Is Brexit actually going to happen?

[flypanam]

Who's this? If you're going to give politicians nicknames, at least make it so people can tell who you're talking about.

I think it's Boris.

 

[killer b]

I see. Dunno why anyone would care what Johnson does or says anymore tbh, he's blatantly a busted flush.

 

[killer b]

If we were to get to the point, the EU would likely adopt a more flexible negotiating position with Labour. If Labour so wanted.

Any reopening of negotiations with a new UK gov would also be in the light of a reframed EU, one riven by doubt (by migration), and considering its future without Merkel.

A good point actually - a Labour minority government may be forced to offer a second referendum, but they would also want to renegotiate first - so any second referendum would be between a Labour negotiated soft brexit (backed by the Labour leadership) and remain. How would the pro-brexit lot campaign under that scenario? I guess they'd probably sit on their hands.

 

[Supine]

Jesus, it takes a lot to make a bad day these days!

 

[Winot]

Labour has been softening its position on a 2nd ref incrementally. If there were to be a GE it wouldn't surprise me if they offered a 2nd ref in their manifesto. It would be difficult for people to argue that a 2nd ref was undemocratic and against the 'will of the people' if it had electoral legitimacy.

 

[philosophical]

I think your analysis is sound. It’s more or less what I think, as far as can be ascertained. But this last bit is worth reiterating. The assumption from some daft Remainers that Remain would necessarily win a second referendum is baffling. How? Based on what? ‘Because that’s what they’d prefer’ seems to be the strength of it. Where is this surge going to come from, though? The movements from Leave to Remain in all the polling that I’ve seen have been more or less matched by roughly equal movements in the other direction. (Disregarding don’t knows and Didn’t Votes). But psephology aside, what is going to change the minds of Leave voters? Calling them “unforgivable people”. I doubt it. That kind of thing just hardens attitudes and confirms group boundaries. And if you’re in a minority, the last thing you want to do is make it feel harder for people to cross that boundary. And yet that’s all Remain has got - a repeat of the campaign that lost them the last vote plus the added patronising message of: “you were deluded: you’ll come to your senses”. I can see that backfiring all over again.[/QUOTE
One thing remain has got is a question to the leavers about how after leaving they are going to take back control of the land border on the island of Ireland.

 

[philosophical]

Sorry. On phone and buggered up the quoting .

 

[killer b]

Labour has been softening its position on a 2nd ref incrementally. If there were to be a GE it wouldn't surprise me if they offered a 2nd ref in their manifesto. It would be difficult for people to argue that a 2nd ref was undemocratic and against the 'will of the people' if it had electoral legitimacy.

I'm uncertain about many things, but one thing that's totally certain to me is that Labour under Corbyn will not go into any early election promising a second referendum. They will be offering a renegotiated soft Brexit.

 

[The Fornicator]

Labour has been softening its position on a 2nd ref incrementally. If there were to be a GE it wouldn't surprise me if they offered a 2nd ref in their manifesto. It would be difficult for people to argue that a 2nd ref was undemocratic and against the 'will of the people' if it had electoral legitimacy.

Labour has softened, and that might have begun after Corbyn went to Brussels.

We shoudn't forget the EU is itself in now in pretty fundamental flux. It's likely the new German leader (still some distance off but something to be taken into account now) and Labour will have more in common.

 

[SpackleFrog]

"It will be a bit like the USSR"

The CPB line about a 'British Road to Socialism' doesn't look so daft now does it?

 

[Yossarian]

If Corbyn promises a second referendum he'll probably lose the votes of most of the Labour Brexit voters - "Vote for me and I'll see about overturning your earlier vote" isn't much of a platform - and he'll likely discover that most Tory Remainers would sooner leave the EU than have him as PM.

 

[Raheem]

I think your analysis is sound. It’s more or less what I think, as far as can be ascertained. But this last bit is worth reiterating. The assumption from some daft Remainers that Remain would necessarily win a second referendum is baffling. How? Based on what? ‘Because that’s what they’d prefer’ seems to be the strength of it. Where is this surge going to come from, though? The movements from Leave to Remain in all the polling that I’ve seen have been more or less matched by roughly equal movements in the other direction. (Disregarding don’t knows and Didn’t Votes).

I'm not sure there's an assumption that remain would win, at least from anyone who has a vague clue. It's more that there are limited options ahead. If you don't want May's deal, don't want no deal and don't believe a renegotiation is possible, then it has to be either a referendum or a stitch-up.

That said, you need to take into account that a referendum would not be leave/remain. If it is remain versus the deal, then polling since the deal was reached does show a decent and consistent lead for remain. Not that it's a guarantee.

 

[killer b]

If Corbyn promises a second referendum he'll probably lose the votes of most of the Labour Brexit voters - "Vote for me and I'll see about overturning your earlier vote" isn't much of a platform - and he'll likely discover that most Tory Remainers would sooner leave the EU than have him as PM.

Yeah, the promise of a second referendum would just pile up votes in safe city seats and lose them a load of towns. It would be a disastrous policy.

 

[Pickman's model]

The CPB line about a 'British Road to Socialism' doesn't look so daft now does it?

british roads for british lefties

 

[T & P]

 

[Wilf]

I think there's a number of barriers to this chain of events which - IMO - make it an improbable one.

May's deal will almost certainly lose on first going to parliament: however, I don't think she'll resign - losing at this point is pretty much built into her plans.

There will probably be a confidence vote in the house - MPs will most likely vote down party lines, so whether it passes or not is down to the DUP: and while they've made noises about voting against the government in a confidence vote, I think the very tight majorities of a few key DUP MPs suggests they wouldn't be very keen on an early election. So it probably won't pass.

If it does, then there's 14 days for a new government to be formed before an election can be called - the Tories will likely move fast to replace May with a leader who can command the support of the DUP. There are other possible things that could happen in these 14 days too - some sort of Labour minority government isn't totally out of the question, but it's hard to imagine how they'll persuade enough Tory or DUP MPs to vote for them or sit on their hands - maybe if at this point they promised a second referendum some of the tory remain ultras might commit hari-kiri. I think the most likely thing is a new Tory leader and a new - still unstable - Tory government though.

If there is a general election, Labour will not go into it promising a second referendum, but instead the softest possible brexit. They are unlikely to win a majority, but are likely to be able to form a minority or coalition government (most likely minority w/ confidence & supply) so this is the point at which a second referendum really becomes possible: it's the price of the support of the minor parties.

So then if there's a second referendum... I can't see on current polling any likelihood of a clear win for remain, and I can't see the kind of transformative campaign coming from the remain camp to make that happen.

Am I missing anything?

Even after yesterday - maybe even especially after yesterday (with the grieve thing) - there may still be routes through to a revote and something getting through that splits the tory party but with Labour support. Which would in turn need the EU to open up negotiations again, at least to the point where something different could be put to parliament.

With regard to a gen election I still don't see that as likely, not just or even predominantly because the ftpa, just the pure self interest of tory mps. But if there was and Labour are in a position to form a government, that would inevitably be with snp support. Wouldn't be a coalition, probably just confidence and supply, though there would have to be an agreement between them over brexit (and a second indie ref as well). Labour get pulled out of shape by this just as much as the tories were by the dup (unless of course labour wanted to use it as cover to remain).

I'm not predicting, just exploring the logics that flow from the madness created by May's negotiations and the tory party. There will be genuine consequences for a lot of people in whatever becomes the outcome, but for now it's most entertaining seeing our bosses and rulers lost at sea.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

A good point actually - a Labour minority government may be forced to offer a second referendum, but they would also want to renegotiate first - so any second referendum would be between a Labour negotiated soft brexit (backed by the Labour leadership) and remain. How would the pro-brexit lot campaign under that scenario? I guess they'd probably sit on their hands.

There's no way to do that without somehow convincing others that you think whatever soft brexit you get is better than remain. If you actually think remain is better than any soft brexit deal, then how do you campaign for a soft brexit in a new referendum where 'no brexit' is also on the ballot? That's the mess at the moment - 'we've negotiated this deal, but we recommend you reject it because not leaving is in our opinion better': that will be the real position of many on the Labour side. At the moment, May can dismiss the merits of remain by saying that it is not an option. Labour wouldn't have that luxury in a second ref on their watch.

 

[killer b]

No way to do what?

 

[Wilf]

Yeah, the promise of a second referendum would just pile up votes in safe city seats and lose them a load of towns. It would be a disastrous policy.

In some ways, that's been labour's problem for the last 2 years and why they've managed to say little of any interest other than '6 tests'. The Tories have been screwed by brexit as they've been in the driving seat, but Labour are more compromised by it.

I think it was a few pages back, people were saying Labour still remain trapped in a neo-liberal vision of what life might be like both inside and outside the EU. If they'd had a different vision - a Lexit even - they might have found their way to a political strategy and message that overcame the divide your mention.

 

[killer b]

I think it was a few pages back, people were saying Labour still remain trapped in a neo-liberal vision of what life might be like both inside and outside the EU. If they'd had a different vision - a Lexit even - they might have found their way to a political strategy and message that overcame the divide your mention.

I don't think so - Lexit is an electoral dead end. Maybe if it had been policy for a decade or so...

 

[Wilf]

I don't think so - Lexit is an electoral dead end. Maybe if it had been policy for a decade or so...

Don't mean Lexit as a 'thing', just shorthand for making a positive out of a social democratic vision of life outside the EU. The '6 test mantra' is so far away from being a political position. It's not active statement of anything and it doesn't provide a way of bringing those cities and small towns together.

Edit: even now I'd be surprised if many people have any sense of what brexit would be like in labour's hands.

 

[Florkleshnort]

Maybe now would be a good time to start thinking about joining the Euro.

 

[danny la rouge]

That said, you need to take into account that a referendum would not be leave/remain. If it is remain versus the deal, then polling since the deal was reached does show a decent and consistent lead for remain. Not that it's a guarantee.

I'll preface this by saying I don't know what sequence of events will play out. I can make assumptions, like anyone else, and I can interrogate the assumptions of others. But I accept that I may be wrong.

That said, it's true that we don't know what would be on the ballot paper of this hypothetical referendum. But it's these very steps further into the hypothetical that makes the polling less reliable. If there's a referendum and if these are the questions, how might you answer them? If, if, might. It could be that today, people are answering that to say "the deal doesn't sound very good". Just as in the referendum itself people were probably answering a different set of questions to the precise one actually posed, people may well be taking that question to mean "do you like the deal?". But if that turns into a choice between a brexit and no brexit in the polling booth, rather than in a survey, then I'm not convinced we have the evidence to say the majority will opt for no brexit.

I took part in a poll this morning for YouGov. The question asked was three way - deal, no deal, or remain, and respondents were asked to rank the choices. Hypothetical options in a hypothetical referendum.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

If you don't want May's deal, don't want no deal and don't believe a renegotiation is possible, then it has to be either a referendum or a stitch-up.

I think a stitch up of some sort is about the only certain outcome in any of this

 

[killer b]

Don't mean Lexit as a 'thing', just shorthand for making a positive out of a social democratic vision of life outside the EU. The '6 test mantra' is so far away from being a political position. It's not active statement of anything and it doesn't provide a way of bringing those cities and small towns together.

Yeah, that's what I meant too: I don't think that would have been something possible to do, with the current makeup of Labour support. The 6 tests position was the only way of keeping a massive amount of the membership and voter base onboard. The centrality of the EU to Labour politics isn't something that could have been undone in two years, even with a positive vision for life outside the EU.

 

[danny la rouge]

One thing remain has got is a question to the leavers about how after leaving they are going to take back control of the land border on the island of Ireland.

While that is of course an issue that exercises people near that border and (to a degree) those responsible for the negotiations, I think you're overestimating it as a killer point on the path to the ballot box.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

No way to do what?

Hold a second referendum in which you endorse your own deal. How would that work? And if you didn't endorse your own deal, the brexit camp would be all over you saying that you deliberately produced a shit deal. I don't see any way around that, given that Labour backed remain originally and any soft brexit deal is going to be wide open to attack as something that is brexit in name only and is less preferable than remain even to someone who wants brexit to happen.

So in a hypothetical situation where a new labour govt negotiated a new deal and put it to a referendum with the other option being 'remain', I don't see how they wouldn't be stuffed whether they recommended their deal or recommended remain. In that sense, I do see dlr's point about a 2nd ref not having remain as an option, but I think that's impossible now - any 2nd ref will have remain as an option. Labour would need to come out and say that they were wrong to support the first ref and wrong to support triggering A50. That's a lot of humble pie for a politician, and they'd get hammered for doing that as well. They'll get hammered whatever they do.

 

[danny la rouge]

Don't mean Lexit as a 'thing', just shorthand for making a positive out of a social democratic vision of life outside the EU. The '6 test mantra' is so far away from being a political position. It's not active statement of anything and it doesn't provide a way of bringing those cities and small towns together.

Edit: even now I'd be surprised if many people have any sense of what brexit would be like in labour's hands.

I was one of those saying there's been no vision from the formal labour movement about what a social democratic life outside the EU might be like. I wasn't saying it out of any expectation that this vision could in reality have arisen from either the Labour Party or the unions, though. More out of frustration as to how things might have been different. If the formal labour movement had been different. Which it isn't.

 

[killer b]

Yeah, that's what I meant too: I don't think that would have been something possible to do, with the current makeup of Labour support. The 6 tests position was the only way of keeping a massive amount of the membership and voter base onboard. The centrality of the EU to Labour politics isn't something that could have been undone in two years, even with a positive vision for life outside the EU.

This article is an instructive read about Labour and the EU - (I've posted it before, but it's worth another look). Labour has no internal infrastructure for making a decent lexit argument. It's a minority crank position in the party, and two years wouldn't have changed that. Helen Thompson | Returning to Democracy: The British Left and the Constitutional Temptation of the European Union - Judicial Power Project

 

[two sheds]

I think it's been a mistake for Labour to just keep talking about "6 tests" without summarizing what they mean. It's a bit abstract - better would have been to add a couple of sentences each time explaining that it meant keeping environmental and worker protections (which aren't even explicitly mentioned), maintaining strong security contacts with the EU, etc, etc.