Topic: Brexit: "Vultus inanis est et mori in fossa ego sum!"

[Raid]

I know its Gogglebox, but Mary from Wiltshire, was getting shit off her remain husband Giles because she has turned into a No Deal leaver. She said "we can't have a second referendum as it will cause even more splits in the country, we can't have Mays deal because it is worse than what we have, so its got to be no deal"

When Yellowhammer's Executive Summary was published the other day I told a leave acquaintence  of mine to read that if he wouldn't listen to me, to understand why it was not feasible to 'just leave like we voted to'.

The deal we have is obviously the best one available. If we are to leave it has to be with another deal, there is not one tangible benefit to leaving without a deal.

[oldfordie]

I know its Gogglebox, but Mary from Wiltshire, was getting shit off her remain husband Giles because she has turned into a No Deal leaver. She said "we can't have a second referendum as it will cause even more splits in the country, we can't have Mays deal because it is worse than what we have, so its got to be no deal"

Mary wtf are you thinking,every deal will be worse than the one we have now.
We should start describing the choices better.
Do you want a Brexit that doesn't f anybody's life up.
Do you want a Brexit that will f.. up many lives but we still be able trade.
Do you want a Brexit that f...up everything for most people.
How about choosing from the above choices Mary.

[24/7]

Mary from Wiltshire is the bastard love child of a sheep and barman. That's what we're dealing with in the UK. What a joke.

[Circa1892]

I see the RAWK political thread has booked its annual get together.

I’ll save you a seat on the front row!

[Andy @ Allerton!]

I know its Gogglebox, but Mary from Wiltshire, was getting shit off her remain husband Giles because she has turned into a No Deal leaver. She said "we can't have a second referendum as it will cause even more splits in the country, we can't have Mays deal because it is worse than what we have, so its got to be no deal"

She sounds quite contrary

[Rush 82]

She sounds quite contrary

But how will her garden grow without a deal

Probably very well considering all the fertiliser being thrown about...

[No666]

Show Mary this - if her attention-span will last for seven paragraphs:

Claiming a no-deal Brexit represents a clean break with the European Union is “nonsensical”, according to Philip Rycroft, the former permanent secretary at the Department for Exiting the EU.

Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson has promised to extricate the UK from the EU on 31 October “come what may” – and has hinted that he could try to get around legislation mandating him to request a Brexit delay.

The Brexit party leader, Nigel Frottage, whose party trounced the Tories in May’s European elections, has been urging the PM to deliver a “clean break Brexit” by leaving without a deal.

But Rycroft, who was the most senior civil servant at DexEU until March this year, told the Guardian a no-deal Brexit would mark the beginning of a complex series of negotiations.

“It is not a clean break: what it does is it takes us legally out of the EU. But what it can’t do is undo all of the very close economic ties that we have with the EU, on which so much of our trade as a country depends. And nor would we want to undo all of the close security ties that we have with the EU,” he said.

“And because of the importance of those ties both for the EU and the UK, it will remain hugely important to have those expressed through a formal relationship. In other words, we’re going to have to negotiate – and that negotiation on the future relationship starts with citizens, money and the border on the island of Ireland.

“So the notion that no deal somehow means that we can turn our backs on the EU and break all our ties is just nonsensical.”

[Mutton Geoff]

And I see your name isn't on the list of invited speakers. #conspiracy

neither is John Mann the new govt puppet

[No666]

This has probably been explored before on here, but there's interesting stuff from the LSE in the link below. If the price of remaining was carrying an ID card, where would you stand?

https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2019/09/13/what-policy-do-british-voters-want-on-eu-immigration-is-there-a-hidden-consensus/

[Iska]

This has probably been explored before on here, but there's interesting stuff from the LSE in the link below. If the price of remaining was carrying an ID card, where would you stand?

https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2019/09/13/what-policy-do-british-voters-want-on-eu-immigration-is-there-a-hidden-consensus/

That’s a good read.  I suppose the conclusion is there’s always been a lot of common ground throughout the population on most things.  Which leaves me wondering what the hell has changed that the parties now tack to the extremes instead of competing for the centre?

[Zeb]

This has probably been explored before on here, but there's interesting stuff from the LSE in the link below. If the price of remaining was carrying an ID card, where would you stand?

https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2019/09/13/what-policy-do-british-voters-want-on-eu-immigration-is-there-a-hidden-consensus/

Been a bit done around it over past couple of years up here in Manchester too - especially relevant given it was one of the Blair-era trial areas - although work on it here was more linked to attitudes on immigration generally. Still really uncertain about practicality of it, although I think my instinct is still strongly against it having watched the Tories go out of their way with the 'hostile environment'. Have personally chilled out a bit over the 20 years since but still seeing a slowly rising bar on such things. Similar to voter ID. People loudest to say they want it always seem to forget to add the bit on the end where they mean 'for other people, not me'.

----

Was obvious where this would lead when the prospect of a 'Government of National Unity' first filled August downtime headlines. It makes sense on one level. It's also one heck of a huge job for a mixbag group of parties and renegade MPs to figure out an offer to 'leave' that Brexiters will unite behind (spoiler: they won't) while also then presenting it in a question they themselves can agree upon. Still, interesting to see recognition of potential coming from the 'moderate' Tories like Parris.

Spoiler

News that a Brexit withdrawal agreement might just, even now, be feasible is an astonishing achievement for the House of Commons. The prime minister insisted that without the threat of no-deal, EU negotiations would be bogged down. The House forced him to withdraw his threat. The pace of negotiations picked up.

The prime minister said Britain would leave the European Union on October 31, regardless. The House forced him to withdraw that threat too. The negotiations now have time to proceed. So far so good.

But steady on. The concessions are all on the British side. The EU’s backstop remains in place. If Britain wants to depart from the EU’s regulatory standards and customs union, it can but must still leave Northern Ireland behind, with a border running down the Irish Sea. Larne would become a new Calais, Cairnryan in Scotland a new Dover. We accepted that ages ago and the EU has never budged. It’s the Democratic Unionist Party that is now shifting.

The Irish Sea border would have to be for all goods. So far the DUP has shifted only on farm goods but, carrots or kettles, Brussels will insist the logic applies to all trade. On this the DUP will have to shift further. They are wobbling and it’s these wobbles that are generating optimism for a May-style deal.

It would be harder for them to shift on the EU customs union which is about tariffs, not product regulation. Unless Britain quits this we are not free to strike the trade deals that Brexiteers dream of. So Northern Ireland would have to stay behind in the customs union too. If the DUP and their friends in parliament can swallow this, then fine — amazing! But they have so far conceded nothing of the sort. Had they done so two years ago, May’s deal would have passed the Commons and we’d have left the EU on March 31. It will be funny if, after years of ruckus with Brussels, it turns out that the real negotiations were all along with the DUP.

So, despite initial appearances, the possibility of a revamped May deal simply replaces Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson’s old difficulties with new ones. The prime minister faces ambush on many sides: Remainer resistance continues; “Spartan” Brexiteer MPs will now be muttering louder; and this week the Scottish Court of Session launched a surprise attack.

But, fixated on Johnson’s agonies, we risk losing sight of a deep fracture among those who’ve fought no-deal, and this week’s rumours of a deal will soon expose the rift. Many so-called Remainers really want a deal. Many others really don’t. Our own cliff-edge approaches. Once we’ve blocked no-deal, what next?

To that in a moment, but first to Johnson’s predicament. It’s said that several Labour MPs are ready to back a version of Mrs May’s withdrawal agreement. But will these MPs really rescue a Tory prime minister? So far, they’ve always melted away when it came to the crunch. And if the prime minister is genuinely ready to face down his own hardline Brexiteers and seek an all-party consensus, then expelling the 21 colleagues who would have supported him in this was a strange way to start.

Wild notions swirl at times like these. Johnson talked to schoolchildren this week about building a bridge to Northern Ireland. This loopy idea is interesting only for its hint at the prime minister’s state of mind. Speculation earlier this week about his supposed preparedness to break the law for Brexit suggests a degree of despair.

One setback he should survive is the bizarre Scottish ruling that the prorogation of parliament was unlawful. The Supreme Court will consider this next week and surely disagree. The Court of Session in Edinburgh took it upon itself to discover the “true reason” for the prime minister’s decision and ruled that because this differed from what he said, the decision was unlawful.

This is a road the law cannot travel. In politics, a dirty old game, few decisions have a single “true reason”. People dissemble. Intentions are mixed and murky. I disagree with the suggestion that the government should now reveal its real thinking behind prorogation. This would concede the legal reasoning behind the Scottish claim that a prime minister’s motivation is a matter for the courts. It is not. I shouldn’t be at all surprised if Johnson “lied to the Queen”; he lies to lots of people. If the voters get saddled with a compulsive fibber as prime minister, the voters have a remedy. Chuck him out. The ballot box and not the judiciary is the way to do this.

Which brings me to the plans of those no-deal blocking MPs whom Brexiteers sneer at as “Remainers”. But many of them aren’t, and the difference matters.

Some (like the Liberal Democrats) want to cancel Brexit altogether. But many others want to respect the 2016 referendum and leave with a deal. My friend, the former international development secretary Rory Stewart, passionately wants a deal and our differences on this feel sharp. It’s true that many like me don’t want to leave at all. We detest May’s deal: vassalage indeed, as we’ll argue in any referendum campaign. And if a now better-informed electorate changes its mind on Brexit, then hallelujah. But if not (and I don’t bank on a Remain result) then so be it.

So how can these three groups — Remain, Leave-with-a-deal and People’s Vote — maintain the solidarity that Johnson’s blundering helped them to forge last week?

Only the promise of a confirmatory referendum can keep us together. The 2016 referendum result carries an authority that can only be nullified by a new test of opinion. Some of us want to stay, some want to leave, but we can all agree to put it to the people. This proposition has in recent days brought together Tom Watson, Labour’s deputy leader, Sir Oliver Letwin, a leading figure among the purged Tory rebels and, intriguingly, David Cameron, who tells today’s Times Magazine: “I don’t think you can rule out [a second referendum], because we’re stuck.”

By contrast, a general election this winter would never bring such closure. Schemes for tactical voting would bring confusion. The Lib Dems and the Brexit Party would probably deprive any party of an absolute majority. We Tories would tear ourselves apart. Labour would get into a horrible muddle about its Brexit policy. The resultant mess, with arguments about what the voters “meant” about Brexit, would be grisly. And then, with a new government whose Brexit mandate was still contested, we’d start the arguments all over again.

So call a referendum. After that a general election could turn to the traditional questions that British elections settle. But settle Brexit first. Ask the people soon. Stop ducking it.

[close]

[Trada]

Rumour going around that Sam Gyimah maybe joining the Lib Dems at around 6pm.

[Trada]

The Trade Bill that meant Parliament had a say in future trade deals (eg with the USA) has been dropped from legislation by Johnson.

Our elected representatives cant amend, allow or deny trade deals that are bad for the UK post Brexit.

[Zeb]

Rumour going around that Sam Gyimah maybe joining the Lib Dems at around 6pm.

Ah explains why you posted the Progress thing. You lot thought it was going to be Rosie Duffield, didn't you? Serious point behind that rumour is whether Lib Dems are quietly standing down against strong pro-Remain Labour MPs in tight Lab/Con marginals.

Wonder when Justine Greening is going to shift over if it's Gyimah today.

[Trada]

Ah explains why you posted the Progress thing. You lot thought it was going to be Rosie Duffield, didn't you? Serious point behind that rumour is whether Lib Dems are quietly standing down against strong pro-Remain Labour MPs in tight Lab/Con marginals.

Wonder when Justine Greening is going to shift over if it's Gyimah today.

The process thing was nothing to do with this at all.

Strange to think Labour will be the only party offering a peoplesvote/2nd referendum if Brexit is going to be stopped that is the only right way to do it.

[Libertine]

Rumour going around that Sam Gyimah maybe joining the Lib Dems at around 6pm.

And then there were 18. At this rate, the Lib Dems may get to a majority before any election is called.....

[Zeb]

The process thing was nothing to do with this at all.

Strange to think Labour will be the only party offering a peoplesvote/2nd referendum if Brexit is going to be stopped that is the only right way to do it.

Ah ok. Just seemed strange coincidence.

Are the Nats at 'revoke without a referendum' yet? Part of Labour's problem isn't it? No-one's forming a government on their own at 20-something per cent vote share but Labour's leadership, and coalition to be fair, isn't robust enough to argue a solid position on an outcome they want. 

[Elmo!]

Dan O'Donoghue
@MrDanDonoghue
NEW: Scottish Tory sources have said informal talks are ‘ongoing’ with the Lib Dems about ensuring the SNP do not have a ‘clean sweep’ of Westminster seats at the next election — understand similar discussions happened at Holyrood in 2016

'The most unambiguosly anti-Brexit party'

[Trada]

And then there were 18. At this rate, the Lib Dems may get to a majority before any election is called.....

The new MPs will take over the party soon you just know Chucka will see himself as future leader.

[oldfordie]

Dan O'Donoghue
@MrDanDonoghue
NEW: Scottish Tory sources have said informal talks are ‘ongoing’ with the Lib Dems about ensuring the SNP do not have a ‘clean sweep’ of Westminster seats at the next election — understand similar discussions happened at Holyrood in 2016

'The most unambiguosly anti-Brexit party'

Why? Forget they are just as bad as the Tories, why would the Lib Dems help the Tories win any seats.

[Elmo!]

Why? Forget they are just as bad as the Tories, why would the Lib Dems help the Tories win any seats.

Unionism.

Also helps shore up Swinsons seat.

[oldfordie]

Unionism.

Also helps shore up Swinsons seat.

Can see your point. it sounds like a bad tactical move that may backfire though.

[Banquo's Ghost]

Pretty scary polling reported in the Guardian today - after all the week's madness, the Tories have improved to a 12 point lead.

Corbyn's 4D chess is paying off though: 

Almost a fifth (19%) of Labour leave voters are now intending to vote Conservative, suggesting views on Brexit are determining voters’ choice more than traditional party loyalties.

Despite losing six consecutive votes in the Commons in the past fortnight Johnson has a far higher net approval rating for his handling of Brexit than Jeremy Corbyn. While 37% approve of the prime minister’s handling of Brexit against 43% who disapprove, only 17% approve of Corbyn’s handling of the issue, against 60% who disapprove.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/sep/14/tories-extend-poll-lead-to-12-despite-week-of-political-chaos

[Yosser0_0]

Did anyone notice how many European Union flags there are at the Last Night of the Proms? (Its on now)

[Dr. Beaker]

Has anyone  managed to watch that BBC brexitcast or whatever it's called. I can't manage to get past the first 5 minutes of cringeworthy small talk. Is it worth making the effort (because I've tried twice, like)?

[Circa1892]

Andrew Murray harrassed women in his old job. Presume Trada will be sharing outraged sqwankbox posits on it soon

[Dr. Beaker]

Did anyone notice how many European Union flags there are at the Last Night of the Proms? (Its on now)

Same last year.

[Libertine]

Did anyone notice how many European Union flags there are at the Last Night of the Proms? (Its on now)

There's a campaign to hand out flags to those going: https://twitter.com/TheNewEuropean/status/1172948984853344257 but fair play to those who take and wave them.

Presume there's a certain irony to them still singing "Land of Hope and Glory" right now!

Loved the singer waving the rainbow flag earlier though.....

[Yosser0_0]

Same last year.

Quite heartwarming and a statement that we are not all stupid racists given that its being broadcast all over the world.

[Robinred]

Did anyone notice how many European Union flags there are at the Last Night of the Proms? (Its on now)

I did indeed.

It’s telling though that the closing of LNOTP is always tinged with not so wholesome nationalism and the singing of ‘Land of Hope and Glory’, ‘Jerusalem’ and other singularly ‘English’ songs. I know it’s tradition and I know many in the audience are pro European; nonetheless it rankles with me that just beneath the surface is something disquieting.

[Zeb]

Pretty scary polling reported in the Guardian today - after all the week's madness, the Tories have improved to a 12 point lead.

Corbyn's 4D chess is paying off though: 

Against that, ComRes (in the Sunday Express) has:

Tories: 28% (-2)
Labour: 27% (-2)
Lib Dems: 20% (+3)
Farageists: 13%
Greens: 5% (+1)

(difference from 8/9/19)

I believe the technical term for it is "mad as hats". Still washes out to a Tory lead all the same. Just size of it. And where. Labour are running the marathon pulling an anvil behind but that's an old story.

[So… Howard Philips]

Against that, ComRes (in the Sunday Express) has:

Tories: 28% (-2)
Labour: 27% (-2)
Lib Dems: 20% (+3)
Farageists: 13%
Greens: 5% (+1)

(difference from 8/9/19)

I believe the technical term for it is "mad as hats". Still washes out to a Tory lead all the same. Just size of it. And where. Labour are running the marathon pulling an anvil behind but that's an old story.

When push comes to shove I would imagine most dyed in the wool Conservatives who have said they would vote Farageist will revert back to tribal loyalty.

[Yosser0_0]

Latest UK general election opinion polls: big variation in Conservative lead between pollsters

https://www.markpack.org.uk/155623/voting-intention-opinion-poll-scorecard/

[Banquo's Ghost]

I believe the technical term for it is "mad as hats". Still washes out to a Tory lead all the same. Just size of it. And where. Labour are running the marathon pulling an anvil behind but that's an old story.

Agreed on the mad part, and that polling is all over the place. The Guardian poll struck me as scary not so much for the reported lead, but that a government so venal and chaotic is still not being dented by the Opposition.

Indeed, the continued evidence that former Labour voters are increasingly prepared to vote Conservative Brexit areas seems to undermine the 'fence-sitting' approach, and that any election in the pre-Brexit timescale is lilley to be a single issue election shorn of previous loyalties.

As in Thatcher's heyday, once previously tribal Labour voters decide they can vote Tory, they are not easy to get back.

As I've written before, I think the only viable strategy for Labour is to become a fiercely Remain party, almost certainly on a Revoke Article 50 platform. With a very different leader to sell it.

I think the only lesson the polls are giving us is that a very clear position on one or other side of the Brexit issue is necessary. Or maybe that the British (English?) electorate really wants a dictatorship rather than standardised bananas.

[Zeb]

Agreed on the mad part, and that polling is all over the place. The Guardian poll struck me as scary not so much for the reported lead, but that a government so venal and chaotic is still not being dented by the Opposition.

Indeed, the continued evidence that former Labour voters are increasingly prepared to vote Conservative Brexit areas seems to undermine the 'fence-sitting' approach, and that any election in the pre-Brexit timescale is lilley to be a single issue election shorn of previous loyalties.

As in Thatcher's heyday, once previously tribal Labour voters decide they can vote Tory, they are not easy to get back.

As I've written before, I think the only viable strategy for Labour is to become a fiercely Remain party, almost certainly on a Revoke Article 50 platform. With a very different leader to sell it.

I think the only lesson the polls are giving us is that a very clear position on one or other side of the Brexit issue is necessary. Or maybe that the British (English?) electorate really wants a dictatorship rather than standardised bananas.

I'm a bit more sanguine about prospects of a straight shift of Labour 2017 voters to Conservatives. Evidence of longer term trends continues to be it's minimal once you're past the 'conveyor belt' effect (as the Fabians pointed out last year, one of the few things held in common among longer term Labour voters is a "deep, almost innate, dislike for the Conservative party") - although a large, and related, problem could be turnout while the key problem is that there'll be no (majority) Labour government when the party's on a purity drive to minimise its appeal. Question really boils down to what Labour sees its future as a party as being. Which is without a suitable answer for all of Labour's traditional coalition of voters with the debate as it is. Similar proxy would be a debate on Trident. ("Let's build the subs but not put nukes on them" is the current position being quietly mooted, I believe.)

Not sure there's a viable strategy there beyond damage limitation as things are. As soon as you mention 'a very different leader', it's no longer 'viable' without some serious rethinking by and remaking of the current membership.

[stevo7]

With the advent of tactical voting, I reckon a lot of people being polled nowadays lie about their voting intention to skew the results.

[Zeb]

One of the ways to get past the 'who would you vote for tomorrow?' problem is to look to longer term surveys of opinion which ask questions like "would you ever vote for X?".

Paula Surridge has been working with that (although last of the data dates from March so reasonable question is whether things have changed dramatically since European elections) and comes to the following conclusions.

Labour

Spoiler

Among those who voted Labour in 2017 and have a strong remain identity 45% rate their likelihood of voting Liberal Democrat at 6/10 or higher. This shouldn’t be entirely surprising, many of these voters did in fact vote LibDem in 2005 or 2010. This will be of major concern to Labour though, as it shows that almost half of this group of voters may be willing to switch to the LibDems, this group itself being the largest among 2017 Labour support.

But it may be that a strong campaign (or a clear Brexit message?) means that these voters stick with Labour.

The signs this might happen are mixed. Among the strong remain identifiers over 40% give a 10/10 likelihood of voting Labour, it is possible with strong remain messaging and a good campaign Labour can hold onto more of their 2017 base than recent polls have suggested. However, among very strong leave identifiers (who had voted Labour in 2017) 25% rate their likelihood of ever voting again Labour at 0/10.

This may be an important element of the electoral landscape at the next general election; not just who those ‘Labour leavers’ vote for but if they vote at all. Looking across these four parties (and limiting our analysis to England only to avoid the additional complications of the nationalists in Scotland and Wales) more than 1 in 5 of Labour 2017 voters with a leave identity did not score any of the parties at 6 or higher. In other words they rated themselves as unlikely to vote for Labour, the Brexit Party, the Liberal Democrats or the Conservatives.

What might this all mean for a general election (widely expected to be soon), it goes some way to explaining why Labour find it so hard to lock in their Brexit position, they are fighting to hold on to their 2017 vote from two sides. The bigger electoral danger may be losing a significant proportion of the much larger group of ‘strong remain’ voters but in some areas losing a proportion of those with leave identities to the Brexit Party or to non-voting could be enough for the Conservatives to squeeze past.

[close]

And for Conservatives.

General conclusion.

Spoiler

In a recently published piece (written back in May) I concluded

‘The next general election may well be a competition to see which party can retain its 2017 support most effectively in order to have the most legitimate claim to lead a potentially highly fragmented hung parliament.’

This still seems like a likely scenario. Brexit identities are likely to play a part in the next election, but these will be far from the whole story. Concentrations of types of voters in different types of constituencies will matter and assumptions based purely on ‘leave’ and ‘remain’ in constituencies are likely to be flawed. There is real potential for the system to fragment dramatically, with the LibDems gaining from Labour and the Conservatives (though fewer voters from the later) to achieve something close to their 2010 share of the vote, while the Brexit party may well match (if not exceed) the performance of UKIP in 2015. Neither of these on their own managed to ‘break’ the two party system completely but should they both occur at once (a fairly likely scenario) all bets are off.

[close]

For reference, Lib Dems got 23% of the vote share in 2010 and UKIP 12.6% of the vote in 2015. 'Neither of them' could be quite the potent campaign slogan against the big two across Britain. eg Lewis Goodall's piece on Wales today. Depends whether you see this as being purely a Brexit thing or some deeper, and older, stuff bubbling up again. Case against that, of course, is that FPTP effectively forces tactical voting for many and squeezes out other parties. Or at least until it doesn't.

[Cpt_Reina]

@wesstreeting: Today @SamGyimah came to work to block a Bill to deliver justice for ppl imprisoned and chemically castrated for being gay. What a guy.

https://twitter.com/wesstreeting/status/789460154341351424

People who vote for the Lib Dems based on the single factor that they're pro revoke need to reassess their values.

The party is becoming much more tory than it is Liberal.

[Sangria]

@wesstreeting: Today @SamGyimah came to work to block a Bill to deliver justice for ppl imprisoned and chemically castrated for being gay. What a guy.

https://twitter.com/wesstreeting/status/789460154341351424

People who vote for the Lib Dems based on the single factor that they're pro revoke need to reassess their values.

The party is becoming much more tory than it is Liberal.

It doesn't really matter in the immediate short term. As long as it is remain. Which Labour is not.

[Lush is the best medicine...]

@wesstreeting: Today @SamGyimah came to work to block a Bill to deliver justice for ppl imprisoned and chemically castrated for being gay. What a guy.

https://twitter.com/wesstreeting/status/789460154341351424

People who vote for the Lib Dems based on the single factor that they're pro revoke need to reassess their values.

The party is becoming much more tory than it is Liberal.

you should look up a bit more on that, besides labour is run by a man who happily took £20k from a regime that hangs gays so not the best card to play here