 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: In, out, in, out; EU Referendum thread.
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
Overleaf link.
Sure. I know it's a good argument for Remain, both ways, as mr cheesy's Mombiot link pointed out. But you are also right about the general level of economic literacy and interest.
I guess I'm thinking marginally. What might influence two or three don't knows or two or three pro-Brexiters out of a hundred to change their minds? Enlightened self-interest is a pretty strong vote-motivator when push comes to shove.
[ 15. June 2016, 11:01: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
lowlands_boy
Shipmate
# 12497
|
Posted
High drama today, with Osborne warning of an emergency budget if we exit, with Boris and Gove claiming the right to table a whole bunch of immediate legislation changes if we exit.
Accompanied by high farce, as Nigel Farage and Bob Geldof have a face off on the Thames, as Geldof tries to upset Farage's "Brexit Flotilla".
As usual, you couldn't make it up.
--------------------
I thought I should update my signature line....
Posts: 836 | From: North West UK | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
Overleaf link.
Sure. I know it's a good argument for Remain, both ways, as mr cheesy's Mombiot link pointed out. But you are also right about the general level of economic literacy and interest.
I guess I'm thinking marginally. What might influence two or three don't knows or two or three pro-Brexiters out of a hundred to change their minds? Enlightened self-interest is a pretty strong vote-motivator when push comes to shove.
You're thinking rationally too, which is lacking in the debate. And as for "Enlightened self-interest" there's a long tradition of voting against one's best interests and enlightenment is no more than a period in history.
Brexit is based almost entirely on a desire to "get rid of them", but the alternative is a pretty nasty combo. They will fit well with Putin and Trump though.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jane R
Shipmate
# 331
|
Posted
Forget sanity. Forget reality. Just put on re-runs of It's a Knockout in place of the TV "debates".
It's just as likely to influence the undecided as anything else... ![[Mad]](angryfire.gif)
Posts: 3958 | From: Jorvik | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
It's a Knockout, adapted from a French show and part of the Jeux Sans Frontières franchise.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
I think Leave is successful, precisely because it's not rational. Whether your taste runs to Farage's foreign rapists, Boris's clowning, or the infinite supply of money being awarded - to farmers, fishermen, NHS, etc. - there's something for everyone.
It's a fun-packed Leaving party, with balloons, Thames flotillas, the Beast of Bolsover, go, go, go.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
I had to laugh last night, watching TV, when a guy was interviewed, who described how his local Tesco's had Polish food in it! That was it, that was his argument against the EU.
How do you deal with that? I don't know.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
The Leave campaign is uncoordinated (though, Remain isn't very coordinated either - but at least everyone knows what the current status quo is), with different voices presenting mutually incompatible promises for a golden age with the UK outside the EU. So, while this makes it easy for the overall picture to be dismantled (eg: some people are saying all money we send to the EU can be spent on the NHS, others are saying that all the money we get from the EU to support farmers, fishermen, scientific research, regional development etc will still flow but from Westminster rather than Brussels - even if the Leave campaign could form a government those promises are mutually exclusive, even if the economy doesn't nose dive), there's also something someone is saying that appeals to large numbers of people.
I'm seeing a massive contrast with the Scottish Independence campaign. Both Leave and Yes present a glorious vision for the future, compared to the hum-drum of the status quo. But, there the similarity ends.
The Yes campaign were centred around and coordinated by the SNP, who held power in Holyrood, and so were in a position of government. So, the vision they presented was plausible, even realistic, and the Yes campaign were in a position to at least attempt to deliver it.
The Leave campaign is really several parallel campaigns by people who would probably prefer not to be in the same boat. Most Tories, ISTM, for example, would be ecstatic if Farage wasn't around. And, the campaigns are presenting mutually contradictory visions, appealing to slightly different sectors of the population. Some of what is being presented is more plausible than other parts - an instant set of trade agreements and treaties such that there is no interuption in trade with the EU, or a drop to practically zero net immigration are totally implausible. Other parts of the package are more plausible - that the UK would eventually form trade agreements with the EU, for example. But, plausible or not, the Leave campaign would need to gain power in Westminster to even attempt to get their proposals into law. Which might work if the uneasy truce between the different parties in the Leave campaign can hold beyond the 24th June, but probably couldn't be fully realised until the next general election - and, even then it's not certain that those making these promises would be in a position to follow through.
The Yes campaign offered a coherent, plausible but difficult to achieve vision and were in a position to act on that. The Leave campaign are offering an incoherent and largely implausible vision, which would be nearly impossible to achieve and are not, and possibly never will be, in a position to act on it.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
rolyn
Shipmate
# 16840
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
I had to laugh last night, watching TV, when a guy was interviewed, who described how his local Tesco's had Polish food in it! That was it, that was his argument against the EU.
This holds a serious point regarding voter turnout.
A low turnout gives Brexit enthusiasts the possible edge. A medium turnout of Cameron's scared witless hordes gives Remain the edge. However, get your average xenophobe, who never normally bothers his or her arse about voting, into polling booths next week and boris' fingers might start twitching over that champagne cork .
--------------------
Change is the only certainty of existence
Posts: 3206 | From: U.K. | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
fletcher christian
Mutinous Seadog
# 13919
|
Posted
All the debates involving those who are in the 'leave' campaign centre on very empty promises of a UK (although that title might quickly dissolve) that will be wealthier, have more jobs, more control, be much greater and better in every respect. What they don't spell out is how this new wonderland might happen. They've spelt out exactly no policies. It's like voting for a wishing machine. They do talk - a lot - about the money they will save out of the EU, yet neglect to mention debts they might have to pay off, the future problems with trade and expense of border controls and duties and the strong likelihood of a very seriously devalued pound. There is no acknowledgment of the social aspects, of the possibility of a destabilised Northern Ireland (and you can bet that's going to cost a lot of money) and the significant likelihood of an independent Scotland. I'm not sure where all the manufacturing is going to be magicked from; although Boris seems to think the UK exports enough cake to keep it afloat. Then there is the aftershock nobody seems to be talking about - the horrific prospect of a loony right wing government; a New Conservatives and UKIP coalition with either Boris or Farage as PM.
I find the whole thing unthinkable and very, very worrying.
![[Votive]](graemlins/votive.gif)
--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan
Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ariel
Shipmate
# 58
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
I had to laugh last night, watching TV, when a guy was interviewed, who described how his local Tesco's had Polish food in it! That was it, that was his argument against the EU.
How do you deal with that? I don't know.
Ours has a Mexican section in it. We need to build a wall.
Seriously, you get all sorts. I've never forgotten the vox pop before one election some years ago when one lady said "I like gardening, so I'm voting Green." You're always going to get an element of that in any election, but that's democracy.
Posts: 25445 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
I had to laugh last night, watching TV, when a guy was interviewed, who described how his local Tesco's had Polish food in it! That was it, that was his argument against the EU.
How do you deal with that? I don't know.
I saw that too, in Mark Easton's report I think? He said that his local Tesco had two whole aisles dedicated to Polish food. Quite amusing.
But presumably what he was doing was pointing to the wider social change that's occurring where he lives? (And two whole aisles in a major supermarket dedicated to a cuisine previously very rarely seen in the UK is evidence of this?)
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lowlands_boy:
High drama today, with Osborne warning of an emergency budget if we exit, with Boris and Gove claiming the right to table a whole bunch of immediate legislation changes if we exit.
There's a really serious point here, a few people in favor of leaving keep saying that this isn't a vote for Johnson, Gove, Farage and so on.
Which is true - up to a point - however, there isn't a clear plan for Leave at all. Someone is going to have to take charge post a Leave vote and make stuff happen, and it makes all the difference whether or not you trust them to be able to make good decisions or not.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jane R
Shipmate
# 331
|
Posted
Alan: quote:
It's a Knockout, adapted from a French show and part of the Jeux Sans Frontières franchise.
Yes, that was the point ![[Cool]](cool.gif)
Posts: 3958 | From: Jorvik | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
lowlands_boy
Shipmate
# 12497
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
quote:
Originally posted by lowlands_boy:
High drama today, with Osborne warning of an emergency budget if we exit, with Boris and Gove claiming the right to table a whole bunch of immediate legislation changes if we exit.
There's a really serious point here, a few people in favor of leaving keep saying that this isn't a vote for Johnson, Gove, Farage and so on.
Which is true - up to a point - however, there isn't a clear plan for Leave at all. Someone is going to have to take charge post a Leave vote and make stuff happen, and it makes all the difference whether or not you trust them to be able to make good decisions or not.
Well, Farage isn't even an MP, but given the standard of most of the "debate" I've been engaged in Facebook, some of the numb-nuts don't even seen to realise that, and seem to think he'll become the prime minister
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
And of course Boris, Gove and co on the leave side, and Cameron, Osborne and co on the remain side, have all been insisting the Cameron remains the PM no matter what the outcome of the referendum is.
Whether that will mean anything by tea time on Friday remains to be seen. They could be dropping like flies, like they were after the 2015 general election. It's certainly going to be a couple of days to keep the TV coverage on....
--------------------
I thought I should update my signature line....
Posts: 836 | From: North West UK | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
lowlands_boy
Shipmate
# 12497
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:
Alan: quote:
It's a Knockout, adapted from a French show and part of the Jeux Sans Frontières franchise.
Yes, that was the point
Of course the rights to that were subject to a British buyout - although I don't expect the rights holder has quite the right profile to do anything with it nowadays....
--------------------
I thought I should update my signature line....
Posts: 836 | From: North West UK | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lowlands_boy:
Well, Farage isn't even an MP, but given the standard of most of the "debate" I've been engaged in Facebook, some of the numb-nuts don't even seen to realise that, and seem to think he'll become the prime minister
To be clear, I wasn't commenting on whether or not Farage (or any of those other figures would be PM), but what role they may play after a Leave vote.
Because a vote for Leave is not a plan to leave. It's the vote for someone, somewhere to start some process. It has a large downside and limited upside. Voting Leave unless you are reasonably confident of who is likely to be in charge of that process, and how they are likely to run it, seems like a colossal risk.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
fletcher christian
Mutinous Seadog
# 13919
|
Posted
Do you really think Cameron can remain as PM after a leave vote? If the pounds tanks - which in all likelihood it would - the financial crash happens, the investment withdraws and unemployment sky rockets (to name but a few); can Cameron really stay in power? I think in that instance you are far more likely to have a strongly right wing government. I hope I'm wrong.
--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan
Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rocinante
Shipmate
# 18541
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by fletcher christian:
Do you really think Cameron can remain as PM after a leave vote? If the pounds tanks - which in all likelihood it would - the financial crash happens, the investment withdraws and unemployment sky rockets (to name but a few); can Cameron really stay in power? I think in that instance you are far more likely to have a strongly right wing government. I hope I'm wrong.
If I was him, I might be tempted to stay on just to say "I told you so". He could plausibly say that all of the above were not his fault, and if there was a leadership challenge the Brexiters would have to agree on a candidate, a process which would be amusing to watch for the neutral spectator. Can't see Gove putting up with Boris as PM, somehow.
Posts: 384 | From: UK | Registered: Jan 2016
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by fletcher christian:
Do you really think Cameron can remain as PM after a leave vote? If the pounds tanks - which in all likelihood it would - the financial crash happens, the investment withdraws and unemployment sky rockets (to name but a few); can Cameron really stay in power? I think in that instance you are far more likely to have a strongly right wing government. I hope I'm wrong.
I think the likelihood is that Cameron will not continue as PM in either scenario, and that it is very likely that we'll have a GE and a very rightwing new parliament.
I also hope I'm wrong, but I fear I'm not. Choppy water ahead.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by fletcher christian:
Do you really think Cameron can remain as PM after a leave vote? If the pounds tanks - which in all likelihood it would - the financial crash happens, the investment withdraws and unemployment sky rockets (to name but a few); can Cameron really stay in power? I think in that instance you are far more likely to have a strongly right wing government. I hope I'm wrong.
If there's a Brexit then Cameron will really struggle to maintain his position as leader of the Conservatives, and if he manages it he will do so as a lame duck unable to do anything because he would be unable to count on the votes from the Eurosceptic members of his party.
If he steps down (which would seem most likely) then the Eurosceptics would be riding high and the new Conservative leader will almost certainly be from their ranks. Which will move the government to the right. But the government would then struggle to keep those members closer to the centre in line, and is likely to lose a few votes in the Commons if they tried to implement anything too radically right wing.
Either way, we get a few years of a fractured and weak Conservative government. Some Tory MPs may even resign the whip - from the right to defect to UKIP, from the centre to the LibDems or as independents. A loss of the Conservative majority in the Commons is possible. Though as noted previously, the Tories do have a history of pragmatism to hold themselves together.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
lowlands_boy
Shipmate
# 12497
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
quote:
Originally posted by lowlands_boy:
Well, Farage isn't even an MP, but given the standard of most of the "debate" I've been engaged in Facebook, some of the numb-nuts don't even seen to realise that, and seem to think he'll become the prime minister
To be clear, I wasn't commenting on whether or not Farage (or any of those other figures would be PM), but what role they may play after a Leave vote.
Because a vote for Leave is not a plan to leave. It's the vote for someone, somewhere to start some process. It has a large downside and limited upside. Voting Leave unless you are reasonably confident of who is likely to be in charge of that process, and how they are likely to run it, seems like a colossal risk.
Yes, I agree. I'm sure you have grasped these points - this has been by far the most intelligent forum for debate.
But I'm quite serious about what I wrote about the points on Facebook - some of it has genuinely been so vacuous that I think there are people who seriously believe that this is some sort of election between two parties, and we ARE voting Boris for PM if we vote leave.
--------------------
I thought I should update my signature line....
Posts: 836 | From: North West UK | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
quote:
Originally posted by fletcher christian:
Do you really think Cameron can remain as PM after a leave vote? If the pounds tanks - which in all likelihood it would - the financial crash happens, the investment withdraws and unemployment sky rockets (to name but a few); can Cameron really stay in power? I think in that instance you are far more likely to have a strongly right wing government. I hope I'm wrong.
I think the likelihood is that Cameron will not continue as PM in either scenario, and that it is very likely that we'll have a GE and a very rightwing new parliament.
I also hope I'm wrong, but I fear I'm not. Choppy water ahead.
First Parliament would have to find a majority to repeal the fixed term parliament act before we can have a GE. I just can't see that happening. There's nothing in it for the sitting Tories, and Labour would be staring down the barrel of going to the country with a leader people aren't sure about, and having just been whacked by their own core vote (assuming Brexit). I just can't see a GE happening and reckon the current Parliament will limp on to 2020.
--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....
Posts: 1481 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
First Parliament would have to find a majority to repeal the fixed term parliament act before we can have a GE. I just can't see that happening.
I could be wrong, but I understood a "vote of no confidence" would still bring the government down.
quote:
There's nothing in it for the sitting Tories, and Labour would be staring down the barrel of going to the country with a leader people aren't sure about, and having just been whacked by their own core vote (assuming Brexit). I just can't see a GE happening and reckon the current Parliament will limp on to 2020.
On the contrary, there would be everything in it for the Brexit Tories, because as it stands the parliamentary majority is in favour of Remain, and there would be great difficulty in getting a majority to support the necessary Brexit legislation.
I think the numbers are quite stark. The Tories have a working majority of 17. So that means around 10 Tories need to vote against the government or around 20 need to abstain.
If it was obvious that the Brexit legislation was stalling, I think a vote of no confidence would be arranged very quickly.
And in the reverse scenario where Remain win, there would only need to be a small number of Tories voting in a no confidence vote to bring down the government and trigger a GE where they'd hope to get an increased number of Brexit politicians and force the changes through.
Either way, the result is the same.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
First Parliament would have to find a majority to repeal the fixed term parliament act before we can have a GE. I just can't see that happening.
I could be wrong, but I understood a "vote of no confidence" would still bring the government down.
quote:
There's nothing in it for the sitting Tories, and Labour would be staring down the barrel of going to the country with a leader people aren't sure about, and having just been whacked by their own core vote (assuming Brexit). I just can't see a GE happening and reckon the current Parliament will limp on to 2020.
On the contrary, there would be everything in it for the Brexit Tories, because as it stands the parliamentary majority is in favour of Remain, and there would be great difficulty in getting a majority to support the necessary Brexit legislation.
I think the numbers are quite stark. The Tories have a working majority of 17. So that means around 10 Tories need to vote against the government or around 20 need to abstain.
If it was obvious that the Brexit legislation was stalling, I think a vote of no confidence would be arranged very quickly.
And in the reverse scenario where Remain win, there would only need to be a small number of Tories voting in a no confidence vote to bring down the government and trigger a GE where they'd hope to get an increased number of Brexit politicians and force the changes through.
Either way, the result is the same.
you're right on no confidence - however you still need to get a majority for that.
In Brexit most Tory MPs are Remainers, so it's unlikely that you'd get a no confidence majority which was a going to force a GE as it's not in their or any other party's interests either. In the case of Remain you're looking at a minority of spurned Brexit Tory MPs trying to top up pretty well every non-Tory MP in the house to get a majority for no confidence when, again, an election isn't in the interests of any MP except spurned Brexiters.
Like I said, I don't have any claim to seeing the future, but I don't see a GE coming. Unless they're complete masochists it's not in the interests of a majority of MPs across all parties to put themselves up for re-election until they have to - whether the vote is Leave or Remain.
--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....
Posts: 1481 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
Prior to a general election Brexiters would need to ensure that local constituencies would select a pro-Brexit candidate where the current member is pro-Remain. Which would probably need a motion at conference to align the Conservative party policy with the referendum result - which would be where the major Troy bloodletting is likely to occur. Then the pro-Remain members would be holding opinions contrary to party policy, grounds for deselection.
You would then have Tories standing on a platform of "we'll pass through legislation to enact a Brexit". Presumably UKIP would only stand if the local conservative party selected a candidate opposed to Brexit. The other parties may decide to stand on a platform of "we'll oppose Brexit legislation", especially if it's a close referendum result. There will be the usual hard-core party loyalists, but floating voters who strongly oppose Brexit (or support it) may swap alliegence at that point. The general election at that point would be a second referendum, and it's possible (especially if the count is close next week) that we could return a Parliament where the pro-Brexit members are in the minority (almost certainly larger than the current minority) and a pro-Remain party has the majority. What a fine mess that would be.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
You would then have Tories standing on a platform of "we'll pass through legislation to enact a Brexit".
Well, this is where it would then become tricky. Because Leave.EU differ widely on what would constitute 'enacting a Brexit' (as I said above, the vote would be an aspirational one, it doesn't put a specific plan into play).
Some leavers want an immediate triggering of article 50. Leave.EU had an article on their website that said that they wouldn't trigger article 50 but would immediately open up talks with the EU on future directions. Then there are the various constituencies who have been bought off by promises that massive change will come soon (naturally whilst keeping free movement and free trade ) who will only be satisfied by a fairly dramatic reversal of everything that has happened since joining the EU.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
Aye. That's an enormous problem for Leave. They have no coherent vision for what Leave would look like. They are a loose alliance of different organisations with different issues with the EU, united for the moment around a common "we don't like the EU" basis, but with each group having a different vision of what they want. Leave has won support in the electorate by appealing across the board, trying to be all things to all people. If there's a Brexit I'd lay money on none of those supporting Leave being happy with the outcome - if we remain in the EFTA then those wanting more open trade with the Commonwealth won't get it, if we spend money currently sent to the EU on the NHS then the farmers and others will be out of pocket, if we continue to subsidise farmers and support regional development and science then those wanting more money spent on the NHS will be disappointed, nothing anyone does is going to make a significant dent in immigration with the best outcome being a bit more money from visa application fees.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
you're right on no confidence - however you still need to get a majority for that.
In Brexit most Tory MPs are Remainers, so it's unlikely that you'd get a no confidence majority which was a going to force a GE as it's not in their or any other party's interests either. In the case of Remain you're looking at a minority of spurned Brexit Tory MPs trying to top up pretty well every non-Tory MP in the house to get a majority for no confidence when, again, an election isn't in the interests of any MP except spurned Brexiters.
I think one has to consider how hated the Tory government is - and how it would look if Labour or the SNP voted that they "had confidence" in the Tory government. I'm not sure that an opposition has ever voted for a government subject to a no confidence vote.
I think one also has to consider that whoever wins, around 50% of voters are going to be voting Remain, so it isn't a foregone conclusion that the Labour party would do badly at a GE. It must be in their favour (in the eyes of some) that they've taken a pretty unambiguous Remain position (with very few Brexiters) - so a Labour GE campaign would undoubtedly point out that another Tory government would mean increased austerity under Brexit and Remain.
As far as I can see, there is zero chance of Labour or the SNP voting for a split Tory administration, at best they'd be abstaining.
If everyone votes against the government in a confidence vote, in my opinion, there is no question it would fall with a few Tory rebels who vote against or abstain. If people like the DUP etc vote with the Tory government, the maths gets more complicated. If the opposition abstains, who knows what will happen.
quote:
Like I said, I don't have any claim to seeing the future, but I don't see a GE coming. Unless they're complete masochists it's not in the interests of a majority of MPs across all parties to put themselves up for re-election until they have to - whether the vote is Leave or Remain.
I don't think this really washes. Assuming that the Brexit Tories actually believe in Brexit, they're not going to be content to have the referendum without legislative action in the HoC. Because that'd be daft.
The question is then what happens to the former-Remain MPs. Do they accept the popular vote and accept that they've no choice but to vote through the Brexit legislation? Do they continue the Remain fight via sabotage?
I can't read the tea-leaves, but I can't see how the majority of the MPs can continue in the HoC with a Brexit vote and without a GE. It just doesn't seem credible that they'd vote through a major constitutional change which they don't believe in.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618
|
Posted
On Remainers being grateful for Labour's Remain position, the problem is that support for Leave overindexes in precisely the group which overindexes in voting Labour. This is why Remain have suddenly identified Labour voters as holding the key to remaining, and the reported (see Guardians passim) despair of Labour MPs dutifully pounding the streets and finding it incredibly tough. I said on the other thread in Hell that the story here could actually be Labour (for the greater good) inflicting on itself exactly what it inflicted on itself in Scotland when it argued for No. Their support for Remain could well be stoking up their future electoral problems.
Labour won't want to go to the polls much before they can help it, so they're not going to be rushing to support a no confidence vote. I don't think their position is in their favour in the eyes of *enough.*
What Remain MPs will do (if they've got any sense) is say "I support the will of the people" and get on with trying to hold onto their jobs. The calculation for most will almost certainly be that a few years to see if things die down and people forget what they said before they rowed in behind "making Brexit work in the national interest and putting aside personal preferences" might be worth it before they risk going to the country.
Those calling for a confidence vote will be a minority, and the nutters. In fact, a minority of nutters calling for a confidence vote might be the very thing to make the rest of the house changing its views in the national interest look statesmanlike.
Unless you think that a couple of hundred MPs are actually going to put principle before salary?
Something which occurs to me in writing the response which I hadn't considered before is that in the event of a Leave vote we might have to move into the territory, far from a GE, of a government of national unity, with everyone working together to achieve the best deal. The rules of the game in the event of things going Leave next week will politically put us into 1939-40 territory.
The spectacle of Jeremy deciding which Tory he and the Labour Party are prepared to serve under "during the present emergency" would be an enjoyable moment in a fraught time.
For anyone who isn't following the Hell thread, I'm personally minded to vote Remain by the way - so none of the above is a Brexiteer's fantasy. I'm just reading the political runes the way I see them.
I really think when it comes down to it a mixture of pragmatism and personal survival instinct is going to kick in at Westminster.
--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....
Posts: 1481 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cod
Shipmate
# 2643
|
Posted
For those interested in polling this site has very interesting discussion and I have been following it closely. In brief, the most scientific polls have, in the last week, shown significant swings towards Leave. Most of them are showing Leave leads, the most recent being 7 points. There is a parallel to the Indyref: in the last few weeks before polling support for Yes increased substantially, particularly after the second Darling-Salmond debate. My view on this was that in Scotland there has been for a long period strong sympathy for independence ie, "yes, but we can't", which changed to "actually we could".
The other thing to note was swingback is said to have followed. My view is this was overstated. There was actually only one reputable poll that showed Yes in the lead, and even then by only 2 points. It led to ridiculous panic amongst senior Westminster politicians who duly all trekked north to tell the Scots about what the Scots had already been discussing for years, not to mention the absurd and incomprehensible "Vow" which I don't believe swung the final result at all.
The situation we have here is that Leave appear to have far stronger support than Yes did. There were simply no polls showing Yes leads of 7 to 10%. And I think it has to be accepted that Leave don't have to make anythign like as coherent a case as Yes. In the event of a Leave vote there will still be a UK (at least for the time being) with its own government and civil institutions).
My own view is that has been clear for a very long time that there are really ownly two main arguments for Leave. One is sovereignty and the other is immigration. I differ with the majority views on this thread in their attitudes to these points. There are of course arguments in favour of pooling sovereignty and in heavy immigration. But there are also perfectly clear and respectable arguments against. The utter complacency with which those arguments have been treated (including on this thread) have undermined Remain, which like the No in the Indyref will have lost the campaign even if it wins the vote.
Of course what may change everything is the very distressing news of Jo Cox's murder.
--------------------
"I fart in your general direction."
M Barnier
Posts: 4229 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Cod:
My own view is that has been clear for a very long time that there are really ownly two main arguments for Leave. One is sovereignty and the other is immigration. I differ with the majority views on this thread in their attitudes to these points. There are of course arguments in favour of pooling sovereignty and in heavy immigration. But there are also perfectly clear and respectable arguments against.
I've read the Brexit arguments and they really don't strike me as clear, so I don't give them a pass as respectable. They do seem to me to misunderstand how national sovereignty works in the modern world, the different categories into which immigrants fall and the practical issues involved in safeguarding national borders.
I haven't dismissed them because I haven't read them. I prefer the Remain arguments because they seem to me to make more coherent economic and political sense.
[ 17. June 2016, 22:16: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
quote:
Originally posted by Cod:
My own view is that has been clear for a very long time that there are really ownly two main arguments for Leave. One is sovereignty and the other is immigration. I differ with the majority views on this thread in their attitudes to these points. There are of course arguments in favour of pooling sovereignty and in heavy immigration. But there are also perfectly clear and respectable arguments against.
I've read the Brexit arguments and they really don't strike me as clear, so I don't give them a pass as respectable. They do seem to me to misunderstand how national sovereignty works in the modern world, the different categories into which immigrants fall and the practical issues involved in safeguarding national borders.
I haven't dismissed them because I haven't read them. I prefer the Remain arguments because they seem to me to make more coherent economic and political sense.
I agree. That gets three of these ![[Overused]](graemlins/notworthy.gif)
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stumbling Pilgrim
Shipmate
# 7637
|
Posted
This thread ought to be compulsory reading before anyone is allowed to vote! I haven't found this much sense, not to mention civility, anywhere else.
Yesterday we received in the post a leaflet headed 'Official Information about the Referendum' and in large letters 'The European Union and Your Family - The Facts'. It begins with the '£350 million per week' lie and continues with the scaremongering about how many people are in the countries applying to join the EU, which I suppose should be a giveaway, but it's not until the bottom of the back page that you find a very small 'Vote Leave' logo. I'll be reporting it to the ASA as misleading advertising, but they will take six months to wag a finger and tell them not to do it again. I'm amazed that they are allowed to do this - isn't anyone in charge of what both sides are allowed to do?
Posts: 492 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Stumbling Pilgrim:
isn't anyone in charge of what both sides are allowed to do?
Both sides are run by politicians, with the moral integrity of a toad. That's the moral integrity of one toad shared between them, if each of them had the integrity of a toad that would be an exaggeration of their integrity.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Stumbling Pilgrim
Shipmate
# 7637
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
quote:
Originally posted by Stumbling Pilgrim:
isn't anyone in charge of what both sides are allowed to do?
Both sides are run by politicians, with the moral integrity of a toad. That's the moral integrity of one toad shared between them, if each of them had the integrity of a toad that would be an exaggeration of their integrity.
That's so true I don't know whether to
![[Killing me]](graemlins/killingme.gif) or ![[Waterworks]](graemlins/bawling.gif) . But isn't there anyone this kind of blatant deception can be reported to, who can actually do something about it?
--------------------
Stumbling in the Master's footsteps as best I can.
Posts: 492 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
So we're not down with a more respectful tone of debate to avoid murderous gits slaughtering mps in the streets then ?
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
fletcher christian
Mutinous Seadog
# 13919
|
Posted
Anglican't:
quote:
For some reason, the Daily Mail has published this week's Spectator's editorial urging a Leave vote. Quite an interesting read, I thought.
'Interesting' is an interesting way to put it. One of the great frustrations about the whole debate is the lack of actual facts. On the leave side there are simply accusations, nothing backed up by fact. Undemocratic is oft slung around about an organisation which is all elected and no post held in perpetuity. A threat to sovereignty is oft heralded, but each new person seems to have a completely different understanding of what this means although all seem bound by the notion that some mysterious and hidden bureaucrat somewhere in a Brussels warehouse is actually pulling the strings of a puppet Europe. Hugh Fearnley Wittingstall demonstrated just how easy it was to lobby effectively in Europe even without being an elected member to achieve a good result about fishing quotas. Britain elects Farage who sat on exactly one of forty-however many meetings and achieved exactly nothing so that you could sit at home on your arse and complain about an undemocratic Europe. Can you not see the irony of control Farage exercised over your own mind and futures? Immigration needs to be more controlled, and yet Europe has come under international criticism for its response to the Syrian crisis and we know immigration would in all likelihood not change significantly if Britain left the EU - if anything it might go up. It's a threat to our democracy, they cry, and well it might when you consider the type of 'democracy' Britain actually has and the importance placed upon peerage and privilege. We only get the spin from newspapers and articles like this one that throw around wild accusation with absolutely no facts to back any of it up and nothing whatsoever by way of suggestion or policy that might be in any way better. All we have is the emphatic repeated declarations of 'what's mine is mine' and the degraded defiant stench of 'I am not my brother's keeper'.
Don't get me wrong though; the argument of the remain side has been equally as pathetic. Not a word about a once great Briton by the name of Winston Churchill and the not insignificant matter of the birth for the European dream and all those who died for it. Not a word about the longest held peace we know of in Europe. No shouts about the great successes of controlling the rise of the scary right in a world wildly swinging that direction just about everywhere. No mention of the cultural exchange, the richness, the diversity that brings beauty and wealth to so many lives throughout Europe. Only petty arguments about responding to myths and the smoke screen of lies. Not a word about sharing wealth for the benefit of all. Nothing about the ideal of a duty of care to our neighbours.
This campaign will have no winners. You'll both still slouch on to give birth to your rough beast in Bethlehem. Maybe you've already birthed it.
--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan
Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by fletcher christian:
Not a word about a once great Briton by the name of Winston Churchill and the not insignificant matter of the birth for the European dream and all those who died for it. Not a word about the longest held peace we know of in Europe.
You mean something like this?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WLgwtfWYdTs
There has been some material written and said along these lines, however the more sensational claims end up in the headlines.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by fletcher christian:
Don't get me wrong though; the argument of the remain side has been equally as pathetic. Not a word about a once great Briton by the name of Winston Churchill and the not insignificant matter of the birth for the European dream and all those who died for it. Not a word about the longest held peace we know of in Europe. No shouts about the great successes of controlling the rise of the scary right in a world wildly swinging that direction just about everywhere. No mention of the cultural exchange, the richness, the diversity that brings beauty and wealth to so many lives throughout Europe. Only petty arguments about responding to myths and the smoke screen of lies. Not a word about sharing wealth for the benefit of all. Nothing about the ideal of a duty of care to our neighbours.
Churchill was in many ways a bigot, albeit our bigot who was ruthless as a war leader.
And I for one am glad that few have tried to use my relatives deaths in the war as collateral for their political platforms.
Many died in the war withany different political views. Don't try to suggest that they'd have supported or opposed the EU which formed decades afterwards.
That kind of playing with a form of the myth of redemptive violence is the lowest form of argument.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
fletcher christian
Mutinous Seadog
# 13919
|
Posted
Posted by Chris:
quote:
You mean something like this?
I saw that when it first came out and thought it was quite good, but it's been lost under the tidal wave of bullshit.
posted by Cheesy:
quote:
And I for one am glad that few have tried to use my relatives deaths in the war as collateral for their political platforms.
Many died in the war withany different political views. Don't try to suggest that they'd have supported or opposed the EU which formed decades afterwards.
That kind of playing with a form of the myth of redemptive violence is the lowest form of argument.
Both where you live and where I live know the ugly, disfigured legacy of the insane notions of blood sacrifice. But I do rather strongly suspect that those who died would turn in a grave at the thought of throwing away a democratic collaboration of the kind we have today with such feckless carelessness, amid panto's on the Thames and propaganda that has trumped any genuine attempt to get at the truth. If anything, such a notion strikes at the heart of the nonsense of redemptive violence that Farage seems happy to let loose on your own streets.
--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan
Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by fletcher christian:
Both where you live and where I live know the ugly, disfigured legacy of the insane notions of blood sacrifice. But I do rather strongly suspect that those who died would turn in a grave at the thought of throwing away a democratic collaboration of the kind we have today with such feckless carelessness, amid panto's on the Thames and propaganda that has trumped any genuine attempt to get at the truth. If anything, such a notion strikes at the heart of the nonsense of redemptive violence that Farage seems happy to let loose on your own streets.
There is absolutely no way of telling. Let's not go there. Nothing good comes from that direction.
--
I've also been able to establish in the last half hour that there is at least one party using the image of Churchill and the deaths in the war for their political campaigning: Britain First.
[ 18. June 2016, 14:48: Message edited by: mr cheesy ]
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Frankly My Dear
Shipmate
# 18072
|
Posted
Simple question but a not so simple answer. Given how the official Labour line has been so supportive of Remain, is the Labour Party not in serious danger of having a large amount of 'egg on face' if Leave wins it ??
I suppose commentators will then be saying that maybe it was wiser to continue with Corbyn's initally 'cool/ support with reservations' approach ??
For those who live in various parts of the UK, what is your general take on the 'feeling' on the matter in your area .... There is a strong sense where I am (Shropshire) that there will be a big % for Leave,, but of course attitudes may be very different elsewhere .......
Posts: 108 | From: Telford, Shropshire, UK | Registered: Apr 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
The leave campaigners shout louder, I think. I've not heard much chat about it here, other than people commenting on the paucity of facts upon which to base a decision. I'm where Corbyn is - remain with reservations. I've a lot of sympathy for those on the left who are for leave (RMT et al) but I think they're far too optimistic about the prospects of a left-wing exit. If, at some point in the future, a Labour government are butting up hard against state aid rules while trying to restructure the economy then there's an argument for getting out, but at the moment all it does is free the tory's hands to screw working people even further.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
If Leave win it will be more than just Labour with egg on their face. Cameron and a large portion of the Cabinet will also be egg-faced, probably more so than Labour as they called the referendum in the sure and certain expectation of an easy Remain victory. But, egg-faced politicians will be the least of our worries at that point.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Firenze
Ordinary decent pagan
# 619
|
Posted
That's Old Etonians for you - the idea that if you sail into something with enough chutzpah it'll all come right in the end. As it is, I can see Cameron going into the history books as the PM who not only wrecked the UK as both an economy but also as a significant player in world politics and probably facilitated the dismantling of the very entity he was tasked with leading (if clever Ms Sturgeon has anything to do with it). He can also add screwing up the N Irish question btw.
Posts: 17302 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Firenze:
That's Old Etonians for you - the idea that if you sail into something with enough chutzpah it'll all come right in the end. As it is, I can see Cameron going into the history books as the PM who not only wrecked the UK as both an economy but also as a significant player in world politics and probably facilitated the dismantling of the very entity he was tasked with leading (if clever Ms Sturgeon has anything to do with it). He can also add screwing up the N Irish question btw.
Sir Anthony Eden lost a substantial amount of Britain's standing too, thanks to his mishandling of the Suez Crisis in 1956. He was an Old Etonian too.
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
There is some talk this morning about the "Jo effect" and some early evidence that her death is causing some folks to re-evaluate their voting intentions. One of the challenges to both campaigns, as they resume, will be how they handle the significance of her death in the wider context of the debates. I will be interested to see how well (or how badly) they do that.
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Frankly My Dear
Shipmate
# 18072
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
There is some talk this morning about the "Jo effect" and some early evidence that her death is causing some folks to re-evaluate their voting intentions. One of the challenges to both campaigns, as they resume, will be how they handle the significance of her death in the wider context of the debates. I will be interested to see how well (or how badly) they do that.
I'm just waiting for the "Jo effect" to turn into the next conspiracy theory ....
Posts: 108 | From: Telford, Shropshire, UK | Registered: Apr 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement
© Ship of Fools 2016
UBB.classicTM
6.5.0
|
|
|
|
|
| |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
