The UK Politics and EU Referendum thread - merged

[kukushkin88]

The current WA has failed to get through 3 times

Boris says he cannot present it again and it’s obvious he cannot present it again

So Barnier saying he’s not changing the WA before any talks have started is a kinda terrible strategy for somebody professing to not want a no deal outcome.

Looks like Barnier is, shock, lying one way or another

Looks like a GE then. Remember it’s likely the best outcome for the EU (and us) is if we don’t leave. A GE brings about some interesting possibilities on that front.

It’s not even close to lying to say ‘no change to WA, we’d like to avoid no deal’.

[Longines]

Has Boris said - in detail - what the alternative to the WA is? I may have missed it.

[Doobs]

The current WA has failed to get through 3 times

Boris says he cannot present it again and it’s obvious he cannot present it again

So Barnier saying he’s not changing the WA before any talks have started is a kinda terrible strategy for somebody professing to not want a no deal outcome.

Looks like Barnier is, shock, lying one way or another

I thought sticking to your guns and forcing them to back down is the best strategy?  Or is that only the best strategy when we do it?  Or  is it only the best strategy if you hum the dambusters theme? 

[TightEnd]

Unless he sells out Ireland, which as an ongoing member he cannot do, Barnier can't reopen the WA. More importantly than politics,it endangers the good friday agreement and with it peace

Boris has to do a 180, or no deal.

As no deal is no certainty to get through parliament (probably more of a chance with JRM doing the arcane rules stuff), this means an election to get a majority, blaming Barnier and remainers to get that majority, with lots of populist rhetoric

then go back to Barnier and say "I have a parliamentary majority, change the WA or we no deal" At that point Irish government might blink

that is the strategy

[TightEnd]

Has Boris said - in detail - what the alternative to the WA is? I may have missed it.

He has not, apart from references to GATT24 which were debunked (Neil interview Article 5 c et al)

[StuartHopkin]

Unless he sells out Ireland, which as an ongoing member he cannot do, Barnier can't reopen the WA. More importantly than politics,it endangers the good friday agreement and with it peace

Boris has to do a 180, or no deal.

As no deal is no certainty to get through parliament (probably more of a chance with JRM doing the arcane rules stuff), this means an election to get a majority, blaming Barnier and remainers to get that majority, with lots of populist rhetoric

then go back to Barnier and say "I have a parliamentary majority, change the WA or we no deal" At that point Irish government might blink

that is the strategy

If it carries on in this tone will he need to get it through parliament?

IE

Boris wont talk unless they remove WA
They wont remove WA
Repeat until the 31st October
EU close the door whether parliament like it or not?

[TightEnd]

Unless he sells out Ireland, which as an ongoing member he cannot do, Barnier can't reopen the WA. More importantly than politics,it endangers the good friday agreement and with it peace

Boris has to do a 180, or no deal.

As no deal is no certainty to get through parliament (probably more of a chance with JRM doing the arcane rules stuff), this means an election to get a majority, blaming Barnier and remainers to get that majority, with lots of populist rhetoric

then go back to Barnier and say "I have a parliamentary majority, change the WA or we no deal" At that point Irish government might blink

that is the strategy

If it carries on in this tone will he need to get it through parliament?

IE

Boris wont talk unless they remove WA
They wont remove WA
Repeat until the 31st October
EU close the door whether parliament like it or not?

i suppose that depends on whether you think he genuinely is prepared to no deal or not?

is the aim to get out, doesn't matter how? if that's the case then automatic no deal 31 oct, no need for election, deal with the downsides by shoving £50bn into the economy

or is the aim to get out protecting the economy? (and maybe giving the government electoral longevity whenever the next election is?)

[aaron1867]

Unless he sells out Ireland, which as an ongoing member he cannot do, Barnier can't reopen the WA. More importantly than politics,it endangers the good friday agreement and with it peace

Boris has to do a 180, or no deal.

As no deal is no certainty to get through parliament (probably more of a chance with JRM doing the arcane rules stuff), this means an election to get a majority, blaming Barnier and remainers to get that majority, with lots of populist rhetoric

then go back to Barnier and say "I have a parliamentary majority, change the WA or we no deal" At that point Irish government might blink

that is the strategy

You think that is the strategy & I completely don’t see it that way

Not only does he need a majority, but he needs a large one to get no deal through. Even he isn’t that stupid.

I personally see his strategy as getting it to the closest to 31 Oct and hoping E.U. will blink first

[TightEnd]

so when i say

"As no deal is no certainty to get through parliament (probably more of a chance with JRM doing the arcane rules stuff), this means an election to get a majority"

then you say

"Not only does he need a majority, but he needs a large one to get no deal through. Even he isn’t that stupid. "

you agree with me

[BigAdz]

Unless he sells out Ireland, which as an ongoing member he cannot do, Barnier can't reopen the WA. More importantly than politics,it endangers the good friday agreement and with it peace

Boris has to do a 180, or no deal.

As no deal is no certainty to get through parliament (probably more of a chance with JRM doing the arcane rules stuff), this means an election to get a majority, blaming Barnier and remainers to get that majority, with lots of populist rhetoric

then go back to Barnier and say "I have a parliamentary majority, change the WA or we no deal" At that point Irish government might blink

that is the strategy

That is the strategy, or that is what I think the strategy should be, or that is what I think is the strategy is?

[TightEnd]

the latter

[Sheriff Fatman]

so when i say

"As no deal is no certainty to get through parliament (probably more of a chance with JRM doing the arcane rules stuff), this means an election to get a majority"

then you say

"Not only does he need a majority, but he needs a large one to get no deal through. Even he isn’t that stupid. "

you agree with me

And I think there's a chance he'll now get a decent majority in a GE, as he's started the process of eating into the Brexit Party vote, while Corbyn seems to be peaking in the speed at which he's losing voters.  Even if he finally was dragged into making Labour an officially pro-remain party, he's been so reluctant to do so that he's essentially lost the trust of those who've jumped ship to the Lib Dems.

May lost her majority in 2017 via a terrible campaign and a huge number of people voting Labour as the best means of stopping Brexit.  Two years later, Boris will run a more effective campaign (via the machine behind the Vote Leave campaign) and Labour have marginalised themselves to the point where they've lost a huge number of those 'stop Brexit' protest votes.  I struggle to see how Boris doesn't get a workable majority unless the Lib Dems somehow pick up a huge number of Tory/Lib Dem contested seats, along with the SNP winning back all the Scottish Tory seats they lost in 2017.

[neeko]

If there is a general election, it will depend on how the remain parties cooperate, and how brexit parties assist each other.

If there is one party on each ballot for remain, and tories, brexit party, and labour on the other, Brexit parties would be struggling to get a majority

[nirvana]

Mantis

"Boris has the talent to write some numbers on a bus and it convinces the majority of people to vote leave. Now onto the GE where he simply needs to put bigger numbers on larger bus and let's gogogo to big majority in commons.  "

you might be right. parts of the leave vote and Trump brazenly talking any old bollocks and getting elected are evidence ofit

In your heart of hearts though this is very depressing isn't it? that policy, truth and principle don't matter. That voters will swallow any old crap (lack of knowledge, lack of interest etc)?

But there is no other option is there? It's just whose crap do we want to swallow.

It isn’t the case though. There haven’t been political campaigns in recent times in the UK/US dominated entirely by and won through lying. Boris/Trump/Leave have totally changed the game. Trump has more than 10,000 lies on record since he took office!

It’s not the most even handed publication but what they’ve written here is true and corroborated by lots of analysis including the Electoral Commission.

https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/vote-leave-director-admits-won-lied-public/08/02/

It clearly shows a large number of people almost believe what they want to be the truth, rather than what they know is the truth.

This seems to be where Remoaners have it so wrong. I have said it time and again, the numbers on the bus were irrelevant, it was the message of positivity that roped them in.

If Remoan has posted how much better things would be in the EU, it would have been no contest, but they couldn't have the bullshit positive factor as we have been in so long, rarely with any good news. That wasn't gonna wash...

must return to this

it is easier to sell change than defend the status quo to a voter base where the majority is disaffected

The Eu benefits, such as unfettered access to free market, crucial in a just in time world, and regeneration funds (spending money in what turned out to be disadvantaged leave areas) are a tough sell to an audience given feelgood soundbites

That disaffected population confused the effects of austerity with it being the EU at cause and at fault. Add in stagnant wage growth and in some people some harder line attitudes to immigration (because they see their communities changing, without realising the positive impact on economic growth because they don't see it themselves) and the desire for change becomes quite easy to tap into. It's difficult to counter populism when the change argument doesn't have to be thoroughly true in modern politics.


All that said, i think we all agree that Remain ran a dreadful campaign,that the way the referendum was phrased didn't pin vote leave down and is a root source of the problems we face now (everyone's preferred brexit is different) that we triggered A50 too early, that May's decision to call an election was precipitous and that election campaign that lost her majority was calamitous, and the need to coalesce with the DUP boxed our negotiators into another corner, that Corbyn has been a brexiteer and the opposition hasn't done its job very well and certainly hasn't been a remain party and all of this combined basically nixed reasonable prospects of an orderly brexit.


Right, back to work :-)

The bit about it being hard to sell the status quo is really a bit of nonsense I think - I mean it was obviously hard for the Remain proponents but that was because they never actually made an attempt to sell anything - lazy and incompetent as you imply later but that's completely different to whether it could be considered hard. It's an easy to trot out lazy point from those that failed so spectacularly in the campaign.

[aaron1867]

so when i say

"As no deal is no certainty to get through parliament (probably more of a chance with JRM doing the arcane rules stuff), this means an election to get a majority"

then you say

"Not only does he need a majority, but he needs a large one to get no deal through. Even he isn’t that stupid. "

you agree with me

A majority isn’t guaranteed to change anything, therefore he needs a huge majority. You have just stayed majority.