Brexit mega thread part 11: is fucktastrophy a word?

[mirages08]

Part 11 of this mega thread

Couldn't see a new one?

Hope you don't mind a newbie starting it!

Personally, I think that the French people, IMO, should be governed by politicians in France, voted for by people duly enfranchised to vote in France.

I'm pretty sure French people are governed by politicians in France, ones that they have elected. Do you think they aren't?

That's a shame, I had much more success in EU elections.

Me too, about half the candidates elected were acceptable to me, including one moderate Tory. The sort of Tory who is no longer acceptable in the current party.

Correct, I haven't.

You're also correct in sentiment that most people vote for a party. Unfortunately, you're wrong in fact. At UK General election people vote for the candidate, a person, not merely the party they represent. You'll know this because when the read out the results, they say for example...

"Keir Starmer, The Labour Party candidate, 36,641... the person is named before the party. Now, that might not matter to lots of people on here, I might even be in a minority of one here, but it does matter to me.

This person, even if I haven't voted for them, is my representative. They are directly, personally, accountable to me. If I like what they do, I'll vote for them next time; if I don't, I'll vote for someone else.

Who wins, and whether I'm successful in having the candidate I chose elected doesn't matter to me one bit. The direct, personal bit, does matter to me.

TBH I get the feeling people are either not reading or being deliberately obtuse. This stuff is really not hard.

Unfortunately, you're wrong in fact.

I am well aware that I am wrong in fact. Thank you for pointing it out. I have been active in politics and have been at a number of Counts, so I do know exactly what happens.

Can you say the same? Have you been to the Count ever?

No, it's really not hard. All I have been able to gather from your posts is EU = bad. You have got your Brexit, so you are happy. You are entitled to your opinion.

But equally we are entitled to ours and are equally entitled to press for the UK to rejoin the EU at some future date.

I live in an ultra safe Tory seat. My vote has no impact in my own constituency. And, just like you can't remove an MEP representing a French area, I can't remind Nadine Dorris

It's almost like countries in the EU have sovereignity........

https://www.thegrocer.co.uk/brexit/why-are-key-british-food-exports-in-such-steep-decline/683478.article

I can't vote to remove an MEP elected in France, a French voter couldn't vote out one elected in the UK.

This is given as a reason for Brexit and I'm not supposed to say the 'S' word? 🤦🏻‍♀️

I mean, I can't vote to remove an MP elected in Uxbridge, and a voter in Uxbridge can't vote to remove one elected in Leicester East. In fact, it's worse than that - voters in Richmond can vote to remove Zac Goldsmith as their MP, and BlowJohnson can tell them "fuck you" and install him for life in the HoL.

voters in Richmond can vote to remove Zac Goldsmith as their MP, and BlowJohnson can tell them "fuck you" and install him for life in the HoL.

Ditto with Nicola Blackwood in Oxford West and Abingdon, although Boris Johnson wasn't the culprit then. I assume it was Theresa May.

But we have been told that we must ignore the House of Lords.

I shouldn't really need to point this out but Uxbridge, Richmond and Leicester, to use your examples are in the same country so the voters who can vote to remove an MP representing a seat you don't personally live in are part of the same national polity. That's the difference between a UK General Election and a European Parliament one.

Fine, though, if all you get from my posts is "EU = bad" you're totally entitled to that view and I've never said that you aren't.

I find, when you're trying to have a discussion, it helps to engage honestly with the other person's POV and ask them questions, but if you'd rather not do that for any reason, again, absolutely your right.

Ok, I think I get it.
You voted Leave because you don't like the fact the candidates name isn't first in EU elections they way it is in UK elections.

I can't argue with that. I might not agree that it is worth rolling the dice on the peace in NI for, or the eye watering cost to us all, or the removal of rights and opportunities for our young people, or all the shit in the sea now, but I can see it is worth it for you.

I knew a farmer who said he voted Leave because he hated cutting his hedgerows and wanted rid of them and stock fencing. He knew he had a better chance of getting this outside of the EU environmental protections. Fair enough. I don't agree with him but he though all the costs were worth it for this chance. I also know somebody who wanted an end to live animal transportation and thought we had a better chance of getting this outside the EU. Again, I don't agree but this was the most important thing for her.

I have to admit I'm still a bit confused about your annoyance that you can't vote out French MEPs, while at the same time thinking you shouldn't be able to vote out French MEPs. You described your thinking upthread as logical, I'm struggling to see the logic in that though.

I think it is deeply hilarious that Brexit voters keep insisting they aren't jingoistic and xenophobic, when their main shtick comes back to "in the same country"

I did wonder:

https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/bbc-asked-to-explain-media-blackout-over-national-rejoin-march-359470/

LouiseCollins28

You saw fit last night to deliver a short lecture on how voting works in this country. I asked you a straight question - have you ever been to a Count? I.e. have you seen first hand what goes on?

I was at the Count where our previous Tory MP Nicola Blackwood was voted out. As mentioned she got bumped up to the Lords and we cannot now vote her out.

You would prefer that we ignored the Lords because you said it was obvious that you were talking about the Commons. It might not have occurred to you that we could make another inference - you want to ignore the Lords because it spoils your narrative about the supposedly unelected EU.

I did wonder:

I wondered about that too. I have been to all the previous Remain marches, but wasn't able to go on this one, although I had thought about trying to go.

Not a dicky bird about it from the BBC. Why?

For anyone who did go - and have been on previous demos - how in your estimation was the turn out this time?

Not a dicky bird about it from the BBC. Why?

Just to be clear, I had a brief search using their own search tool for:

EU
Westminster
Protest
Rejoin

and got nothing more recent that 3 or 4 days.

Previously they have been quite sneaky and had an article that was dated correctly that was their fig leaf if accused of bias. (I know coz I asked).

However this time - and spidering with Google - fuck all. They haven't even bothered this time.

How will they be able to fuck Labour over if they can't mention Brexit ?

Yes I have been to a count. You can make whatever inferences you like but your changing the subject to focus on the Lords when I've very plainly comparing politys and electoral systems is just frustrating to me.

Re "unelected EU" I've been talking about elected people this whole time, MPs and MEPs. My point is about how they are chosen and by whom. Yet again you're accusing me of making an argument I'm not making.

LouiseCollins28

I've been talking about elected people this whole time, MPs and MEPs.

Indeed, but as we point out our Legislature also has the House of Lords. There are rules about what Bills coming up from the Commons they can block, but of those which aren't in that category losing out in the Lords has caused the Government to withdraw some of them.

This list shows Government defeats in the Lords
https://www.ucl.ac.uk/constitution-unit/research-areas/parliament/changing-role-house-lords/government-defeats-house-lords

The Government of course, is not the same as the House of Commons - it was a cause of extreme annoyance to Sir Lindsey Hoyle recently that the Government was giving information about policy to the Press first and not putting it before the House of Commons.

As it has already been pointed out, no one voted for the current PM, not even the small number of Tory party members. But since we don't have a Presidential system, that is perhaps not a strong argument. Sunak might have been wiser to call an election and should he have won, had his own mandate.

My point is about how they are chosen and by whom. Yet again you're accusing me of making an argument I'm not making.

There is nothing in the above statement to say that it's who they are rather than the position they are elected for which concerns you. I could trawl back through the whole thread to find somewhere where you said that, but from memory it's only when you have it pointed out to you that you can't vote for many UK legislators you begin to add caveats that you meant this, or that.

The march was nowhere near as large as the second second referendum one (which was massive), but there were definitely several tens of thousands on that march. I've seen 40,000 estimated on twitter, and that may be about right, if a conservative estimate. It completely dwarfed the other protests.

But then it was much better behaved as well. The Ulez one in particular had the conspiracy theorists acting up.

well if six million signatures can disappear without trace, a measly hundred thousand is a rounding error.

Did you go?
@Peregrina
I went.
Shall we try to meet up for the next one?

I couldn't go this time. I would have liked to have done but had existing commitments.

"There is nothing in the above statement to say that it's who they are rather than the position they are elected for which concerns you."

Corrrect, there isn't anything like that because who they are isn't very important to me and I didn't say it was.

What I wrote was "My point is about how they are chosen and by whom." It's not about who they are, it's not about the position are elected to either, I literally didn't say either of those things. It's about the relationship of the elected lawmaker to the voter in a national election (or the lack thereof)

I want those relationships to be direct and individual, others might not want this. That means voting for a candidate not a party, voting for an individual as my sole representative, not a number of people from a list. This is because those people have 0 individual accountability to the voter, because they were picked, in multi member constituencies, by a party, from a list.

It's quite possible that in future Westminster will adopt the sort of voting system youuappear to want, right now, it hasn't.

This is just circling now, I'm moving on.

Campaign to rejoin EU gathers strength at protest march | The Independent

@LouiseCollins28 may I therefore assume you would opposed the introduction of full PR in the UK, even though it is manifestly more democratic because it is a system where every vote counts? Personally I feel that FPTP sacrifices the concept of voter representation in favour of something as nebulous as having a personal MP. I wonder how many people in the next GE will be voting for a person over a party, given how many will just want a change of government?

If I had a vote, I would not ever vote for a person who is part of a party that does not represent my values. One's MP may be a paragon of human goodness, but in parliament it is likely that they will not vote in a way that represents their values; they will vote as they are told to by their party whips. This is where the personal connection of the vote falls down completely.

Had to google images, voting slip for European Parliament.
@LouiseCollins28
They do have the candidates names on them, in order of priority for each party. Is the issue you have with it that you might really like the third on the list for say the Conservatives, but don't like the two in front of them so don't want your vote to count towards them?