has to be found for that, which means tax rises somewhere (or cuts somewhere else). Etc, etc, etc.

Is it a battle worth taking on? Maybe, tho I'm not sure its wise when there's so many other beneficial things time could be spent on instead. It's not one for the top of the list, that's for sure.

[Crazyfool01]

well the petition has now topped 1million signatures ... and now its down for maintenance .... its worse than the glastonbury  webcam  ....not sure what difference this will make but at least it might provoke a bit of thought as its now made the bbc news website 

[Mr.Tease]

14 minutes ago, crazyfool1 said:

well the petition has now topped 1million signatures ... and now its down for maintenance .... its worse than the glastonbury  webcam  ....not sure what difference this will make but at least it might provoke a bit of thought as its now made the bbc news website 

I'm still not seeing any shift in the leave areas, which has concerned me for the past year (because it looks pretty entrenched). I didn't sign it myself (would only consider backing it to avoid a no deal at the last minute), but good luck- I always believe that if you only did things if you were guaranteed success in advance, you wouldn't end up doing anything!

[eFestivals]

10 minutes ago, Mr.Tease said:

 

Hmmmm .... not sure the govt is really giving out real-time demographic data of who's signed, is it?  

[Scott129]

2 hours ago, eFestivals said:

No, Blair believed in 'The Third Way'. It has its own name, and even has its own wiki page.

I think we may be agreeing. My original point was to say its wrong to say labour have constantly been going between left and centre and only getting elected when centre is in charge. Labours history is between social democracy and democratic socialism (one left and one more left). Blair shifted labour (rightly or wrongly) to s place it had never been before. 

 

2 hours ago, gigpusher said:

Politicians should have principles not be so populist as just to go with what a majority want even if it will in have an awful impact on all areas of society. The majority of people want capital punishment but we're not bringing that back. 

I don't think you should just go with what the majority want, but you certainly have to listen to their view (that's part of being a democracy). Must working class people feel screwed over (wrongly by the EU) but to just dismiss their legitimate concerns and carry on as normal is wrong imo. Also pretty sure the majority don't want capital punishment. 

 

1 hour ago, Keithy said:

But, and this is the really crucial part, he'll never be in a majority government to achieve it.

Perhaps but i personally couldn't support a government that is supported by someone like Murdoch just because it gets them elected

[incident]

59 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Hmmmm .... not sure the govt is really giving out real-time demographic data of who's signed, is it?  

I don't know if it's 100% real time - but yeah, they do publish the stats and they look fairly up to date.

[Scott129]

1 hour ago, crazyfool1 said:

well the petition has now topped 1million signatures ... and now its down for maintenance .... its worse than the glastonbury  webcam  ....not sure what difference this will make but at least it might provoke a bit of thought as its now made the bbc news website 

Andrea Leadsom said somet sarcastic like "we'll pay someone attention when it has 17.4 million signatures"

[gigpusher]

Just now, Scott129 said:

I think we may be agreeing. My original point was to say its wrong to say labour have constantly been going between left and centre and only getting elected when centre is in charge. Labours history is between social democracy and democratic socialism (one left and one more left). Blair shifted labour (rightly or wrongly) to s place it had never been before. 

 

I don't think you should just go with what the majority want, but you certainly have to listen to their view (that's part of being a democracy). Must working class people feel screwed over (wrongly by the EU) but to just dismiss their legitimate concerns and carry on as normal is wrong imo. Also pretty sure the majority don't want capital punishment. 

 

Perhaps but i personally couldn't support a government that is supported by someone like Murdoch just because it gets them elected

In numerous polls people have come out in favour of capital punishment and I'm not saying you dismiss but what good leaders should do is educate people. The EU is not responsible for the plight of poor people in this country, immigration is not. They are scapegoats for a Tory government. Jeremy Corbyn should be tearing them a new one.

Just look at Jacinda Ardern for a masterclass in leading and educating on how you should behave. We could only dream of having leaders with that emotional intelligence and ability to lead from the top.  

[Mr.Tease]

Yikes, some EU journalists are now reporting eu has not agreed to the May 22nd date, and are now discussing April or even May 7th (my birthday and I’ll be in Greece !) without the clause of Mays deal passing or not. 

https://www.twitter.com/aqbyrne/status/1108803821818531844

https://www.twitter.com/adamfleming/status/1108803953897148416

 

Edited March 21, 2019 by Mr.Tease

[Scott129]

14 minutes ago, gigpusher said:

Just look at Jacinda Ardern for a masterclass in leading and educating on how you should behave

Well we can agree on this definitely. She's amazing 

[Keithy]

Re: Peoples Vote.

As someone who voted remain and would love a way out of this mess, I still don't quite get how the people's vote will work?

What are the options? It can only be 2 options; if you have remain, May's deal and No Deal then you are splitting the leave vote and the electoral commission will not allow that.

So if it's No Deal or Remain then any leavers will understandably be up in arms as you've chosen the extreme leave option which is patently unfair.

Similarly May's Deal or Remain will still have the leaves up in arms as you've chosen a universally accepted bad deal against remain.

So I don't get what the peoples vote would actually be short of rerunning the referendum with a yes/no option....and I'm not sure that actually solves anything.

I think that's why revoke A50 has taken off in the last 24 hours (although predominantly from remain areas) as the aim of the Peoples Vote is unclear other than having a vote on 'something'.

 

[Mr.Tease]

3 minutes ago, Keithy said:

Re: Peoples Vote.

As someone who voted remain and would love a way out of this mess, I still don't quite get how the people's vote will work?

What are the options? It can only be 2 options; if you have remain, May's deal and No Deal then you are splitting the leave vote and the electoral commission will not allow that.

So if it's No Deal or Remain then any leavers will understandably be up in arms as you've chosen the extreme leave option which is patently unfair.

Similarly May's Deal or Remain will still have the leaves up in arms as you've chosen a universally accepted bad deal against remain.

So I don't get what the peoples vote would actually be short of rerunning the referendum with a yes/no option....and I'm not sure that actually solves anything.

I think that's why revoke A50 has taken off in the last 24 hours (although predominantly from remain areas) as the aim of the Peoples Vote is unclear other than having a vote on 'something'.

 

Because a second ref doesn’t have a majority in parliament straight up, the only way it has a chance is that compromise motion whereby mps would accept Mays deal IF it’s subject to ratification via a second ref. 

Best shot of winning a second ref is if the options are Mays deal or remain. Having no deal as an option would be fairer and more democratic but tough shit, I’ve had enough of indulging the no deal brexiteers!

i think the above is a safer way of revoking article 50 rather than doing it straight up as you would slightly lessen the backlash.

[shoptildrop]

53 minutes ago, Scott129 said:

Andrea Leadsom said somet sarcastic like "we'll pay someone attention when it has 17.4 million signatures"

Yeah she did which some folk will see as a challenge!! The number after 6pm was going up approx 2000 signatures a minute and within 38 mins (despite numerous crashes) it had over 700K extra signatures ?

It's totally crashed at the moment

[Keithy]

1 minute ago, Mr.Tease said:

Best shot of winning a second ref is if the options are Mays deal or remain.

But that's what I have a problem with (in the sense of fairness). The leave option is one that's been universally accepted as awful. (Playing devils advocate), if I were a leave voter, I'd immediately be saying that is not a fair vote, plus also arguing why is remain on the ballot? The referendum decided the leave/remain option so surely the peoples vote should be a vote on the deal ie No Deal or May's Deal?

[Mr.Tease]

5 minutes ago, Keithy said:

But that's what I have a problem with (in the sense of fairness). The leave option is one that's been universally accepted as awful. (Playing devils advocate), if I were a leave voter, I'd immediately be saying that is not a fair vote, plus also arguing why is remain on the ballot? The referendum decided the leave/remain option so surely the peoples vote should be a vote on the deal ie No Deal or May's Deal?

At this point they’re going to whinge betrayal regardless because they want something that can’t be delivered. No deal is illegal because it breaches the northern Ireland peace treaty. At the end of the day they have only themselves to blame. All the brexiteers ran away following their win at the referendum because they knew it could not be delivered. That meant they entrusted May to fulfill it. Therefore Mays deal is their deal, they can vote for it if they want but if they don’t like it it’s entirely their own fault and they should take ownership and responsibility of that rather than blaming mythical bogeymen.

[Keithy]

1 hour ago, Mr.Tease said:

At this point they’re going to whinge betrayal regardless because they want something that can’t be delivered. No deal is illegal because it breaches the northern Ireland peace treaty. At the end of the day they have only themselves to blame. All the brexiteers ran away following their win at the referendum because they knew it could not be delivered. That meant they entrusted May to fulfill it. Therefore Mays deal is their deal, they can vote for it if they want but if they don’t like it it’s entirely their own fault and they should take ownership and responsibility of that rather than blaming mythical bogeymen.

Yes, that's all very true. But another vote has to be fair and balanced and signed off by the electoral commission. That's just simply the law. We can discuss the calamity of Brexit so far but the reality is all that is irrelevant when it comes to framing the question in a clear, legal, impartial matter. The question has to be balanced fairly for both sides. 

Is the People's Vote a pseudo 2nd referendum with remain as an option or is the People's Vote a vote on the leave deal? 

If it's the former, then call it as it is - a 2nd referendum. Which then gets into the sticky issue of the result if remain wins. Best of 3?

If it's the latter, then remain is not on the ballot and we're a straight shoot out out between a very shit deal and no deal. Which is effectively asking which foot do you want to shoot yourself in, left or right?

 

Edited March 21, 2019 by Keithy

[Purple aki squat]

The March on Saturday could be enormous plus this petition gaining momentum each hour.

PM trying to get another vote on her deal next Tuesday.

See you next Tuesday Teresa.

It’s time the real majority in this country made their voices heard.

x

[ghostdancer1]

2 hours ago, Keithy said:

Re: Peoples Vote.

As someone who voted remain and would love a way out of this mess, I still don't quite get how the people's vote will work?

What are the options? It can only be 2 options; if you have remain, May's deal and No Deal then you are splitting the leave vote and the electoral commission will not allow that.

So if it's No Deal or Remain then any leavers will understandably be up in arms as you've chosen the extreme leave option which is patently unfair.

Similarly May's Deal or Remain will still have the leaves up in arms as you've chosen a universally accepted bad deal against remain. 

So I don't get what the peoples vote would actually be short of rerunning the referendum with a yes/no option....and I'm not sure that actually solves anything.

I think that's why revoke A50 has taken off in the last 24 hours (although predominantly from remain areas) as the aim of the Peoples Vote is unclear other than having a vote on 'something'.

 

Q1: Remain or Leave

Q2: If Leave:   a - May's Deal

                         b - No Deal

 

only ballots which voted Leave to Q1 get counted when counting the result for Q2.

[incident]

17 minutes ago, ghostdancer1 said:

only ballots which voted Leave to Q1 get counted when counting the result for Q2.

No. That wouldn't, and absolutely shouldn't happen under any circumstances.

That would be the worst possible way of doing it. You've potentially got an outcome that only a shade over 25% of the voting public can accept.

[Keithy]

24 minutes ago, ghostdancer1 said:

Q1: Remain or Leave

Q2: If Leave:   a - May's Deal

                         b - No Deal

 

only ballots which voted Leave to Q1 get counted when counting the result for Q2.

That wouldn't work. Let's say the result to Q1 is the same as before : 48-52

Then if we hypothesise that 52% split is

25% - May's Deal

27% - No Deal

...then we leave the EU with a deal that 73% of the electorate didn't vote for. That would be madness.

Plus the 48% remainers are ignored on the leave option. I might have voted remain but if leave wins then I'd want the softest possible exit.

Edited March 21, 2019 by Keithy