Brexit mega thread part 15a - looking forwards

[Talkinpeace]

Just rebooting the most recent thread

At the moment the UKs issues are rather over shadowed by events elsewhere
but maybe that is a good thing.

The German election on Sunday is worth watching
Right wing European politicians pulling out of CPAC speeches because they realise its not a good look
Farage floundering to stay relevant

and the possibility of the return of free movement for our kids if not us

Relations between mainland Europe and the UK remain a worthy topic for discussion

@DuncinToffee

If you read the BBC in full it refers to goods, but not services.

Well done for reading the BBC in full 👏

But, and it's a big but - IT WAS A GENERAL ELECTION - NOT A REFERENDUM.

I'm not sure how I can make this any more clear...

@MaybeNotBob

But, and it's a big but - IT WAS A GENERAL ELECTION - NOT A REFERENDUM.

Had Labour been elected there would have been a referendum with the option to remain.

Likewise, if the Liberal Democrat’s won with a majority there would not have been the need for another referendum as they would have revoked Article 50.

Remember that in December 2018 the EU informed UK that EU would accept a unilateral revoke of Article 50. Also, remember that UK joined the EU in 1973 without a referendum beforehand.

More significantly, subsequent to the Gina Miler case, leaving the EU had to be done by an act of parliament. As per UK law, the government did not have the authority to trigger Article 50 based on the 2016 referendum result.

So, to get enough MPs into parliament who want to rejoin the EU, it’s first necessary for voters to vote for parties that want to rejoin. That did not happen in the 2019 general election.

Move forward to the 2024 general election and the outcome was that there are 538 MPs in parliament from the three Brexit supporting parties; Labour, Conservatives and Reform.

Looks like labour think immigration is what bothers people the most. Take a look at:

https://mol.im/a/14699891

Unfortunately, Labour are falling into the, rather obvious, trap of chasing the right-wing media's line on immigration. The same line that the Reform voters are falling for.

Immigration is a negligible influence on what is happening in this country, but the billionaires don't want the ordinary people to start looking at who actually is causing the problems; therefore they shout "Immigrunts" at the top of their voice, and the interminably stupid lap it up...

Second referendum-supporting and anti-Brexit parties won more votes in 2019 than pro-Brexit ones if you want to argue that votes cast in that election were on nothing but Brexit.

No referendum before joining the EEC? Correct. The UK is a representative democracy and the Tories won with a manifesto commitment to negotiate terms of entry and put them to Parliament, which is what happened.

@hoopyvest

Second referendum-supporting and anti-Brexit parties won more votes in 2019 than pro-Brexit ones if you want to argue that votes cast in that election were on nothing but Brexit.

I was not, but making the point that had the same number of people who voted remain in 2016 (16.1) million voted for the Liberal Democrat’s, Brexit would not have happened. Remember that Gina Miller encouraged tactical voting to thwart Brexit.

Posters like perigrain and May be no bob are the one that think the Conservatives lost in 2024 due to Brexit.

Regard the numbers of votes for second referendum/anti brexit vs pro Brexit, the difference was less than 4% of the total vote. So, applying the remain supporters logic that a 4% difference is not enough to represent a majority, then the difference becomes irrelevant.

Move forward to 2024, the votes for pro-Brexit parties, Conservative, Labour and Reform was 71% of the total votes cast. In terms of seats, the total for the same three parties was 538, which is 82% of Parliament.

Posters like perigrain and May be no bob are the one that think the Conservatives lost in 2024 due to Brexit.

Ooh, trying to tell us how we thought now, are you? A rather clueless response, if I may say so.

@Peregrina

It was you that started a thread which suggested the Conservatives lost the 2024 General Election due to Brexit.

And it's you that assumes that it had nothing to do with it, all while insisting that the 2019 GE was entirely about it.

Hypocrisy of the highest order.

Not to mention stupidity...

It was you that started a thread which suggested the Conservatives lost the 2024 General Election due to Brexit.

What I said was:
Brexit happened, although one time Leavers do not seem to appreciate this.
It's worth noting I think that Brexit was a Tory initiative and the Tory party has just received its worse electoral thrashing since 1832. Could it be entirely unrelated?

Nowhere do I state that this was the only reason. It was one reason for some people. Not for you Globetrotter up in Farage Land. But since you like things to be black and white: you have got your Brexit.
You don't like it? Tough.

@MaybeNotBob

And it's you that assumes that it had nothing to do with it, all while insisting that the 2019 GE was entirely about it.

Wrong again. My point was that the opportunity to cancel Article 50 was presented in the 2019 general election, but not taken.

As for the 2024 general election, it’s correct that the Conservatives lost approx 7 million votes. It’s also correct that both Labour and the Liberal Democrat’s received fewer votes in 2024 compared to 2019. So, if the 7 million votes that the Conservatives lost did not go to Labour or the Liberal Democrat’s, where did they go?

The explanation is easy:

3 million fewer people voted in 2024 than in 2019

4 million voted for Reform

@Peregrina

It's worth noting I think that Brexit was a Tory initiative and the Tory party has just received its worse electoral thrashing since 1832. Could it be entirely unrelated?

If that’s not suggesting the conservatives lost due to Brexit, what is?

My point was that the opportunity to cancel Article 50 was presented in the 2019 general election, but not taken.

Yes. That would mean that it was the only thing people were voting about.

But you seem to be insisting that because people voted about other things, that means that they supported Brexit.

You really are tying yourself up in knots trying to justify your horrifically inconsistent ramblings to yourself...

@MaybeNotBob

You are the one who has stated that voters were not given the opportunity to revoke Brexit or have a second referendum as they were not on the 2019 general election ballot paper.

They were both in the ballot paper. Revoke was the box called Liberal Democrat’s. The second referendum was the box called Labour.

Unfortunately, Labour are falling into the, rather obvious, trap of chasing the right-wing media's line on immigration. The same line that the Reform voters are falling for.

The English will only vote for right wing policies when they are promised by right wing parties. No matter how extreme Labour make themselves, they won't win over those people.

'I was not'?

But you were.

I think we are going to see this supposition tested during the remainder of this Governmnent's term.

I'm making no judgement on whether your sentiment is right. Logically it does follow that if people want that sort of position taken they'll be more likely to vote for someone who's be advocating it for a long time rather than a recent Labour convert (if such Starmer is.) It's fairly easy to find contrary statements and arguements made by Starmer before he became PM, possibly from ealier in his tenure too.

Where you and I differ is that I wouldn't characterise the platform that Starmer is advocating today as "right-wing." Saying somthing is "...wing" is code for extreme and I don't agree that wanting immigration to be controlled better or reduced overall is an extreme position. It's a position that some people with extreme views hold, sure, but that's not the same thing.

Of course what matters will be the imact of what Starmer and Cooper do, not what they say "...and we shall see" to shameless miscontexualise a quote from Arthur Harris

They were both in the ballot paper. Revoke was the box called Liberal Democrat’s. The second referendum was the box called Labour.

Er, no they weren't. There were boxes for candidates from many parties, amongst whom those were policies that they may have wanted.

And, as you insist on saying about 2024, people weren't voting on a single policy.

I'm surprised you can get your knickers on when tying yourself up like this!

@MaybeNotBob

Your posts convinced me that you did not watch the 5 September 2019 episode of BBC question time. The main parties made their position regards Brexit very clear.

Ah, government by Question Time now is it?

It seems AI is a big fan of QT

Maybe watch the leaders special episode of BBC question time on 22 November 2019 All major parties were present.

Conservatives stated their key issue was Brexit with the slogan:

“Get Brexit Done”

Liberal Democrats their key issue was Brexit with the slogan

“Stop Brexit”

and Jo Swinson pledged to cancel Brexit if they won the election with a majority.

Labour’s position was to renegotiate a deal with the EU and have another referendum with option to remain.

SNP wanted to remain in the EU. A bit odd that as if the UK had not left the EU, Scotland would not be entitled to another independence referendum.

The Independent Group wanted another referendum or people’s vote. Odd, wasn’t it people who voted in 2016?

Plaid Cymru wanted another referendum with option to remain as they knew better than the majority of those in Wales who voted leave.

Green party wanted another referendum.

How tedious. Brexit is done. You don't like it.

I think Question Time is a good program to watch. I record it each week as I am usually out of the UK on Thursday.

Not too impressed with Richard Tice (Reform deputy leader) slogan:

Net stupid zero

I am not convinced net zero is a realistic and economically viable, but to stoop to the use of the word stupid is copying what many remain supports have done since 23 June 2016.