The Brexit Thread (LOCKED)
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In | RSS Feed
 Matov  16 Jan 19 10.25am |
  |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by silvertop
For my part, and I concede my thinking on these matters can seem a little strange, the only logic for May bringing a deal to the HoC that she must have KNOWN would be rejected is because she wanted this no-confidence vote. Knowing that she will win it. And that in turn that kicks up the pressure on Labour to declare themselves for a second referendum. And the second they do, with Corbyn uttering the words, we have a GE soon afterwards, fought on a simple Leave or Remain narrative. To be fair to Corbyn he has held his nerve so far, and with good reasons. I appreciate that most Labour members want us to Remain in the EU but the electoral reality is that in the seats that Labour needs to win to gain a majority, then it is potentially bloody risky to proclaim yourselves as effectively wanting to overturn the vote on June 23rd. May would not be in charge, with a Tory party election machine far more aware of the threat that Labour offer. And the only story around the entire process Leave or Remain. Question is does Corbyn buckle or not?
"The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." - 1984 - George Orwell. |
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
 |
 Cucking Funt Clapham on the Back 16 Jan 19 10.26am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by pefwin
looks like the Daily Fail has already ruled out no deal. The moment Dacre stepped down, the Mail did a complete 180 degree turn and in a trice they trashed what little reputation they still possessed.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Badger11 Beckenham 16 Jan 19 10.47am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Matov
For my part, and I concede my thinking on these matters can seem a little strange, the only logic for May bringing a deal to the HoC that she must have KNOWN would be rejected is because she wanted this no-confidence vote. Knowing that she will win it. And that in turn that kicks up the pressure on Labour to declare themselves for a second referendum. And the second they do, with Corbyn uttering the words, we have a GE soon afterwards, fought on a simple Leave or Remain narrative. To be fair to Corbyn he has held his nerve so far, and with good reasons. I appreciate that most Labour members want us to Remain in the EU but the electoral reality is that in the seats that Labour needs to win to gain a majority, then it is potentially bloody risky to proclaim yourselves as effectively wanting to overturn the vote on June 23rd. May would not be in charge, with a Tory party election machine far more aware of the threat that Labour offer. And the only story around the entire process Leave or Remain. Question is does Corbyn buckle or not? A political pundit made the same point about a GE. The areas Labour need to win back are largely Brexit voters. Corbyn will do well in areas that already have Labour MPs especially in the south. But it's the north that he needs to reach out to and many of them see labour as a London centric party.
One more point |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
pefwin  Where you have to have an English ... 16 Jan 19 11.07am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Penge Eagle
No, he lost a democratic vote and is willing to accept the result. Something you and other remainers should do also. I take it you are still in the US as you missed JRM's many many interviews where he did not accept the result, even trying to spin it as a win.
"Everything is air-droppable at least once." "When the going gets tough, the tough call for close air support." |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Matov 16 Jan 19 11.10am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Badger11
A political pundit made the same point about a GE. The areas Labour need to win back are largely Brexit voters. Corbyn will do well in areas that already have Labour MPs especially in the south. But it's the north that he needs to reach out to and many of them see labour as a London centric party.
I see about 70 Labour MP's have come out for a second vote this morning. Less than was being predicted along with Corbyn not even hinting at a change in policy in terms of backing a second vote. To be fair, Labour have played a blinder so far with the likes of Starmer being the respectable face of tipping Remainers the wink that if they stick with Labour then they will get what they want. Question is how long they can maintain the act?
"The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." - 1984 - George Orwell. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| steeleye20 Online Croydon 16 Jan 19 11.10am |
|
|---|---|
|
Having lost a vote by 240 the PM learns nothing. She is now taking onboard cross-party support, without the leader of the opposition !!!!!
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Pussay Patrol  16 Jan 19 11.17am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by pefwin
I take it you are still in the US as you missed JRM's many many interviews where he did not accept the result, even trying to spin it as a win. We'll have a labour swing and a hung Parliament. Labour will have to get together with the SNP, and the SNP will insist brexit is reversed or a 2nd referendum at the very least to do a deal
Paua oouaarancì Irà chiyeah Ishé galé ma ba oo ah |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 16 Jan 19 11.18am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Badger11
We pay MPs to do a job they decided that the EU was too difficult for them so they asked us to to the job we pay them for. Then they have the cheek to kick it into the long grass because they don't like the answer. I very much hope (blind optimism) that on Monday Mrs May says plan B is Brexit under WTO on March 29. The first bit is correct. We do pay MPs to do a job! That job is to represent us and decide what it is we need and not to just give us what some want, no matter that those "some" happens to include many who formed, by a small margin, a majority in 2016. The second bit is incorrect. They didn't decide that the EU was "too difficult" for them. The Tories wanted to kill the endless squabbling from their eurosceptic wing, throttle the rise of UKIP and firmly establish the UK as an EU member. Parliament's mistake, led by Cameron, was to commit to respecting the result. May, no doubt for personally honourable reasons, has continued to make that mistake, alongside every politician who suggests that our democracy is threatened if we now fail to exit. In fact the absolute reverse is true. Our democracy is rooted solely in Parliament. Our job is only to decide who we choose to represent us. Referendums play no legal role in our democracy. If Parliament now decide that committing to respect a referendum was a mistake because of subsequent events (greater clarity of the consequences and the perception of a changed public opinion), then they have a democratic duty to correct that mistake. Should Brexit now be thrown out by Parliamentary action it would be a triumph for our democracy and not a failure of it.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Hrolf The Ganger 16 Jan 19 11.28am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
The first bit is correct. We do pay MPs to do a job! That job is to represent us and decide what it is we need and not to just give us what some want, no matter that those "some" happens to include many who formed, by a small margin, a majority in 2016. The second bit is incorrect. They didn't decide that the EU was "too difficult" for them. The Tories wanted to kill the endless squabbling from their eurosceptic wing, throttle the rise of UKIP and firmly establish the UK as an EU member. Parliament's mistake, led by Cameron, was to commit to respecting the result. May, no doubt for personally honourable reasons, has continued to make that mistake, alongside every politician who suggests that our democracy is threatened if we now fail to exit. In fact the absolute reverse is true. Our democracy is rooted solely in Parliament. Our job is only to decide who we choose to represent us. Referendums play no legal role in our democracy. If Parliament now decide that committing to respect a referendum was a mistake because of subsequent events (greater clarity of the consequences and the perception of a changed public opinion), then they have a democratic duty to correct that mistake. Should Brexit now be thrown out by Parliamentary action it would be a triumph for our democracy and not a failure of it. I see you have started early with the self deluded, self serving bollocks. No one is buying it.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Badger11 Beckenham 16 Jan 19 11.28am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
The first bit is correct. We do pay MPs to do a job! That job is to represent us and decide what it is we need and not to just give us what some want, no matter that those "some" happens to include many who formed, by a small margin, a majority in 2016. The second bit is incorrect. They didn't decide that the EU was "too difficult" for them. The Tories wanted to kill the endless squabbling from their eurosceptic wing, throttle the rise of UKIP and firmly establish the UK as an EU member. Parliament's mistake, led by Cameron, was to commit to respecting the result. May, no doubt for personally honourable reasons, has continued to make that mistake, alongside every politician who suggests that our democracy is threatened if we now fail to exit. In fact the absolute reverse is true. Our democracy is rooted solely in Parliament. Our job is only to decide who we choose to represent us. Referendums play no legal role in our democracy. If Parliament now decide that committing to respect a referendum was a mistake because of subsequent events (greater clarity of the consequences and the perception of a changed public opinion), then they have a democratic duty to correct that mistake. Should Brexit now be thrown out by Parliamentary action it would be a triumph for our democracy and not a failure of it. Normally I would agree with your argument. We elect representatives and not delegates. However the moment that Parliament voted to allow a referendum they gave up that responsibility. Having done so its a bit rich that they are now trying to wrestle it back from the voters.
One more point |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Matov 16 Jan 19 11.53am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Badger11
Quite. And whilst people fear the damage (wrongly in my opinion but we will not know until/if it happens) a no-deal exit might bring, the potential forces unleashed should Parliament seek to overturn the result on June 23rd do not bear thinking about. Our entire system of Governance will be potentially under threat because why should anybody ever bother either voting or having any faith what so ever in a politician?
"The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." - 1984 - George Orwell. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| steeleye20 Online Croydon 16 Jan 19 12.03pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Matov
Quite. And whilst people fear the damage (wrongly in my opinion but we will not know until/if it happens) a no-deal exit might bring, the potential forces unleashed should Parliament seek to overturn the result on June 23rd do not bear thinking about. Our entire system of Governance will be potentially under threat because why should anybody ever bother either voting or having any faith what so ever in a politician? Any democratic vote can be overturned by another. It is not within the power of the government to deliver brexit. It can simply be overturned next time.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / Register
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2023 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.