Europe --- In or Out

[ewerk 30543]

15 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

We've all been saying that for months now, but there is a bigger issue at hand here - if all our dreams come true and Labour sweep into power, cancel Brexit, and lead us into the sunlit uplands of a mixed economy - we will have a very pissed off 50% of the country who will feel that their democratic vote has just been rode over roughshod.

 

Corbyn's position up until now had been a healing one - if we go full Remain, as much as I've wanted Labour to do this for months now, what will that mean in practice? They go for straight revoke?

 

I explained this to you literally half an hour ago. Are you the remain CT?

[Rayvin 5217]

Just now, ewerk said:

 

I explained this to you literally half an hour ago. Are you the remain CT?

 

My bad, I barely slept last night and it's apparently showing with short term memory loss.

 

I still think it's risky.

[ewerk 30543]

4 hours ago, Gemmill said:

I know the Supreme Court said "early this week" but how is their ruling actually delivered? Do they just stick it on their website when it's done or is there another convening of the court. 

 

Come on ewerk, find this out for me. 

https://www.supremecourt.uk/news/future-judgments.html

aRe You HAppY NOw?

[ewerk 30543]

So Corbyn has won. Labour are still not a remain party. Absolute madness.

[Rayvin 5217]

I really don't think that becoming a 'Remain' party was going to do us any favours in terms of actually remaining. But I do acknowledge that it makes it harder for Labour to win an outright victory.

[ewerk 30543]

It was a tight vote and Formby refused to take it to a card vote. Sounds very dodgy to me.

[Kevin Carr's Gloves 3887]

1 minute ago, ewerk said:

It was a tight vote and Formby refused to take it to a card vote. Sounds very dodgy to me.

Ukulele playing cunt

[Rayvin 5217]

10 minutes ago, ewerk said:

It was a tight vote and Formby refused to take it to a card vote. Sounds very dodgy to me.

 

Yes I heard that too, and yes it does sound disingenuous.

 

I still think it's the right outcome for anyone wanting to remain though. The public vote, when the time comes, will have a mass movement galvanising people to vote in. It doesn't need Labour to be front and centre of it, it'll be cross party and energised. What we need urgently before that, is to make sure that second vote happens. And Labour fighting over Remainer votes with the Lib Dems does nothing to achieve this compared to leaving themselves as broadly open as possible.

[NJS 4377]

Sensible but fatal is still my view. 

 

[Rayvin 5217]

1 hour ago, NJS said:

Sensible but fatal is still my view. 

 

 

To Labour itself, sure. To the country's national interest it may be exactly what we need.

[Gemmill 44802]

 

Thread pretty much nails it. 

[NJS 4377]

1 minute ago, Rayvin said:

 

To Labour itself, sure. To the country's national interest it may be exactly what we need.

That's what I meant - as I've said somebody has to try to talk to both sides but too many bloody minded remainers will now vote lib dem, not get a second ref and will get 5 years of that corrupt fraud as pm. 

[Gemmill 44802]

 

 

 

[zerosum 234]

 

[Rayvin 5217]

2 hours ago, Gemmill said:

 

Thread pretty much nails it. 

 

I don't know who this guy is and he's entitled to his opinion but i still would appreciate someone telling me how Labour coming out for remain does anything to boost remains chances of getting a majority for a second referendum. It leaves them in exactly the same pool of voters as the Lib Dems.

 

This guy may believe that no one in the country will buy Labour's stance but the alternative has zero net gain potential for remain. This has at least some potential.

 

I'm terms of Labour's electoral chances in general, yes it's harmful. But most of the people getting worked up about this seem to be avid Remainers rather than Labour supporters, and it just doesn't make sense.

 

Unless someone can explain to me how Labour's current position does anything to harm the chances of a pro referendum majority in parliament.

 

Edited September 23, 2019 by Rayvin

[Rayvin 5217]

I'll stress as well that the Daily Mail, in its coverage of the conference, was getting incredibly excited about the idea of Corbyn being forced to back remain. And anything that excites the Mail is bad for humanity.

 

[Renton 21563]

The idea that you can go to Europe, negotiate a deal with the EU, have a referendum on it, and campaign against it, is insanity. There are loads of problems with revoke too, but at least its actionable. Aloong with their bat shit policies, Labour under Corbyn is unelectable. We're fucked as a country. 

[Rayvin 5217]

1 hour ago, Renton said:

The idea that you can go to Europe, negotiate a deal with the EU, have a referendum on it, and campaign against it, is insanity. There are loads of problems with revoke too, but at least its actionable. Aloong with their bat shit policies, Labour under Corbyn is unelectable. We're fucked as a country. 

 

Why is it insanity? Since we already know that it isn't a negotiation in any meaningful sense, it's a process of selecting a package and then making some customisation tweaks so that it works.

 

This country is fucking mental.

[Rayvin 5217]

Also,  were you not coming around to Labour's position the other day?

[Meenzer 15518]

1 minute ago, Rayvin said:

Also,  were you not coming around to Labour's position the other day?

 

Maybe he's decided that not committing to any position is the best way to win an argument.
 

[ewerk 30543]

5 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

 

Why is it insanity? Since we already know that it isn't a negotiation in any meaningful sense, it's a process of selecting a package and then making some customisation tweaks so that it works.

 

This country is fucking mental.

It makes sense. The Brexiters will call it a stitch up but they would say that in any situation unless no deal is on the ballot.

[Rayvin 5217]

The Daily Mail was rubbing its hands with glee for the chance to openly call Labour a Remain party yesterday. Also I suspect the opportunity to make Corbyn look weak.

 

I don't understand this knee jerk hysteria from the media. I mean i know that's a fairly standard position for me but they're off the deep end this time, at least the ones who want to remain. I can see why the right wing press would make a big fuss about this.

 

I suspect there is a large enough chunk of society that is not enthusiastically supporting Leave or Remain, to whom Labour's middle ground position might appeal, for this to be a worthwhile gamble. Any remain voters will go for Labour in their usual seats anyway because we still get a second referendum. All yesterday confirms is that they won't fight an election with the LDs as their primary opponents.

[NJS 4377]

Unfortunately politics isn't about good policies or making sense by and large - it's about emotive reactions to people and ideas. 

 

I think we all agree Corbyn falls short in the "good leader" stakes but it's also a matter of long held attitudes that won't change - things like demanding a leader who worships the queen and is willing to nuke millions still holds sway. 

 

That now includes brexit which is reduced to zealots on both sides and neutrals completely bored with it who want it to end anyway possible. I'm beginning to think Johnson fluking a semblance of May's deal through might not be that bad as I think there's enough room in the political statement to soften it to an acceptable level if Labour did win (I might be wrong on this). 

[Rayvin 5217]

5 minutes ago, NJS said:

Unfortunately politics isn't about good policies or making sense by and large - it's about emotive reactions to people and ideas. 

 

I think we all agree Corbyn falls short in the "good leader" stakes but it's also a matter of long held attitudes that won't change - things like demanding a leader who worships the queen and is willing to nuke millions still holds sway. 

 

That now includes brexit which is reduced to zealots on both sides and neutrals completely bored with it who want it to end anyway possible. I'm beginning to think Johnson fluking a semblance of May's deal through might not be that bad as I think there's enough room in the political statement to soften it to an acceptable level if Labour did win (I might be wrong on this). 

 

Sure, but for all the hand wringing over Labour's position I'm yet to hear anyone tell me why it is actually a bad thing other than emotional hysteria, at least in terms of remaining in the EU. I mean sure, if you want an outright Labour government it's very dubious that the current position will enable that, but does anyone getting worked up about that care very much on this front?

 

And surely any variant of Mays deal kills FOM. I can't support it on that basis alone. Even taking my personal feelings out of it, if we lose FOM then we also lose Scotland. And probably NI.

[NJS 4377]

My understanding was that the transition allowed a negotiation on all elements of a future relationship - as I said I may be wrong. 

 

I think Swinson muddyed the water with the revoke without a vote thing - they still won't answer what they want the other option in a vote to be and what they'd do if  leave won - I think having a reasonable alternative to cover the latter outcome is sensible but again you'd have to explain this well.