Is Brexit actually going to happen?

[CRI]

Anyway May's announcement today won't be good news to those who want a hard brexit. Should her deal get voted now (which I'm not sure it will) then an extension looks by far and away the most likely scenario. Just more blackmail this time against the ERG.

I'm not really sure what the point of extension is if May is still in charge. She's deliberately the run the clock down for political expediency and given she only has one gear there is little reason to believe she wouldn't do exactly the same again.

There is no point to an extension, and no guarantee the EU27 will agree to it. If they say "no" then it helps throw more blame on the EU for the pile of shit the country is swan diving into.

The only action the UK can take without agreement of the other EU Countries is to revoke Article 50 - and any politician, of any stripe, who's serious about avoiding said pile of shit should be pushing for revocation immediately.

Yes, after that, do all the awareness raising, campaigning, cleaning up the electoral system, expose the corruption, hold a referendum, come up with some credible plan for UK out of the EU, take dancing lessons, whatever. Article 50 can be invoked again in future if there is still genuine widespread appetite for suicide leaving the EU.

Even so, the companies that have fucked off, the investments that pulled out, the EU27 residents that left before they were pushed out, any sense of credibility of the UK as a nation, the normalcy of xenophobia, all that shit, will still be with us - the legacy of pompous fuckwit politicians willing to drag the country down the shitter to keep their parties together. But still better than the alternative.

 

[Teaboy]

Seriously? Can't compare the two. LibDems fucked up by propping up the Tories so regardless of what they offer, plenty wouldn't have nor ever will touch them. But you carry on believing if it helps.

So are you suggesting that Brexit is not the only thing that mattered at the election?

The Lib Dems specifically stood on the ticket you have suggested Labour would have walked it had they did the same. Can you not see the problem here?

 

[Wilf]

Do you have links to any credible research that suggests Labour would have won the election if they'd run on the policies the tories wanted them to? I'd love to read it if so.

I'm not sure whether we've even reached the point now where Labour pushing a remain line wins more seats than it loses - it probably hasn't. However 2017 would have been just about the worst possible point to go with remain/2nd ref.

 

[Chz]

I'm not sure whether we've even reached the point now where Labour pushing a remain line wins more seats than it loses - it probably hasn't. However 2017 would have been just about the worst possible point to go with remain/2nd ref.

Pushing a referendum line is not the same as pushing a remain line. Or are we now conceding that Remain will win in that case?

I'm Remain through and through, but even I know pushing it in the 2017 election was suicide. I mean, the sane thing would've been to say "We'll get the best deal we can and put it to a public vote", but that doesn't mean it was a good idea, in terms of getting votes.

 

[Wilf]

There is no point to an extension, and no guarantee the EU27 will agree to it. If they say "no" then it helps throw more blame on the EU for the pile of shit the country is swan diving into.

The only action the UK can take without agreement of the other EU Countries is to revoke Article 50 - and any politician, of any stripe, who's serious about avoiding said pile of shit should be pushing for revocation immediately.

Yes, after that, do all the awareness raising, campaigning, cleaning up the electoral system, expose the corruption, hold a referendum, come up with some credible plan for UK out of the EU, take dancing lessons, whatever. Article 50 can be invoked again in future if there is still genuine widespread appetite for suicide leaving the EU.

Even so, the companies that have fucked off, the investments that pulled out, the EU27 residents that left before they were pushed out, any sense of credibility of the UK as a nation, the normalcy of xenophobia, all that shit, will still be with us - the legacy of pompous fuckwit politicians willing to drag the country down the shitter to keep their parties together. But still better than the alternative.

The underlying logic of the underlined bit is 'voters don't understand stuff, so if we ever let them have another go at it they have to be 'educated' first.

 

[butchersapron]

A second referendum line from Labour at any point after the original referendum would have been an implicit remain line. No one world have bought it as any other suggestion

 

[killer b]

I'm not sure whether we've even reached the point now where Labour pushing a remain line wins more seats than it loses - it probably hasn't. However 2017 would have been just about the worst possible point to go with remain/2nd ref.

I think their constructive ambiguity has more or less run out of road now. But May explicitly wanted to make the 2017 election about brexit, and it was only by not allowing her to do this that Labour managed to make the gains they did. They would have been destroyed.

 

[Wilf]

Pushing a referendum line is not the same as pushing a remain line. Or are we now conceding that Remain will win in that case?

I'm Remain through and through, but even I know pushing it in the 2017 election was suicide. I mean, the sane thing would've been to say "We'll get the best deal we can and put it to a public vote", but that doesn't mean it was a good idea, in terms of getting votes.

Part of the reason we are where we are is that silly cunt Cameron not building stage 2 in. And with that not built in, at some point over the last 2 years, May should have had an adult conversation with Corbyn about the this endgame. Not sure she'd have got an adult answer back and all would still have been politics. However, if you look at Brexit purely as a process/timeline, it's hard to think of any bigger fuck up.

 

[CRI]

The underlying logic of the underlined bit is 'voters don't understand stuff, so if we ever let them have another go at it they have to be 'educated' first.

*sigh*

 

[mojo pixy]

Did you happen to do the OU module Liberation and reconstruction: France and Italy? Pretty sure that's where i first saw it - in the prepared course materials.

It wasn't - it was a BA in French I took half a lifetime ago, one of the modules was 20th century French history. I chose it because I'd already studied WW2 and Vichy France at A Level. I thought I'd have an easy job because half the module's contents were already in my head

 

[killer b]

*sigh*

Do you have links to any credible research that suggests Labour would have won the election if they'd run on the policies the tories wanted them to? I'd love to read it if so.

 

[killer b]

I'd be happy with non-credible research too tbf, I need cheering up.

 

[rekil]

Some eejit on twitter is my final answer chris.

 

[Wilf]

*sigh*

Well, how do you explain the following, particularly the underlined bit. Wasn't the opportunity to do that before people voted? And after a couple of years of 'awareness raising', why hasn't there been a significant long term shift in the polls on Brexit? All this smacks of 'the people can't understand this stuff, so we need another go at explaining it to them'.

Yes, after that, do all the awareness raising, campaigning, cleaning up the electoral system, expose the corruption, hold a referendum, come up with some credible plan for UK out of the EU, take dancing lessons, whatever. Article 50 can be invoked again in future if there is still genuine widespread appetite for suicide leaving the EU.

 

[Wilf]

Some eejit on twitter is my final answer chris.

'If you'd said A, Leave the European Union, you'd be going home with nothing... but I don't want to give you that...'

 

[CRI]

So are you suggesting that Brexit is not the only thing that mattered at the election?

The Lib Dems specifically stood on the ticket you have suggested Labour would have walked it had they did the same. Can you not see the problem here?

May called the bloody thing in hopes of consolidating Tory support for her as leader and "her" Brexit, so yes, I would say it was the most important issue for the election.

And on that issue, there was little discernible message between the Tories and Labour. Neither drew attention to emerging evidence of corruption in the original 2016 referendum or of the negative impact of leaving the EU. Labour blew about that they could make a better fist of a "deal" than the Tories, but with little substance to show they wouldn't balls it up just as badly. Neither offered a second "clean and clear" referendum or just calling the whole shitshow off.

So, if you went into the polls and wanted to say "no Brexit," you were shit out of luck. I know both main parties tried to pretend they didn't exist, but more than 48% of people who voted in the referendum wanted to stay in the EU. And, there were plenty who later realised they'd been conned and had buyers regret. Neither of the two main Westminster parties give two fucks about them even now. Lib Dems and Greens had no chance. The SNP and Plaid Cymru have rallied more people since then not because they are especially nationalist, but because independence is now a better option than suicide.

Brexit was never a left / right issue, which is why a General election didn't make things clearer in 2017, nor would it now. That's why there are defectors from both main parties, and recent polls showing new support for them.

 

[CRI]

Well, how do you explain the following, particularly the underlined bit. Wasn't the opportunity to do that before people voted? And after a couple of years of 'awareness raising', why hasn't there been a significant long term shift in the polls on Brexit? All this smacks of 'the people can't understand this stuff, so we need another go at explaining it to them'.

So you are happy with the success of Cambridge Analytica, Aron Banks, Steve Bannon and co.'s microtargeting misinformation strategy then? Okay, fine.

 

[killer b]

Credible, non-credible, I don't mind. Just something other than 'I reckon'.

You're usually so keen to post up bollocks you find on the internet too.

 

[Combustible]

So, if you went into the polls and wanted to say "no Brexit," you were shit out of luck. I know both main parties tried to pretend they didn't exist, but more than 48% of people who voted in the referendum wanted to stay in the EU.

And by this logic, who would the 52% who voted leave have voted for?

 

[Pickman's model]

So you are happy with the success of Cambridge Analytica, Aron Banks, Steve Bannon and co.'s microtargeting misinformation strategy then? Okay, fine.

doesn't really answer the question, 'how do you explain the following' does it?

 

[NoXion]

Credible, non-credible, I don't mind. Just something other than 'I reckon'.

You're usually so keen to post up bollocks you find on the internet too.

She probably has you on ignore.

 

[Pickman's model]

She probably has you on ignore.

some guys have all the luck

 

[killer b]

As if you'd mute this great content.

 

[NoXion]

Personalised echo chambers - not just for Twitter and Facebook!

 

[SpineyNorman]

So are you suggesting that Brexit is not the only thing that mattered at the election?

The Lib Dems specifically stood on the ticket you have suggested Labour would have walked it had they did the same. Can you not see the problem here?

Of course not. And that's a perfect illustration of how remain lost on the initial referendum.

Hilary Clinton bubble thinking transferred onto British politics.

 

[BobDavis]

Labour probably did better than most thought they would at the last election by doing anything except brexit.

 

[Wilf]

So you are happy with the success of Cambridge Analytica, Aron Banks, Steve Bannon and co.'s microtargeting misinformation strategy then? Okay, fine.

So... you are aware that billionaires have used the media in previous elections? Have you factored in the remain supporting media? Oh and what's the threshold you have to reach to overturn basic democratic theory?

 

[bemused]

Labour probably did better than most thought they would at the last election by doing anything except brexit.

If Labour had a different leader I think they'd cream the Tories at the moment. Even with the same policies.

Oh .. and if they booted David Lamy out.

 

[Teaboy]

If Labour had a different leader I think they'd cream the Tories at the moment. Even with the same policies.

At what and how?

 

[Pickman's model]

At what and how?

At the polls