Election impact on investments

nigelbb

Deleted_User wrote: »

That’s a maths problem. LDs opposed referendum. So did the Tories. They got majority between them, let alone Brexit et al.

No. The Liberal Democrats supported a Peoples Vote. They only committed to revoke Article 50 in the event they had a majority but fell 315 seats short of the necessary threshold.

nigelbb

LHW99 wrote: »

IMO its difficult to include labour as a "further referendum" party. They began in 2016 saying they would respect the vote to leave. Then they helped defeat an option for a referendum during the indicative vote process, then they wouldn't vote for either of the negotiated deals, then they thought they could piggyback on the People's Vote campaign this election. Their vote was significantly down in both leave and remain constituencies because no one could really judge / trust what their position really was.
At least the conservative / LD's were very clear, and the difference in their vote % can be considered absolutely representative of the "Get on and do it" vs "Don't even think about it" options.

The commitment to another referendum was clearly articulated in the manifesto. The problem Labour had was trying to please both educated affluent Remain voters & traditional Labour supporters in those areas that voted Leave in the 2016 referendum. The negotiation of a softer withdrawal deal followed by a referendum was an attempt to appease both wings of the party. In the end the attempt failed & there was probably no stance on Brexit that could have succeeded. If they had leaned more towards Leave then they would have lost votes to the Liberal Democrats without gaining any Tory votes. The Liberal Democrats picked up the votes of disaffected Tory Remainers who would never have voted Labour. Ultimately tactical voting was key in this election but rather than a rainbow Remain alliance it was former Labour voters who wanted Brexit more than they wanted anything else who voted tactically for the Tories.

shinytop

nigelbb wrote: »

The commitment to another referendum was clearly articulated in the manifesto. The problem Labour had was trying to please both educated affluent Remain voters & traditional Labour supporters in those areas that voted Leave in the 2016 referendum. The negotiation of a softer withdrawal deal followed by a referendum was an attempt to appease both wings of the party. In the end the attempt failed & there was probably no stance on Brexit that could have succeeded. If they had leaned more towards Leave then they would have lost votes to the Liberal Democrats without gaining any Tory votes. The Liberal Democrats picked up the votes of disaffected Tory Remainers who would never have voted Labour. Ultimately tactical voting was key in this election but rather than a rainbow Remain alliance it was former Labour voters who wanted Brexit more than they wanted anything else who voted tactically for the Tories.

Or possibly former Labour voters who wanted Corbyn and his policies less than they wanted anything else and voted Conservative?

[Deleted User]

nigelbb wrote: »

No. The Liberal Democrats supported a Peoples Vote. They only committed to revoke Article 50 in the event they had a majority but fell 315 seats short of the necessary threshold.

Good point. It’s the maths in Parliament that really matters. MPs have been elected. Now they will get to decide. Everything else is noise.

That’s assuming this election wasn’t merely “advisory”. Perhaps we should demand a “Peoples election”.

Triumph13

shinytop wrote: »

Or possibly former Labour voters who wanted Corbyn and his policies less than they wanted anything else and voted Conservative?

That's clearly what the polling shows and is a view shared very strongly by significant numbers of non-Momentum labour candidates. The cult of St Jeremy clearly has very devout followers, but it is a very niche religion. When your leader is more likely to appear on the fliers of your opposition than your own candidates then you should know you have a problem.

[Deleted User]

The problem Labour had was trying to please both educated affluent Remain voters & traditional Labour supporters i

Labour had more than one problem. Economic ignorance. Maths. Antisemitism. Marxism. Inability to answer questions or decide anything. History of support for terrorism. Conspiracism. Attacks on press. That’s for starters.

hyubh

Deleted_User wrote: »

That’s assuming this election wasn’t merely “advisory”. Perhaps we should demand a “Peoples election”.

You'll never guess what must happen within 5 years...

JoeEngland

nigelbb wrote: »

No. The Liberal Democrats supported a Peoples Vote. They only committed to revoke Article 50 in the event they had a majority but fell 315 seats short of the necessary threshold.

They supported a second referendum, or if you want to use the phrase "people's vote" then they supported a second people's vote. It's funny that they only called it a people's vote after they didn't like the result of the first one.

[Deleted User]

hyubh wrote: »

You'll never guess what must happen within 5 years...

I do realise this is just the beginning of the end. A few things will happen within 5 years. And not just Brexit. EHRC will issue a report followed by court cases against Labour’s nomenklatura and organizations such as NEC. In 5 years, all being well, UK will have a credible opposition with reasonable economic policies.

kinger101

bostonerimus wrote: »

....ps. I just had a WhatsApp from a friend in London...it was "I'm moving to Dublin".

Sounds awful. Full of drunken English people.