[EU] Brexit negotiations at a standstill

[Kallisto]

Well I voted for Labour in the GE and despite being an ardent Remainer and never once expressing any kind of support for Brexit beyond maybe "well we voted for it I guess?" then according to Corbyn I'm a Brexiteer because I had the temerity to actually vote in the GE. More fool me or any Remainer who backed a political party that wasn't the Lib Dems in an election the Lib Dems would never win or gain any extra representation from my vote in a FPTP system.

Same here, I'd rather vote Lib Dem or even Greens but I simply put can't justify wasting a vote for someone that won't win and give Bernard Jenkin (Extreme brexiteer conservative MP) an easier time of getting elected. FPTP is more about voting against someone than for it. So to try to get him ousted my X had to go towards the Labour candidate. (2010 I voted Lib Dem because they had the better chance, before that it was for Ivan Henderson the person even though he was in the Labour Party).

[Slant]

Same here, I'd rather vote Lib Dem or even Greens but I simply put can't justify wasting a vote for someone that won't win and give Bernard Jenkin (Extreme brexiteer conservative MP) an easier time of getting elected. FPTP is more about voting against someone than for it. So to try to get him ousted my X had to go towards the Labour candidate. (2010 I voted Lib Dem because they had the better chance, before that it was for Ivan Henderson the person even though he was in the Labour Party).

Don't get it, though. Everyone seems to think like you two. I wonder what would happen if everyone actually voted for what they believe in instead of gaming the system. Seems to me, that kind of tactical voting is contributing to the mess, too. I mean, the system is clearly to blame here, but it's also the individual's decision to vote against their convictions. A conscious decision that is inexcuseable in its consequences. So you didn't waste your vote, but you also didn't do what you thought was best for your beliefs.

How's anything ever going to change if everyone thinks like that?

[Kronik85]

Don't get it, though. Everyone seems to think like you two. I wonder what would happen if everyone actually voted for what they believe in instead of gaming the system. Seems to me, that kind of tactical voting is contributing to the mess, too. I mean, the system is clearly to blame here, but it's also the individual's decision to vote against their convictions. A conscious decision that is inexcuseable in its consequences. So you didn't waste your vote, but you also didn't do what you thought was best for your beliefs.

How's anything ever going to change if everyone thinks like that?

Because the system is engineered to make you effectively waste you're vote if you don't win. The people of my constituency will never vote in Lib Dem, they might however vote in Labour, so I vote Labour. If we had a none FPTP system I might be tempted to vote Lib Dem, but we don't and not voting isn't an option either. When Parliament has no intention of changing FPTP tossing away my vote doesn't empower me.

When we have historically looked at the vote and seen that parties are over or under represented based on share our politicians answer hasn't been to address this, I know criticising the UK population makes you feel superior Slant but if this shit hasn't worked in the past 20 years I've no reason to believe that voting Lib Dem now in a constituency that will never vote in Lib Dem will somehow change our entire voting system.

[Slant]

Because the system is engineered to make you effectively waste you're vote if you don't win. The people of my constituency will never vote in Lib Dem, they might however vote in Labour, so I vote Labour. If we had a none FPTP system I might be tempted to vote Lib Dem, but we don't and not voting isn't an option either. When Parliament has no intention of changing FPTP tossing away my vote doesn't empower me.

When we have historically looked at the vote and seen that parties are over or under represented based on share our politicians answer hasn't been to address this, I know criticising the UK population makes you feel superior Slant but if this shit hasn't worked in the past 20 years I've no reason to believe that voting Lib Dem now in a constituency that will never vote in Lib Dem will somehow change our entire voting system.

I've rarely criticised the British population as a whole. You're glossing over what I'm actually saying. But I take your point. Drown in your self-pity. I'll strictly stick to the EU side from now on. I'm looking forward to the "arrogant European ass, not even trying to understand us" trope that'll eventually grow.

[Kallisto]

Don't get it, though. Everyone seems to think like you two. I wonder what would happen if everyone actually voted for what they believe in instead of gaming the system. Seems to me, that kind of tactical voting is contributing to the mess, too. I mean, the system is clearly to blame here, but it's also the individual's decision to vote against their convictions. A conscious decision that is inexcuseable in its consequences. So you didn't waste your vote, but you also didn't do what you thought was best for your beliefs.

How's anything ever going to change if everyone thinks like that?

It's mostly down to Voting with convictions is a gamble. A sever one at that. Ok granted for a place like mine outside of Blair era we've always gone Tory that maybe voting with convictions might be better. But a popular Labour candidate (Ivan Henderson due to him being from here and pushing local views even though in the end he lost to Conservative > UKIP > Conservative MP Carswell) during the height of new Labour got through. So while supposedly safe Labour or Lib Dems when they're really doing well can win here. So it's best to make sure the asshole gets the boot since I'm ok with both Labour and Lib Dem. Though some things with both I also disagree with.

[Dhrizzle]

Don't get it, though. Everyone seems to think like you two. I wonder what would happen if everyone actually voted for what they believe in instead of gaming the system. Seems to me, that kind of tactical voting is contributing to the mess, too. I mean, the system is clearly to blame here, but it's also the individual's decision to vote against their convictions. A conscious decision that is inexcuseable in its consequences. So you didn't waste your vote, but you also didn't do what you thought was best for your beliefs.

How's anything ever going to change if everyone thinks like that?

The trouble is we have several leftish parties and, since UKIP sank, only one on the right. For all intents and purposes you vote "Conservative" or "not Conservative." That's why people were so upset with the Lib Dems going into coalition with the Conservatives a few elections back.

British democracy is an absolute shambles. Between them the major left/center-left parties got more than 50% of the vote (Labour, Lib Dems and SNP) but the Conservatives have all the power. In part this is due to the DUP getting 10 seats to 290k votes whilst parties like the Greens only got 1 seat for 525k, and there is the added wrinkle the NI's left leaning party Sinn Fein can't take their seats in Parliament because swearing an oath to the queen goes against their Republican principles (not that left/right means much in NI, there you vote republican/unionist Catholic/Protestant based on where you live.)

- - - Updated - - -

It's mostly down to Voting with convictions is a gamble. A sever one at that. Ok granted for a place like mine outside of Blair era we've always gone Tory that maybe voting with convictions might be better. But a popular Labour candidate (Ivan Henderson due to him being from here and pushing local views even though in the end he lost to Conservative > UKIP > Conservative MP Carswell) during the height of new Labour got through. So while supposedly safe Labour or Lib Dems when they're really doing well can win here. So it's best to make sure the asshole gets the boot since I'm ok with both Labour and Lib Dem. Though some things with both I also disagree with.

I feel the same way about Labour and Lib Dems. In fact the most optimistic I ever felt in British politics was 2010 when it seemed obvious we would get a LabLib coalition and, if they picked and chose the right policies from each manifesto we could have had an awesome government.

[Kallisto]

The trouble is we have several leftish parties and, since UKIP sank, only one on the right. For all intents and purposes you vote "Conservative" or "not Conservative." That's why people were so upset with the Lib Dems going into coalition with the Conservatives a few elections back.

British democracy is an absolute shambles. Between them the major left/center-left parties got more than 50% of the vote (Labour, Lib Dems and SNP) but the Conservatives have all the power. In part this is due to the DUP getting 10 seats to 290k votes whilst parties like the Greens only got 1 seat for 525k, and there is the added wrinkle the NI's left leaning party Sinn Fein can't take their seats in Parliament because swearing an oath to the queen goes against their Republican principles (not that left/right means much in NI, there you vote republican/unionist Catholic/Protestant based on where you live.)

- - - Updated - - -



I feel the same way about Labour and Lib Dems. In fact the most optimistic I ever felt in British politics was 2010 when it seemed obvious we would get a LabLib coalition and, if they picked and chose the right policies from each manifesto we could have had an awesome government.

I'm actually still going to defend Lib Dems for going into that coalition. Brown was boring and toxic as all hell mostly down to correctly calling that old woman a bigot (which was confirmed she was a few years later) and refused to step down for another Labour leader. Tories didn't really have enough for a minority government. Economically we were in the middle of the great recession and SNP south of the border was hated by most people including those on the left. Meaning a Lab/LD/SNP/SDLP coalition was pretty much not going to happen.

A working government was needed and the 2010 one was the best we could get in the circumstances, and the shit that's happened since 2015 pretty much proved that LD did hold back most of the conservative BS that the party tried to push on us in the last few years.

This country really needs the tories to implode and have a Labour/Lib Dem government and opposition.

[Mayhem]

They're separate points. I don't know if she did try to screw up the GE (both regards timing and the Tory campaign), but if she had lost it then that could have screwed over the entire Brexit process, particularly if it resulted in something like a Labour + LibDem or Labour + SNP coalition. As it happens, she won it, so all that speculation is a bit moot.

But wouldn't it have made more sense to call a GE prior to sending out A50 notice to the EU if her intention was to sabotage brexit by losing the GE?

[Omega10]

But wouldn't it have made more sense to call a GE prior to sending out A50 notice to the EU if her intention was to sabotage brexit by losing the GE?

I find it disconcerting that people can talk about her purposely sabotaging Brexit in this way. The situation there is really really messed up

I am moving quickly to the position that Great Britain is going to lose out, and the only question remaining is will be a moderate loss, or big loss, or a HUGE loss. I hope they can cut their losses, and I hope they can avoid the worst of the landmines that are in their path.

[Noradin]

-snip-

Peparing your very own Stap-in-the-back myth already?
Will you take the same preparations to get "even", too? You could start by writing a book, it'd probably be of the same quality, even...

- - - Updated - - -

Under May's deal we will no longer be an EU member state, we will have no MEPs, we will not be part of the SM or CU, FOM will end and the ECJ will no longer have supremacy over UK laws. This is Brexit. The fact that this Brexit is not your vision of Brexit is unfortunate but that is is the risk when you vote for something that is not defined.

I'd disagree, given Teleros' posts on this forum it would be very unfortunate if anything were according to his visions.

- - - Updated - - -

My point was rather broader than just focusing on the Good Friday Agreement though. Now, perhaps it'd mean altering that agreement or even (!) abandoning it, but again, I think the overall negotiations would have ended up different. That's all.

So you do not actually have a clue what you think it they would have been like...

[Noradin]

But. . . . you had a referendum for electoral reform, most did not bother to attend and you overwhelmingly voted against it. So people CAN hold the British people accountable for the electoral system, because they chose not to improve it.

AS far as I understand it that referendum had severe issues: It was a choice between FPTP and "essentially FPTP but totally not the same, honest".

[Noradin]

Even a slight improvement is an improvement. Why did they shoot it down? Did they expect they'd get a chance at something better? Excuse me while I laugh my ass off. Most did not even bother to vote.

There was no "slight improvement" to be had, it was an obvious sham.
No need to lend legimacy to a joke referendum by showing up to vote.

[Teleros]

But wouldn't it have made more sense to call a GE prior to sending out A50 notice to the EU if her intention was to sabotage brexit by losing the GE?

Maybe, but that depends on what you think the EU would've done in the event of a new UK government asking to withdraw the A50 notice. My thinking is that they'd have been happy to stop it. "Ah, of course we're terribly sorry that you don't have a pro-Brexit government any more, UK citizens, but as your new one has asked us to cancel Article 50, we will of course be happy to do so in order to preserve the EU blah blah blah keep your rebate blah blah..."

Peparing your very own Stap-in-the-back myth already?
Will you take the same preparations to get "even", too? You could start by writing a book, it'd probably be of the same quality, even...

More like "cynically prepared to see more sabotaging of Brexit". Don't see what Jews or Teutonic imperialist-socialist screeds have to do with any of that though.

I'd disagree, given Teleros' posts on this forum it would be very unfortunate if anything were according to his visions.

Such antisemitism... it saddens me. I had no idea you had that much bile in you for Jews - though I guess your two links quoted above should've clued me in. Sad to see...

But. . . . you had a referendum for electoral reform, most did not bother to attend and you overwhelmingly voted against it. So people CAN hold the British people accountable for the electoral system, because they chose not to improve it.

Some of us like the current system :P .

This was the proposed new system BTW. Frankly the impression I get (and got) was that a lot of people simply didn't understand it very well, so sticking with what they knew is not surprising.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_U...ote_referendum

[Mormolyce]

If losing votes to UKIP was a threat to just the Tories then why did Miliband feel the need to include the pledges "Reform the EU so it "works for Britain" and "Allow no further transfer of powers to Brussels without a referendum" in his 2015 GE campaign?

Likely hoping to wean some voters from the Tories and/or UKIP.

This option has never been available. The government was bound to carry out Brexit due to the fact that it had promised to fulfil the result of the referendum. If abandoning Brexit was truly an option then why do you think not one of 650 elected MPs have seriously suggested this in the last two years?

Of course it is available, it's just not in their personal career interests to do so.

Plus, you know, party line politics.

[Mayhem]

Maybe, but that depends on what you think the EU would've done in the event of a new UK government asking to withdraw the A50 notice. My thinking is that they'd have been happy to stop it. "Ah, of course we're terribly sorry that you don't have a pro-Brexit government any more, UK citizens, but as your new one has asked us to cancel Article 50, we will of course be happy to do so in order to preserve the EU blah blah blah keep your rebate blah blah..."

What do you mean by maybe? Even your example here would make more sense if the GE was prior to the A50 notice. I mean, you're just making it extremely complicated for no reason. That just makes no sense.

[Noradin]

More like "cynically prepared to see more sabotaging of Brexit". Don't see what Jews or Teutonic imperialist-socialist screeds have to do with any of that though.


Such antisemitism... it saddens me. I had no idea you had that much bile in you for Jews - though I guess your two links quoted above should've clued me in. Sad to see...

You are aware that this act is unlikely to work on anyone who has read more than two of your posts, aren't you?

- - - Updated - - -

I see it as a slight improvement so that at least you can e.g. vote Lib Dem and then if your candidate doesn't get elected, your second preference in Labour can still help keep a Tory representative off the seat. It definitely is not proportional representation but it would be an improvement in that you can at least register your first preference and still tactically choose your second one.

Am I misunderstanding the system? That's what AV is and what the discussion was earlier on was that some people were forced to vote tactically and not for their preferred party

But that one was not up as a choice in the referendum, wasn't it?
At least from what I got from discussions from family who live in the UK, but then it has been some time and I'm not that firm on the details anymore.

[Teleros]

What do you mean by maybe? Even your example here would make more sense if the GE was prior to the A50 notice. I mean, you're just making it extremely complicated for no reason. That just makes no sense.

It does if you bring party politics into account. Remember, May's original (in this case, supposed) decision on why to call the GE was to strengthen her position in the negotiations. Doing it my way gets the Tories off the hook - "look guys we began the process but lost the GE, nothing more we can do" - whereas a GE before you invoke A50 doesn't, because the Tories would be rightly seen as jeopardising the result by risking a GE.

- - - Updated - - -

You are aware that this act is unlikely to work on anyone who has read more than two of your posts, aren't you?

Hey, if you insist on seeing muh nazis under every bush and bed there's not much I can do to help you.

[Mayhem]

It does if you bring party politics into account. Remember, May's original (in this case, supposed) decision on why to call the GE was to strengthen her position in the negotiations. Doing it my way gets the Tories off the hook - "look guys we began the process but lost the GE, nothing more we can do" - whereas a GE before you invoke A50 doesn't, because the Tories would be rightly seen as jeopardising the result by risking a GE.

But aren't you calling her jeopardising the result for donig just that?

[Noradin]

Hey, if you insist on seeing muh nazis under every bush and bed there's not much I can do to help you.

Not unter every one, I'm just seeing a conspiracy theory being peddled similar to the one that allowed them to gain a foothold.

[Noradin]

No, this is what AV is.

I know what it is, but was that what was clearly described as one of the options in the referendum?