The Politics Thread 2019

[Van der MoodHoover]

5 minutes ago, Norman said:

36 percent of people who turned up to vote, voted for a No Deal. Nothing else. Just a No Deal.

Taking into account the low turnout in Leave areas, I would say the Leave side knows exactly what it votes for, and exactly what it wants.

Sorry I must have missed that bit - which vote was this? Was this the Brexit party platform......leave the EU on 31st October with or without a deal?

[Norman]

2 minutes ago, StivePesley said:

You're not wrong, but see my earlier post about the fact that even if 95% of those who voted leave in the original referendum were No Deal psychos then that would still not be enough to win a second referendum on an explicit No Deal ticket

What second referendum?

Psychos? Your mask is slipping again.

[Norman]

2 minutes ago, HantsRam said:

Sorry I must have missed that bit - which vote was this? Was this the Brexit party platform......leave the EU on 31st October with or without a deal?

Brexit party stated you vote for them, you were voting for a No Deal going out on WTO.

So did UKIP i believe.

[eddie]

1 hour ago, Curtains said:

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1133055/brexit-news-latest-tim-martin-wetherspoons-no-deal-vote-party-today-video-election-uk-eu

 

Joking apart, I went into a Wetherspoons in Watford on Monday night after the playoff defeat. I had a baked potato with 5 bean chilli (gammon wasn't on the menu ? ), and it was pretty good. The beer was excellent too. Can't remember what stout it was - a local brew I think.

[eddie]

5 minutes ago, Norman said:

What second referendum?

Psychos? Your mask is slipping again.

The second referendum was in 2016. The first was in 1975.

[Norman]

1 minute ago, eddie said:

The second referendum was in 2016. The first was in 1975.

I'm not on ignore, Edward. 

You feeling alright? ?

[eddie]

5 minutes ago, Norman said:

Brexit party stated you vote for them, you were voting for a No Deal going out on WTO.

So did UKIP i believe.

So that implies around 65% opposed to leaving with no deal then - the people who didn't vote for the Brexit Party or UKIP. About what I figured.

[Norman]

1 minute ago, eddie said:

So that implies around 65% opposed to leaving with no deal then - the people who didn't vote for the Brexit Party or UKIP. About what I figured.

Except it was a multi-party, multi-platform vote. Yes.

[eddie]

1 minute ago, Norman said:

I'm not on ignore, Edward. 

You feeling alright? ?

Democracy is about people having the right to change their mind.

[Highgate]

14 minutes ago, Norman said:

36 percent of people who turned up to vote, voted for a No Deal. Nothing else. Just a No Deal.

Taking into account the low turnout in Leave areas, I would say the Leave side knows exactly what it votes for, and exactly what it wants.

Little doubt that those voters are in favour of a No Deal, that's true. But things were less clear cut in the original referendum.  And 52% is quite a step up from 36% or 36% plus UKIP.   

If those that voted leave are confident there is still a majority for Brexit, then what is the harm in a second referendum once the precise nature of the Brexit arrangement is known.  It's a momentous decision to pull the UK out of the EU.  Why not double check? ? 

[eddie]

3 minutes ago, Norman said:

Except it was a multi-party, multi-platform vote. Yes.

It was quite an interesting result, was it not?

Brexit Party 30.8% v LibDem + Green Party 31.6%.

UKIP 3.2% v Change UK 3.3%

Throw in Plaid Cymru and the SNP (both campaigning on a Remain ticket) in their home countries - another 5% overall.

I would ignore the Tories and Labour as far as the Euro elections were concerned, similarly I have ignored Sinn Fein and the DUP and associated parties in Northern Ireland but it doesn't strike me that there was a huge majority for leaving or remaining one way or the other.

Of course, if there were a general election tomorrow, and if the votes split in precisely the same way, there would effectively be a Brexit Party majority, but of course UK parliamentary elections do not have a PR system - only in the European elections do we use a more democratic method of electing our representatives.

[Norman]

2 minutes ago, eddie said:

It was quite an interesting result, was it not?

Brexit Party 30.8% v LibDem + Green Party 31.6%.

UKIP 3.2% v Change UK 3.3%

Throw in Plaid Cymru and the SNP (both campaigning on a Remain ticket) in their home countries - another 5% overall.

I would ignore the Tories and Labour as far as the Euro elections were concerned, similarly I have ignored Sinn Fein and the DUP and associated parties in Northern Ireland but it doesn't strike me that there was a huge majority for leaving or remaining one way or the other.

Of course, if there were a general election tomorrow, and if the votes split in precisely the same way, there would effectively be a Brexit Party majority, but of course UK parliamentary elections do not have a PR system - only in the European elections do we use a more democratic method of electing our representatives.

It was interesting. As stated before, Leave areas turnout was low. Remain areas high. As to be expected. One has little interest in something past the 31st of October, one has a second referendum to ask for.

Also interesting was the reported split vote from the Tories and Labour and where it went. Including the 5 million Labour Leave voters. 

If I had to put money on a second referendum, I would go with the same result 51/52/to 49/48.

[Norman]

22 minutes ago, Highgate said:

Little doubt that those voters are in favour of a No Deal, that's true. But things were less clear cut in the original referendum.  And 52% is quite a step up from 36% or 36% plus UKIP.   

But it was a multi-party, multi-platform vote. 

It is a big step, but to say the Leave side has no idea what they have or would vote for obviously isn't true. That is all I am saying.

 

[eddie]

2 minutes ago, Norman said:

It was interesting. As stated before, Leave areas turnout was low. Remain areas high. As to be expected. One has little interest in something past the 31st of October, one has a second referendum to ask for.

Also interesting was the reported split vote from the Tories and Labour and where it went. Including the 5 million Labour Leave voters. 

If I had to put money on a second referendum, I would go with the same result 51/52/to 49/48.

I would probably agree that any prediction would be extremely close, but that very much depends if there was any sort of deal to ratify. If it was a 'straight ticket' of leave with no deal v remain (which seems to be the only possibility now), I would suggest that there would be a decisive majority in favour of remaining. Theresa's deal is dead in the water. As a staunch Remainer, I would grudgingly have accepted the deal which was on the table (well, it was more than on the table - it was 'agreed' but had not been ratified/further agreed to by Parliament).

I fear for the future of our country/union. I can see no possibility whatsoever of the UK leaving the EU and remaining a United Kingdom in any sense that it currently exists - Scotland are already pushing hard for a new Independence Referendum, and no matter how hard the Tories push back, it will happen - even if the referendum itself is not ratified by Westminster. Which ever way you look at it, the people of England dragging Scotland out of the EU against their wishes will never be accepted without the mother of all stinks, and it will also accelerate demands for a united Ireland.

I'm glad I'm old, and haven't got too long left to witness the absolute trifle that this most divisive of issues is making of the whole fiasco, piece by piece destroying the country I love - yes, love, as much as any self-proclaimed patriot who took the other side of the argument, and turning entire communities - even members of the same family - against one-another.

[G STAR RAM]

1 hour ago, GboroRam said:

But the Brexit supporters were telling us that we're the 5th largest economy in the world, so we'll be fine after Brexit.

You're now saying we're already screwed so Brexit can't hurt us any more?

With the importance of the EU to UK goods and services, I think we'll be on for a massive recession if we go no deal, and it will take that in order to put the Brexit debate to bed. The paper press have demonised the EU for so long that people just want away from it without really any understanding of why. That's my opinion.

I never said anything like you mentioned in your first 2 paragraphs. 

I personally just think for all the good the EU supposedly does us, this country was in a mess long before 23 June 2016.

So am I correct in thinking that you believe decline in trade between ourselves and the EU will be what makes us no longer a great nation?

What goods and services that we export do you think will be hit? Also do you not think any measures will be reciprocated?

Do you not think there may be a reaction where people are more inclined to buy British goods in response to the EU cutting of their nose to spite their face?

I'm not saying the above will happen by the way, just putting ideas out there.

I also realise the above does not happen overnight but I'm looking at a long term vision here.

[Van der MoodHoover]

1 hour ago, Norman said:

Brexit party stated you vote for them, you were voting for a No Deal going out on WTO.

So did UKIP i believe.

I didn't pay any attention to the Brexit party as I cannot abide Nigel Farage, believing as I do that the man is a complete fraud. And I didn't see anything from UKIP at all.

Its a perfectly clear message tho...and you can't criticise them for not being clear! ?

[Stive Pesley]

1 hour ago, Norman said:

What second referendum?

The same hypothetical one that this guy is on about ?

33 minutes ago, Norman said:

If I had to put money on a second referendum

 

[GboroRam]

15 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

What goods and services that we export do you think will be hit? Also do you not think any measures will be reciprocated?

Have a look in your supermarket at how much produce comes from outside of the UK. Even non EU produce comes to us by benefit of a trade agreement we enjoy as part of the EU. Once we exit we have to negotiate with all those non EU producers. Do we negotiate from a position of strength or will those countries expect a better deal than the one the EU currently has, based on the number of customers in the trading block being greater when operating together? Plus so much for sovereignty - in order to trade between another sovereign nation something has to give; trade standards will differ from country to country. One side, if not both, has to accept that their standards will have to adapt in order for that product to be considered acceptable to the other.

We don't get sovereignty. We lose our trade deals that we have already, and we lose being part of the largest trading block in the world. 

[eddie]

6 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

I never said anything like you mentioned in your first 2 paragraphs. 

I personally just think for all the good the EU supposedly does us, this country was in a mess long before 23 June 2016.

So am I correct in thinking that you believe decline in trade between ourselves and the EU will be what makes us no longer a great nation?

What goods and services that we export do you think will be hit? Also do you not think any measures will be reciprocated?

Do you not think there may be a reaction where people are more inclined to buy British goods in response to the EU cutting of their nose to spite their face?

I'm not saying the above will happen by the way, just putting ideas out there.

I also realise the above does not happen overnight but I'm looking at a long term vision here.

Are you old enough to remember the Wilson government, the enforced devaluation of Sterling in the 1960s (from $2.80 down to $2.40, believe it or not) and the resultant "I'm Backing Britain" campaign, where the government prevented people taking more than £50 out of the country, even if you were going on a holiday, and encouraged everyone to "Buy British"? It was during the so-called "Swinging Sixties", and it marked the beginning of the end for British industry as a stand-alone venture.

In those days, you could buy an entirely British-made vacuum-cleaner, washing-machine, gas cooker, lawnmower, motorbike, car etc - but we still had to import 25% of the food we ate. It would be churlish of me to say that things were 'tough' - because they weren't really, especially when you think that the vast majority of people of my parents' generation had lived through the second world war - and of course my grandparents' generation had lived through two world wars. When I was born, there was still rationing - not a lot, but rationing of some food items continued until well into the mid-1950s - and the effects of rationing went on for a lot longer than that because choice was the one thing we did not have.

A return to 'self-sufficiency' is utterly impossible in a global market - for a start, we don't have the agricultural land available (we now import something like 40% of the food we eat) - and farmers tend to specialise on certain crops. So far as industrial self-sufficiency is concerned, well, your choice of a British-built and British-owned motor vehicle comes down to a choice of two - a Morgan or a JCB. The only 'industry' that exists in sufficient size and diversity nowadays in the UK and which is likely to in the forseeable future is the 'service industry' - more specifically financial services - and the perception now (figures released today) is that fewer and fewer financiers look upon London as the world's financial hub, and are looking towards New York, Paris and Frankfurt.

A few weeks ago, I read that a 'Brexit bonus' was that there were now fewer British people holidaying abroad, instead they are enjoying more holidays in the UK. Last week, I read reports that this 'bonus' was being more than offset by a huge reduction in the number of people from overseas (especially from Europe) coming over here - and the principal reason given was that we are no longer seen as a friendly, welcoming country. Far too often, we are reading stories of people being harangued for 'not speaking English', and, of course, there has been a significant increase in reports of racially-motivated offences. The operative word there is 'reports' - people read newspapers, and people make judgements of where to go on holiday based upon what they read. The damage is done - we have sent a signal loud and clear that a lot of people in the UK don't want anything to do with 'those people' (meaning the EU - but that can just as easily be interpreted as 'foreigners' - and if people perceive that they are not welcome, they will go elsewhere.

[G STAR RAM]

36 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

Have a look in your supermarket at how much produce comes from outside of the UK. Even non EU produce comes to us by benefit of a trade agreement we enjoy as part of the EU. Once we exit we have to negotiate with all those non EU producers. Do we negotiate from a position of strength or will those countries expect a better deal than the one the EU currently has, based on the number of customers in the trading block being greater when operating together? Plus so much for sovereignty - in order to trade between another sovereign nation something has to give; trade standards will differ from country to country. One side, if not both, has to accept that their standards will have to adapt in order for that product to be considered acceptable to the other.

We don't get sovereignty. We lose our trade deals that we have already, and we lose being part of the largest trading block in the world. 

At the expense of sounding stupid here, I don't see any insurmountable issues above.

Aren't trade deals reciprocal? You make it sound like we are over a barrel with anyone that we enter into negotiations with.