GE is on! Remainers how will you vote?

[WarwickLife]

Just that really! The General Election is on, either 11th Dec or a few days before but it's going to happen now that Labour have agreed. Tactical voting websites are being prepared as we speak.

If you are a remainer, who will you vote for?

(And if any leavers lurk here, will you vote for Tories or Brexit party?)

If you voted remain and have comprehended the fact that if the vote had been binding it would have had to be re re run why on EARTH would you "respect" the result?

The referendum campaign had its issues - all campaigns do - but broadly speaking it was a fair and open campaign, and plenty long enough for people to inform themselves. Both sides had largely equal access to the media and largely spent similar sums on the campaign. . The irregularities weren’t significant enough to invalidate the result. Moreover there was no voter intimidation or vote rigging.

I voted Remain yet I accept the result... The key difference between most Tory remainer MPs and other remainer MPs is that the Tory ones have, by and large, accepted the result... They’re the democrats! That’s why I’m currently leaning Tory (though I have to say I’m very conflicted at the moment and am undecided).

It may not have been legally binding, but to fail to deliver on the result when the Government had pledged categorically to do so would be a huge breach of trust, of the same order of magnitude as the LDs when they ditched free education in 2010.

Im.a remainer. Will vote labour

Both sides had largely equal access to the media and largely spent similar sums on the campaign.

Actually, arguably Remain has a big financial advantage from the Government’s leaflet sent to all households that was outside campaign spending limits.

But is it a breach of trust when the Government has spent three and a half years trying to implement a result which has mutually contradictory components, e.g. we deliver Brexit but break an international Peace Treaty in the process? A more honest answer would be to say that it can't be done. A GE is probably one way out now - so e.g. Johnson gets back in and we can expect the NHS to be on the table when it comes to a Trade Deal with the USA, and this will be what people have voted for.

The irregularities weren’t significant enough to invalidate the result.

@Oakenbeach, actually you're totally wrong. The reason the irregularities didn't invalidate the result is because it wasn't a binding referendum. Had it been legally binding other than advisory, the results absolutely wouldn't have stood.

Also, it’s ironic that Remainer bids to thwart Brexit are likely to lead to a particularly hard Brexit!

If Gina Miller hadn’t pressed her case, we’d have left long ago with May’s deal! If Labour MPs had voted for May’s deal, ditto. Even if MPs agreed to get behind BJs deal, more focus would
be on our future relationship with Europe in the GE rather than it being dominated by this “get it done” mentality.

But the same can be said of the ERG Oakenbeach - if they had voted for May's deal we would have left at the end of March. Perhaps Johnson would like to reflect upon that, since he was one voting against her deal.

Oakenbeach how can you say the referendum was fair when in the news this week it has been reported that the met police have referred vote leave criminal investigation to the CPS and that the gov are sitting on a report re Russian interference into the referendum and last GE?

Had it been legally binding other than advisory, the results absolutely wouldn't have stood.

I don’t think we know that. The presence of irregularities doesn’t automatically void a result. If that were the case, almost no elections would be valid as all contain some form of irregularity, even if the irregularity is negligible.

Rather, the court would have to decide whether the irregularity was sufficient to have (on the balance of probability) changed the result. Given that the additional £600k spent is less than 2 pence per voter, in the context of the whole campaign, I think it would be a very tough one to argue, especially as the Government spend £9m on its own information outwith the campaign.

But the same can be said of the ERG Oakenbeach - if they had voted for May's deal we would have left at the end of March. Perhaps Johnson would like to reflect upon that, since he was one voting against her deal.

But that’s the point! The ERG are getting the deal they want. Remainers have facilitated this by overplaying their hand.

Why are you trying to minimise the illegality of the leave campaign? It's bizarre behaviour, quite frankly.

Oakenbeach how can you say the referendum was fair when in the news this week it has been reported that the met police have referred vote leave criminal investigation to the CPS and that the gov are sitting on a report re Russian interference into the referendum and last GE?

I’m not saying there weren’t issues and irregularities... It’s whether of such magnitude that we should disregard the result. Arguably the Government’s information campaign outside the campaign was a far bigger factor.

I voted Remain - I wasn’t happy with the result,
but that doesn’t mean I try and find every way I can of undermining it. The arguments for disregarding the referendum result are inherently partisan.

Why are you trying to minimise the illegality of the leave campaign? It's bizarre behaviour, quite frankly.

I’m not. I want those who break electoral law to face justice. I just don’t believe the breaches were so egregious that, on their own, they caused 800,000 to vote Leave when they would otherwise have voted Remain. Of course, there’s no way of knowing for absolute certain, but the damage to our democracy of setting aside a result in which people were voting in good faith would be enormous.

almost no elections would be valid as all contain some form of irregularity, even if the irregularity is negligible.

That is a strong statement to make, and one which you need to back up. There is very little electoral fraud in this country, despite what Johnson and the ERG would have you believe. I think there were 8 cases of 'personation' investigated at the last election and one prosectution. However a Tory Agent was prosecuted, which might have been the previous election. But considering the elections are nationwide, that isn't very many.

The ERG are getting the deal they want. Remainers have facilitated this by overplaying their hand.

This assumes that Johnson wins - he is not forced to, it's something of a gamble always. Sometimes you can tell which way the electoral tide is going, as with Blair in 1997 but at other times, it is quite difficult to predict.

The arguments for disregarding the referendum result are inherently partisan.
I don't agree. If people genuinely believe that implementing a Referendum result is inherently damaging, (in whichever form of Brexit they decide to implement), then I feel a duty to protest against it. This is a democratic right. The Swiss, who do know about how to conduct Referendums, have had occasions when their Parliament has overruled the result, saying that it can't be done without damaging the country and hence it won't happen.

Irregularity does not equal illegality. If it's illegal it's a whole order of magnitude greater and IMO likely to have influenced the result. If there's no sanction attached, what's the point of the law?

But there’s no damage to democracy in blindly accepting a vote in which corruption has been proven?

If, as you admit, we don’t know how much affect it had, you can’t say for certain it didn’t affect the result.

A little bit of corruption in a democracy vote is ok? As if that doesn’t put a bomb under the whole thing!

Referendums have been used historically by oppressive regimes to give a veneer of democracy precisely because they are so easy to manipulate.

To claim that ‘setting aside the result’ would in affect democracy - when unsecured referendums (as opposed to the tightly regulated ones in Ireland and Switzerland) undermine democracy of themselves, and the damage to our democracy by events since the vote has been incalculable - is at naive slash disingenuous.

But that’s the point! The ERG are getting the deal they want. Remainers have facilitated this by overplaying their hand.

What utter nonsense, this is political battle for the future of the country not a game of bridge.

If May’s deal had passed we would have ended up in an almost the same circumstances as we are now. The WA was set up so that an ERGer could succeed her as leader, agree in time with the EU no deal could be reached and dump NI in the backstop.

If anything, Remain has consistently underplayed its hand, underpinned by fear and muddle and turn-coating.

It’s the turncoat pusillanimous Remainers who will be judged most harshly by history. No-one expects anything of Leavers.

there are none so blind as those who will not see
That should be put on the side of a bus for all Tory voters to read. However, there are none so blind.........

That should be put on the side of a bus for all Tory voters to read. However, there are none so blind.........

Absolutely. I know one elderly Tory lady who in normal circumstances would be appalled if a lying slob like Johnson was even an MP never mind PM, especially when the Party now has no room for Grieve and Philip Hammond, but not a peep from her.

Oakenbeach here are some of your "issues and irregularities". These are all outright lies told during the Leave campaign:

"The Turks are going to join the EU and flood our shores..." The Turks would have had to meet the entry criteria. They can't. In any case, we would have had a veto.
"We will give the NHS huge amounts of money." We all know what's happened there. Immediately afterwards we were told the slogan only said could fund the NHS, not would.
"The UK is being exploited by "Health tourists" - turns out British citizens in the EU take out more than we give.
"We have no control of our borders." Except we do.
"There will continue to be free trade and access to the single market” – Boris Johnson, the Telegraph, 26 June 2016.
"After we vote Leave, we would immediately be able to start negotiating new trade deals with emerging economies and the world’s biggest economies" Vote Leave statement 2 weeks before referendum.
"Absolutely nobody is talking about threatening our place in the single market,” Daniel Hannan, Brexiteer MEP, before the referendum. Blatant lie.
"We can't stop the European Army". A whopper of a lie - still in currency...
"Auditors refuse to sign off EU account" - Another lie. (See also references to 'gravy train' etc...)
"Irish border will be unaffected by Brexit" - Theresa Villiers. Guess what? That was another lie.
"When we joined the EEC, we thought we were only joining a free trade zone." Even the Daily Mail - back in 1975 - referred explicitly to the goal of political union (along with many others).
"UK is regularly outvoted in the EU" utter nonsense

So, Oakenbeach, why do you think the result should be 'respected' given what we know now and the FACT that 3.5 years on, not a single Leave MP has managed to articulate a single provable benefit to leaving?

almost no elections would be valid as all contain some form of irregularity, even if the irregularity is negligible.

That is a strong statement to make, and one which you need to back up.
It probably won't surprise you, Peregrina, that Leave-leaning social media is already circulating stories about students voting twice. This is how it goes: They're entitled to register twice, but they're actually intending to vote twice, because I read a story that had ONE student saying this was what they'd do... And when they illegally vote twice, they will be voting for Labour, LD or Greens because their parents have brainwashed them...

That is a strong statement to make, and one which you need to back up. There is very little electoral fraud in this country, despite what Johnson and the ERG would have you believe. I think there were 8 cases of 'personation' investigated at the last election and one prosectution. However a Tory Agent was prosecuted, which might have been the previous election. But considering the elections are nationwide, that isn't very many.

But that’s my point.... the last GE wasn’t invalidated simply because fraud occurred, as the fraud clearly didn’t get impact onto the overall result!

Oakenbeach
Please read page 28 of the official report into misconduct during the Brexit Referendum
www.electoralcommission.org.uk/sites/default/files/pdf_file/Report-on-Investigation-Leave.EU.pdf
Any one of those would have cause the vote to be re-run had it been a normal election
(see Lutfur Rahman if you do not believe that)

@twofingerstoEverything

All sides in elections make claims the other side will challenge. All sides will spin things meet their narrative. The Leave supporters have equally stated that Remain made erroneous claims,
most notably that we’d suffer an economic crash and need an emergency budget to deal with fall out of we voted Leave.

Remain had ample opportunity to challenge Leave in the campaign and they did so! Even if they persuaded me, they didn’t persuade the majority. That’s democracy!

As for Leaver not providing you, a Remainer, with arguments you believe to be convincing in the period since the referendum, how can that possibly be a good enough reason not to respect the referendum result if we do live in a democracy?

It seems that many Remainers are only democrats when it suits them.