Brexit the economy and house prices part 7: Brexit Harder

Herzlos

SpiderLegs wrote: »

I’m not sure where you’ve been for the last three years but you must have missed the continual messages that brexit affects just about all areas. Economy, immigration, legal, education, health, defence ...etc

A GE is the perfect vehicle for addressing future policy across those areas. My god the number times people have said how we shouldn’t have put a question as complex as brexit into a binary referendum, yet all of a sudden the same thing is the de rigeur answer to everything.

How on earth we could have a referendum and a GE together with potentially conflicting answers I don’t know...

Brexit touches everything, sure, but people will vote in a GE for many reasons so it's hard to determine what that means for Brexit. A referendum on Brexit would remove all of the other stuff (like people who'd never vote for Corbyn whatever his stance on Brexit), and is the only way we can get a 'clear' message. Hopefully if we did that we'd see at least 53% in one direction (and by this point a lot of us don't care which one as long as it gives us enough to get on with something).


Can you infer anything about Brexit from the 2017 GE, beyond people not being so keen on the Tory plan?



By all means have a referendum to determine what kind of brexit we want, and a GE to determine who we want to enact it.

Herzlos

ukcarper wrote: »

I'm not sure the trend is obvious, I think it's pretty clear the country is still spit down the middle.

The trend looks obvious - people seem less keen to do a brexit, which is why Farage and the Brexiteers are so against asking them.


We're still very much split down the middle, but as long as we get something which is always above 50 +/-2 % then we'll at least have some vague majority for something. If the referendum is an STV on options, we may even have a majority for a specific kind of brexit and can just crack on with it.

Thrugelmir

mayonnaise wrote: »

I'm going to stick my head out and predict the brexit party is not going to do as well in today's election as some recent polling suggests.

Mayo's prediction:

brexit party - 28%
libdem - 19%
labour - 17%
tories - 13%
greens - 11%

change uk - 4%
ukip - 3%
other - the rest

Come on...put in your predictions and Monday we can have a natter about how wrong or right we all were.

brexit party - 31%
libdem - 22%
labour - 16%
tories - 11%
greens - 9%
change uk - 5%
ukip - 2%
SNP 2%
other - the rest

Read the tea leaves in the bottom of my cup. .

Theophile

European elections: UK government may face court action after EU citizens denied vote

Voter suppression to keep a certain demographic from voting.
Maybe an idea to get UN observers in next time, as we're not able to hold fair and free elections anymore.
I hope they sue the hell out of this government.


https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/may/23/eu-citizens-denied-vote-european-election-polling-booths-admin-errors

lisyloo

Theophile wrote: »

Voter suppression to keep a certain demographic from voting.
Maybe an idea to get UN observers in next time, as we're not able to hold fair and free elections anymore.
I hope they sue the hell out of this government.


https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/may/23/eu-citizens-denied-vote-european-election-polling-booths-admin-errors

Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by incompetence.

movilogo

people seem less keen to do a brexit

Your eyes only see what you want to see.

but as long as we get something which is always above 50 +/-2 % then we'll at least have some vague majority for something

Referendum happened and Leave won.

If 2nd ref happens, say remain wins by similar narrow margin.

Then [1] why there won't be 3rd ref? [2] why 1st win by Leave would be discarded but same narrow margin win by Remain will be considered end of the matter?

This is why it is better to leave EU first and then after few years offer a ref whether people want to re-join.

The "what kind of leave" argument was introduced by Remainers to overturn the referendum result, simply because they didn't like the outcome.

phillw

lisyloo wrote: »

Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by incompetence.

Passive aggressive incompetence is malicious.

movilogo wrote: »

This is why it is better to leave EU first and then after few years offer a ref whether people want to re-join.

No and you either don't understand why it wouldn't be better or you are being disingenuous and you think you're being clever by suggesting it.

Leave won on a lie, you don't get to destroy democracy in that way. We both know that if things get worse after leaving the EU then there will be even more hate being stirred up in the UK to prevent us rejoining.

What would be best for everyone is to let the court cases go through and prosecute the people involved, tell the people that they have been manipulated and organise councelling so that people can be deprogrammed (anyone who saw the £350 million a week on the red bus and believed it was true, anyone who heard that Turkey were about to join the EU and we were going to be overrun by hordes requires deprogramming). Let everyone calm down, then when both sides can be trusted to start the debate again then we do it.

That way people can make an informed decision, rather than being conned into voting for an impossible situation because of their fear of foreigners.

movilogo wrote: »

The "what kind of leave" argument was introduced by Remainers to overturn the referendum result, simply because they didn't like the outcome.

Remainers were talking about what kind of brexit we'd have before the referendum, the leave side kept saying that nobody was suggesting leaving the single market & we'd be able to do a deal that was better than remaining in the EU. Remainers and the EU said that was impossible, but I never heard leavers say that it's ok because they wanted WTO terms anyway.

The idea that everyone wanted to leave on WTO terms is a down right lie. People might think that is what they voted for now, because memories are pretty much worthless. You should read https://www.amazon.co.uk/Invisible-Gorilla-Other-Intuition-Deceives/dp/000731731X, there has been a lot of studies about memories.

It's true I don't like the outcome of the referendum, but I will only refuse to accept the result because it was a flawed referendum. If you want me to accept it then you need to hold an honest referendum, you don't want that because you know you'd lose an honest referendum.

Thrugelmir

phillw wrote: »

Leave won on a lie,

Irrelevant now. In the past 3 years there's been a full and frank discussion. People have had an abundance of time to come to an informed decision. The future will be shaped accordingly.

If the deal on the table had been accepted. The UK Government couldn't step in to save British Steel. Not sure what we are going to have to export going forward. As the UK continues to decline now it has been asset stripped.

Rinoa

phillw wrote: »

The idea that everyone wanted to leave on WTO terms is a down right lie. People might think that is what they voted for now, because memories are pretty much worthless.

Yeah, nobody now remembers the remainers lies, because they lost.

But lies they were, and great whoppers too - aided and abetted by Her Majesty's Government.

phillw

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Irrelevant now. In the past 3 years there's been a full and frank discussion. People have had an abundance of time to come to an informed decision. The future will be shaped accordingly.

No, people haven't. Nigel Farage stirring up support for the brexit party is proof of that.

I think you misunderstand human nature.

It's like drunk people who are convinced they are fit to drive. Anyone angry about not leaving is under the influence, three years later and the effects of the referendum haven't worn off & it's unclear how long it will take.