Brexit process

[raspberry-blower]

Interesting read on Craig Murray's blog:

People's vote in danger of becoming War Criminals rehabilitation

The major reason that Remain lost the referendum campaign in England and Wales is that the Remain campaign was fronted by the most detested and discredited politicians in the UK: Blair, Brown, Cameron, Clegg, Mandelson, Osborne, and Kinnock and Straw jr. There is nothing these people could propose which would not be rejected out of hand by huge numbers, just at the sight of them.

The question arises, who are “the People’s Vote� and who agreed that Tony Blair speaks for them? My strong belief is that a large majority of the 700,000 who marched through London would regard Blair as a war criminal and be horrified. Plainly, the People’s Vote does not in any sense belong to the People as a campaign but is being controlled by the New Labour war criminal elite, who see it as a chance to redeem their loss of political power.

My disinterested advice to Remain supporters, if they wish to win a second referendum, is for “the People� to wrest control of “the People’s Vote� from the self-appointed war criminal friendly clique currently running it, to ditch the war criminals and to lead with Caroline Lucas. If the People’s Vote is really – as it seems to be – the Blair Bandwagon, it will crash into the buffers of entirely well-merited public distrust.

[Little John]

It's time to stop pretending you don't have to pick a side folks.

This may be said irrespective of one's views on Brexit or the EU. It is simply a matter of whether one is a democrat or one is not. I happen to know a great many ardent Remainers who, nevertheless, will not cross that Rubicon. And the reason they will not is because they are democrats, first and foremost.

[PS_RalphW]

It is NOT about being a democrat or not. It is about asking the people again to confirm or not the choice they made two years ago in the light of

1. A lot more information about what effect Brexit will have

2. Our elected representatives being patently incapable of deciding ANYTHING about what we should do - Labour and Tories.

A decision has to be made. If a second referendum returns a leave vote, I will shut up and accept it.

[emordnilap]

A second referendum is very Irish.

[fuzzy]

It is NOT about being a democrat or not. It is about asking the people again to confirm or not the choice they made two years ago in the light of

1. A lot more information about what effect Brexit will have

2. Our elected representatives being patently incapable of deciding ANYTHING about what we should do - Labour and Tories.

A decision has to be made. If a second referendum returns a leave vote, I will shut up and accept it.

This has to be the post of the week..

We have no information about the effect. Other than the effect of dropping immigration, if the city ever allows it to happen. The gov is trying to soften the step change of a cutoff, which is a good idea, with the massive numbers of immigrants involved.

And if a 2nd poll returned a remain vote, I would just shut up and accept it because??

[clv101]

It is simply a matter of whether one is a democrat or one is not.

Would you self identify as a democrat?

You often talk about the democratic decision, the democratic process with reference to the Brexit vote, even claiming yourself to be a democrat whilst suggesting others aren't. I'd have more respect for your position if you showed some understanding of our country being a representative democracy and not some kind of absolute plebiscite and an understanding of democracy being a process not an event. It is highly democratic for both the public and our representative politicians to continue to debate Brexit after the referendum.

On the Brexit referendum itself I'd like to see a democrat such as yourself recognise a few facts; electoral laws were broken, the referendum itself was advisory (the advisory nature meaning a court can't order a re-run!), the franchise excluded groups with direct interest in the result and there was no threshold majority set. Due to the delay between, firstly the vote and the withdrawal agreement and secondly actually leaving itself - it's perfectly possible for the mood of the electorate to change. I'm not saying it has, just that it might have. Where's your recognition of this fact?

For the record, I don't think a second vote is a particularly good idea. If we do end up there it'll be due to parliament failing to do its job.

[Little John]

It is simply a matter of whether one is a democrat or one is not.

Would you self identify as a democrat?

yes

You often talk about the democratic decision, the democratic process with reference to the Brexit vote, even claiming yourself to be a democrat whilst suggesting others aren't. I'd have more respect for your position if you showed some understanding of our country being a representative democracy and not some kind of absolute plebiscite and an understanding of democracy being a process not an event. It is highly democratic for both the public and our representative politicians to continue to debate Brexit after the referendum.

On the EU referendum, as with the first time around, a plebiscite is precisely what it was. And that explicit plebiscite was granted by our representative, democratically elected parliament with due process

On the Brexit referendum itself I'd like to see a democrat such as yourself recognise a few facts; electoral laws were broken, the referendum itself was advisory (the advisory nature meaning a court can't order a re-run!), the franchise excluded groups with direct interest in the result and there was no threshold majority set. Due to the delay between, firstly the vote and the withdrawal agreement and secondly actually leaving itself - it's perfectly possible for the mood of the electorate to change. I'm not saying it has, just that it might have. Where's your recognition of this fact?

Utter bullshit. Enough with this disingenuous shite about who broke what rules. The entire f***ing political class, aided and abetted by a fully bought up MSM went all out, including the spending of millions of taxpayer's money on direct leaflet drops into every single home in the country, on an agenda of remain.

For the record, I don't think a second vote is a particularly good idea. If we do end up there it'll be due to parliament failing to do its job.

I do not believe a single word you say. If you thought a referendum could be gotten away with and in doing so reverse the Brexit result, you would back it. Of that, I have little doubt.

Just admit what you really are. Which is, underneath all of the green-wash and right-on liberal pretensions, a plain, old-fashioned, common or garden, fully paid up member of the petit-bourgeoisie who is quite willing to ditch any pretense of democracy in the service of where you think your own economic interests lie. Which is in alignment with those of an existing ruling political/economic class.

[Little John]

The one glimmer of light in all of this is that May seems to be indicating, more and more that if the deal loses the vote in Parliament, she will implement a no deal scenario. Also, that she will resist any attempt to implement a new referendum. No doubt, she is doing this for her own reasons of trying to push parliament into accepting her appalling "deal". But, the outcome is looking just as likely to be fully no deal and she knows also full well that the only chance the Tories have of coming out of this with any semblance of political integrity and thus any hope at any future election is by allowing no deal to proceed in the absence of her deal.

[adam2]

I agree that a "no deal" is starting to look more likely than a second referendum.

If however there IS a second referendum, I think that we can be certain that the result will be to remain in the EU.
Lessons have been learnt from the first referendum that went wrong, and any second vote will have to be much better managed so as to ensure that remain wins.

The obvious way to achieve this would be to offer three choices.
1) Remain in the EU
2) Leave under the deal currently proposed.
3) Leave with no deal.

That would split the leave vote between the second two choices and thus ensure that the correct result is obtained.
Democracy is easy ! TPTB simply have ask the right question in order to get the right answer.
And "project fear, second version" to be sure.

[Little John]

That is exactly as I see it panning out one way or the other Adam.

[vtsnowedin]

I doubt if that will be considered a valid way to set up a referendum ballot for the very reason you state.
They might set it up as two questions.
1. leave or remain
2. Deal or No deal.
Only those that vote leave get to vote on 2. Deal or no Deal? as the Remainers will vote for the most odious option.

[Little John]

I doubt if that will be considered a valid way to set up a referendum ballot for the very reason you state.
They might set it up as two questions.
1. leave or remain
2. Deal or No deal.
Only those that vote leave get to vote on 2. Deal or no Deal? as the Remainers will vote for the most odious option.

I think you are wrong, sadly, on that V. You don't understand how desperate the political class, over here, have become.

Ah no. wait. i see what you are suggesting....

I'll need to think about that

[RevdTess]

The obvious way to achieve this would be to offer three choices.
1) Remain in the EU
2) Leave under the deal currently proposed.
3) Leave with no deal.

That would split the leave vote between the second two choices and thus ensure that the correct result is obtained.

This would be an outrageous referendum for the reasons you specify. I can't imagine anyone, even the most ardent Remainers, would think this is fair.

The only way to do it fairly would be using the single transferable vote system where you rank your preferences from 1 to 3 and if your first choice is eliminated you get your second choice instead. In that way the Leave vote could never be split and Remain would have to beat both alternatives combined assuming no one puts Remain as a second choice.

[RevdTess]

A decision has to be made. If a second referendum returns a leave vote, I will shut up and accept it.

Agree 100%

[RevdTess]

The one glimmer of light in all of this is that May seems to be indicating, more and more that if the deal loses the vote in Parliament, she will implement a no deal scenario. Also, that she will resist any attempt to implement a new referendum. No doubt, she is doing this for her own reasons of trying to push parliament into accepting her appalling "deal". But, the outcome is looking just as likely to be fully no deal and she knows also full well that the only chance the Tories have of coming out of this with any semblance of political integrity and thus any hope at any future election is by allowing no deal to proceed in the absence of her deal.

I think this is right. May has totally committed to no referendum. I don't see how she could ever propose one and stay in office. The only route to a referendum I can see is a general election and Labour victory needing the SNP in coalition. The SNP would demand a referendum. Labour on their own I think would go for customs/single market access and try to negotiate on free movement.

No deal seems pretty likely, at least in the short term. Eventually I expect we'd work our way back to a really close trading arrangement with the EU which might even involve paying for market access. I can't see any other deal getting through parliament *and* agreement from the EU. If May won't do a referendum then it's no deal or general election depending on how many Tory MPs are willing to bring their own government down to avoid no deal.