The Brexit aftermath thread

[Pann]

Sinn Fein have practically then same vote share as DUP but absolutely zero say in the process. Also in NI the voting is far more polarised along the lines of Republican/Unionist Catholic/Protestant so it is difficult to tell how well the dominant parties represent the electorate's political stances.

I don't see your point. Sinn Fein could, if they wished, take their seats in Parliament and given the Tories precarious position they could very much have a say in the process. However this is no reason to ignore what the DUP and the people they represent.

- - - Updated - - -

We wouldn't be discussing this if not for Brexit.

To be honest if people had the even the slightest clue about Ireland much of what is talked about in this thread would not be discussed.

- - - Updated - - -

The difference is under PR the current government would only have 43.3% of the seats in parliament whilst a workable majority could be formed by a Lab-Lib-SNP coalition, with other parties bumping the left-leaning side to a comfy 53.3%

Are you really saying you can't see the difference there?

Right, ok, this could happen if we completely ignore reality. Labour picked up 40% of the vote however they were in support of Brexit which both the SNP and Lib Dems opposed. You are also ignoring UKIP would likely lend support to the Cons.

[Huehuecoyotl]

Right, ok, this could happen if we completely ignore reality. Labour picked up 40% of the vote however they were in support of Brexit which both the SNP and Lib Dems opposed. You are also ignoring UKIP would likely lend support to the Cons.

UKIP were largely irrelevant in the 2017 election, they got less than 2% of the vote. That's virtually offset by the Green party, who would certainly link up with a centre left alliance. So it really isn't "ignoring reality" especially when you bear in mind that many of the smaller parties are likely to increase their share of the vote under PR, because so many people view them as a wasted vote in Labour/Conservative strongholds at the moment. And I wouldn't describe the Labour position as being "in favour" of Brexit. I would suggest it was closer to them being accepting of Brexit as a democratic reality. They have been VERY careful to not get in the way of the process, so that the Tories have to own their failure completely.

[Dhrizzle]

I don't see your point. Sinn Fein could, if they wished, take their seats in Parliament and given the Tories precarious position they could very much have a say in the process. However this is no reason to ignore what the DUP and the people they represent.

Sinn Fein don't take their seats because they refuse to swear an oath to the monarch which they see as symbolic of the oppression of Ireland. Even if they did, they still wouldn't hold any power in the government because that isn't how it works.

Also it is important to note that we don't know how DUP voters feel about Brexit, the GFA or the relative hardness and positions of borders. All we know is they voted DUP in elections where people tend very strongly towards voting along ideological/religious lines.

Right, ok, this could happen if we completely ignore reality. Labour picked up 40% of the vote however they were in support of Brexit which both the SNP and Lib Dems opposed. You are also ignoring UKIP would likely lend support to the Cons.

So something would be negotiated between the left-leaning parties (all of which supported Remain in the referendum and prefer a soft or Brexit-in-name-only Brexit,) possibly even getting a second, better informed referendum. It couldn't be any worse than the divisions within the Conservatives, it would better represent how the people of the UK voted and the NI issue could be discussed without DUP hardliners threatening to topple the government.

[Pann]

UKIP were largely irrelevant in the 2017 election, they got less than 2% of the vote. That's virtually offset by the Green party, who would certainly link up with a centre left alliance. So it really isn't "ignoring reality" especially when you bear in mind that many of the smaller parties are likely to increase their share of the vote under PR, because so many people view them as a wasted vote in Labour/Conservative strongholds at the moment. And I wouldn't describe the Labour position as being "in favour" of Brexit. I would suggest it was closer to them being accepting of Brexit as a democratic reality. They have been VERY careful to not get in the way of the process, so that the Tories have to own their failure completely.

The Greens, like the Lib Dems, would not link up with a party that supported Brexit. I suppose it could have possible that Labour could have secured SNP support based on allowing Indyref2 to go ahead but this faces the problem that the combined Lab/SNP vote would still be less that the Con/DUP share. You've changed the argument from under PR Labour would have been able to form a government to under PR people would have voted differently, one is demonstrably false the other is nothing more than what if that none of us can give a conclusive answer to.

- - - Updated - - -

Sinn Fein don't take their seats because they refuse to swear an oath to the monarch which they see as symbolic of the oppression of Ireland. Even if they did, they still wouldn't hold any power in the government because that isn't how it works.

Also it is important to note that we don't know how DUP voters feel about Brexit, the GFA or the relative hardness and positions of borders. All we know is they voted DUP in elections where people tend very strongly towards voting along ideological/religious lines.



So something would be negotiated between the left-leaning parties (all of which supported Remain in the referendum and prefer a soft or Brexit-in-name-only Brexit,) possibly even getting a second, better informed referendum. It couldn't be any worse than the divisions within the Conservatives, it would better represent how the people of the UK voted and the NI issue could be discussed without DUP hardliners threatening to topple the government.

I am well aware of that. I did not say that they would have power in the government, Parliament is not just the government and given the divisions in the government and parliament it is possible that Sinn Fein's 7 seats would be enough to sway the vote one way or another (which is why the Taoiseach has urged them to take their seats in Westminster). Of course this is all speculation and unlikely to happen.

Indeed but simply ignoring them, and everyone else in Ireland, does not solve this issue.

The Cons, by and large, supported remain in the referendum so the point that the left leaning parties supported remain is neither here nor there. Labour supported Brexit in the GE meaning that they would not secure support from the parties that would be needed to surpass the Con share of the vote.

[Noradin]

Not so much clumsiness as delusional about one person's chance of throwing 27 others under a bus when they know what you are trying to do.

Given the difference in mass the EU might as well be the bus the UK is trying to throw it under.

[Dhrizzle]

The Cons, by and large, supported remain in the referendum so the point that the left leaning parties supported remain is neither here nor there. Labour supported Brexit in the GE meaning that they would not secure support from the parties that would be needed to surpass the Con share of the vote.

A coalition government could be formed on the condition a second referendum is held to secure support for Labour, otherwise no government would be formed and a second GE called.

[Pann]

A coalition government could be formed on the condition a second referendum is held to secure support for Labour, otherwise no government would be formed and a second GE called.

You're moving the goal posts. Many Labour voters supported Leave do you just ignore them? Do we ignore those who voted the Cons and less left leaning parties? Do we keep voting until you get the result you desire? I mean we had one unnecessary GE so what's another between friends? Honestly what you are suggesting does not sound anything like democracy.

[Dhrizzle]

You're moving the goal posts. Many Labour voters supported Leave do you just ignore them? Do we ignore those who voted the Cons and less left leaning parties? Do we keep voting until you get the result you desire? I mean we had one unnecessary GE so what's another between friends? Honestly what you are suggesting does not sound anything like democracy.

So a referendum that was billed as advisory but made policy, and a government that the majority voted against is democracy, but a second, better informed and more comprehensive referendum backed by a government that received >50% of the vote wouldn't be?

Also, what goal post moved? I claimed that PR would allow for a left-leaning coalition with overall majority vote-share, how am I wrong?

[Pann]

So a referendum that was billed as advisory but made policy, and a government that the majority voted against is democracy, but a second, better informed and more comprehensive referendum backed by a government that received >50% of the vote wouldn't be?

Also, what goal post moved? I claimed that PR would allow for a left-leaning coalition with overall majority vote-share, how am I wrong?

What? You moved the goal posts yet again. You claimed "A coalition government could be formed on the condition a second referendum is held to secure support for Labour..." which would be againt the Labour manifesto you then said that if they could not form a government another GE should be called. As for the referendum being advisory it was clearly stated that the government would enact the result we can't expect them to go back on their word because we don't like the result.

I have explained this to you. Labour would not get support from the Lib Dems or SNP because of their support for Brexit without either of them they would not have enough votes to surpass the Cons and even with SNP support the Cons and DUP vote share would surpass their total by 0.3%. This is before UKIP's 1.8% share of the vote who would move to support the Cons if faced with the prospect of an anti-Brexit coalition.

The only way a left-leaning coalition could have been formed is if you ignore how people voted and the manifestos on which the respective parties stood for election.

[Dizzeeyooo]

As for the referendum being advisory it was clearly stated that the government would enact the result we can't expect them to go back on their word because we don't like the result.

it's nothing to do with not liking the result, its to do with Brexit being incredibly stupid and damaging to the country, and MPs (currently) choosing to go along with that damage because "will of the people", when the will of the people was based on a huge amount of lies and misinformation about what leaving the EU would actually mean

we elect MPs to make decisions based on their own ability and knowledge of the issues involved, not to blindly follow the will of people who have virtually no idea about what they are even voting for

[Pann]

Why not? The Pro-Brexit side definitely supported that if they didn't get the results they wanted in that referendum they'd keep asking for another.

Not to mention that the information available on what Brexit would look like has VASTLY changed. I sincerely doubt the people who voted in favor of it did so with full knowledge of their government's complete incompetence and lack of preparation.

That is not what I wrote. It is perfectly acceptable to campaign for another referendum (as it would have been for the Leave side had Remain won) or, even, to reverse Brexit. It is, also, acceptable to revisit a decision when more is known about the outcome. It is not, however, acceptable to expect the Government to ignore what people voted for because it does not suit those who lost the vote.

[Dhrizzle]

What? You moved the goal posts yet again. You claimed "A coalition government could be formed on the condition a second referendum is held to secure support for Labour..." which would be againt the Labour manifesto you then said that if they could not form a government another GE should be called. As for the referendum being advisory it was clearly stated that the government would enact the result we can't expect them to go back on their word because we don't like the result.

I have explained this to you. Labour would not get support from the Lib Dems or SNP because of their support for Brexit without either of them they would not have enough votes to surpass the Cons and even with SNP support the Cons and DUP vote share would surpass their total by 0.3%. This is before UKIP's 1.8% share of the vote who would move to support the Cons if faced with the prospect of an anti-Brexit coalition.

The only way a left-leaning coalition could have been formed is if you ignore how people voted and the manifestos on which the respective parties stood for election.

I'm not moving goal-posts at all. It's perfectly feasible that Labour would call a second referendum to secure Lib Dem and SNP support, and it's also feasible that Lib Dems and SNP would support a Labour government without a referendum to keep the Conservatives out, and without a centre-left coalition we'd have another GE as no one party would have the >50% seats needed to create a government.

Those outcomes are vastly more realistic than your insistence we'd end up with the same Con-DUP arrangement we have now.

[Pann]

it's nothing to do with not liking the result, its to do with Brexit being incredibly stupid and damaging to the country, and MPs (currently) choosing to go along with that damage because "will of the people", when the will of the people was based on a huge amount of lies and misinformation about what leaving the EU would actually mean

Jesus Christ! The vote has happened, it's over. Continually stating that the people who voted Leave are stupid or misinformed is not going to change anything - it didn't work before the referendum and it most certainly will not work now.

Brexit should be judged on its, or lack of, merits you are not going to change peoples' minds by keep telling them that you are smart and they are not. Perhaps if people had spent less time feeling superior the people who voted Leave might be more inclined to listen to them and more open to the prospect of changing their minds.

[Dizzeeyooo]

Jesus Christ! The vote has happened, it's over. Continually stating that the people who voted Leave are stupid or misinformed is not going to change anything - it didn't work before the referendum and it most certainly will not work now.

Brexit should be judged on its, or lack of, merits you are not going to change peoples' minds by keep telling them that you are smart and they are not. Perhaps if people had spent less time feeling superior the people who voted Leave might be more inclined to listen to them and more open to the prospect of changing their minds.

feels like you are turning into dribbles

the average leave or remain voter knew pretty much nothing about the actual workings of the EU when they were voting, that has nothing to do with the average leave or remain voter being stupid - people in the UK have never massively cared about Europe to begin with, and politicians/newspapers here have spent the last 20-30 years blaming the EU for anything we don't like and taking credit for anything coming directly from the EU that we do like.

i'll use myself as an example - I had no idea that the whole "we need to leave the EU so we can control immigration" argument was a complete lie before the referendum, does that mean I was stupid? I can see why people living in areas suffering from a lack of government investment can be lead to blame immigrants/the EU for their problems - we have always had the ability to control/reduce immigration (as many other countries in the EU choose to) but successive UK governments have chosen not to bother because the cost of doing so does not outweigh the economic benefits of having more immigrants in the country, plus they don't ever get blamed because they can just blame the evil EU for forcing immigrants into the UK.

i'll say it again:

we elect MPs to make decisions based on their own ability and knowledge of the issues involved, not to blindly follow the will of people who have virtually no idea about what they are even voting for

[Pann]

I'm not moving goal-posts at all. It's perfectly feasible that Labour would call a second referendum to secure Lib Dem and SNP support, and it's also feasible that Lib Dems and SNP would support a Labour government without a referendum to keep the Conservatives out, and without a centre-left coalition we'd have another GE as no one party would have the >50% seats needed to create a government.

Those outcomes are vastly more realistic than your insistence we'd end up with the same Con-DUP arrangement we have now.

Crobyn ruled out a 2nd referendum prior to the GE; https://www.theguardian.com/politics...-politics-live So Labour should just ignore their manifesto to secure Lib Dem support? Or the Lib Dems and SNP ignore their's to get the Cons out? I would imagine that their voters would feel quite betrayed if any of them abandoned their manifestos to pursue power.

Those outcomes are not more realistic; you are ignoring what people voted for.

- - - Updated - - -

feels like you are turning into dribbles

the average leave or remain voter knew pretty much nothing about the actual workings of the EU when they were voting, that has nothing to do with the average leave or remain voter being stupid - people in the UK have never massively cared about europe to begin with, and politicians/newspapers here have spent the last 20-30 years blaming the EU for anything we don't like and taking credit for anything coming directly from the EU that we do like

i'll say it again:

Really?!

Again you are resorting to telling people they are ignorant instead of informing them.

[Dizzeeyooo]

Again you are resorting to telling people they are ignorant instead of informing them.

people who refuse to acknowledge their own ignorance are often incredibly resistant towards becoming informed, sadly

but this really is becoming almost as productive as discussing facts with dribbles

[Pann]

people who refuse to acknowledge their own ignorance are often incredibly resistant towards becoming informed, sadly

but this really is becoming almost as productive as discussing facts with dribbles

Irony at its finest. Again you have fallen back to the leave voters are stupid and/or misinformed. Of course many of them are but their vote counts for the same as a vote from a really smart person like you. If you want those who are not stupid to come around to your way of thinking then stop treating them as if they are.

[Dhrizzle]

Crobyn ruled out a 2nd referendum prior to the GE; https://www.theguardian.com/politics...-politics-live So Labour should just ignore their manifesto to secure Lib Dem support? Or the Lib Dems and SNP ignore their's to get the Cons out? I would imagine that their voters would feel quite betrayed if any of them abandoned their manifestos to pursue power.

Those outcomes are not more realistic; you are ignoring what people voted for.

That's how coalitions work, parties with similar aims negotiate concessions to deliver what they hope will be the best deal for their voters. As a referendum would either maintain the status quo or change it based on the will of a somewhat better informed electorate it's a pretty easy concession for Labour to make.

[Dizzeeyooo]

Irony at its finest. Again you have fallen back to the leave voters are stupid and/or misinformed

the average leave or remain voter knew pretty much nothing about the actual workings of the EU when they were voting

i'll use myself as an example - I had no idea that the whole "we need to leave the EU so we can control immigration" argument was a complete lie before the referendum, does that mean I was stupid?

it's been fun

[Dhrizzle]

Irony at its finest. Again you have fallen back to the leave voters are stupid and/or misinformed. Of course many of them are but their vote counts for the same as a vote from a really smart person like you. If you want those who are not stupid to come around to your way of thinking then stop treating them as if they are.

You need to be more subtle when you twist people's words. There was a lot of misinformation during the referendum. Many Leave voters were misinformed and may well change their vote now there is a clearer picture of what Brexit may entail. Saying this is not the same as saying Leave voters are stupid no matter how badly you want to build that strawman.