A Political Thread

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

If we where to go (still not convinced by that) May will not want to use Article 50 and she seems to be favourite.

Could we in theory set up stronger trade and lessen immigration borders between countries like Canada, Aus and NZ etc? As a way of damage control?

 

[ncurd]

But difference with Norway model is they still have to contribute massively to EU for that deal. However I think the UK have a lot more leverage and I know business's would prefer a Remain vote but now surely they'll heap huge pressure on now to be given deals. Also the fact Scotland and NI effectively voted to remain makes this a whole lot more complicated. But you are bang on in saying it is a guinea pig scenario

The real sticking point will be migration it's probably the main reason why leave won. The problem basically boils down to ALOT countries would find the Norway model attractive if they didn't have to deal with that and they'd rather have a seat at the table. We're larger but any deal made with EU other countries would demand the same terms so I doubt we'll get much probably movement on that front. Laws are another matter but I doubt just that will palatable for a majority of leave supporters.

On votes I once said something similar to my parents as a child (based on intelligence) they were very quick to point out it's way too open to abuse by governments. Rightly or wrongly it's integral part of democracy to actually make governments accountable otherwise they can rig the rules further in favour of them (we already have a voting system that does). Anyway an indirect democracy is supposed to protect us from ill informed decision making that have massive impacts on the people as a whole....someone post the democracy doesn't work video again

 

[munstermuffin]

The real sticking point will be migration it's probably the main reason why leave won. The problem basically boils down to ALOT countries would find the Norway model attractive if they didn't have to deal with that and they'd rather have a seat at the table. We're larger but any deal made with EU other countries would demand the same terms so I doubt we'll get much probably movement on that front. Laws are another matter but I doubt just that will palatable for a majority of leave supporters.

On votes I once said something similar to my parents as a child (based on intelligence) they were very quick to point out it's way too open to abuse by governments. Rightly or wrongly it's integral part of democracy to actually make governments accountable otherwise they can rig the rules further in favour of them (we already have a voting system that does). Anyway an indirect democracy is supposed to protect us from ill informed decision making that have massive impacts on the people as a whole....someone post the democracy doesn't work video again

I'd 100% agree with majority of this. My point is even from 10 years ago politics has changed. Like before 1 party would be the popular 1 but now politics has become much more deeper than parties and diverse.

 

[McTallshort]

You actually think it's democratic to take Britain out of the EU against the will of its people, if the people change their minds?

Who's changed their minds?

 

[McTallshort]

And we have zero idea what the deal between us and Europe will be we just voted on the idea of leaving which means very different things to different people. I see no harm in asking people to agree to the detail.

Bah the Leave campaign promised us a hospital every week if we left the EU we can afford another referendum if we're going to save that much money. Which we're not and we have no idea of the actual cost difference as both sides were taking porkies pies and if, buts and maybes. Which is entirely why there should be a vote so people can make a better decision rather than the hopes and dreams some politicians think might happen.

- - - Updated - - -

oh yeah as said before it was always a political union with further integration down the road. Infact they campaigned on that very fact in 1975.

Yes and it was agreed that if such a union changed in such a fundamental way that it took constitution rights away from the individual countries then each country would hold a referendum. Tony Blair announced we would after Holland and France but they rejected it so our referendum was cancelled. The EU then brought in the Lisbon treaty which over rid the referendum in Holland and France but we still ended up with what they voted against.

 

[ncurd]

Who's changed their minds?

Well for one you did seconds, before you put your ballot in.

Look I don't think a million people changed their minds overnight there has been exactly zero evidence to suggest otherwise. Any calling for an immediate referendum and super majority have their head in the sand the horse has bolted on that one.

Ultimately I'm calling for a second referendum (I'd accept a super majority required to remain but think that would be wrong) on the detail not vague promises of the leave capaign and I don't think that's entirely unreasonable to ask for in case people do channge their minds between now and then.

General Elections are up to goverments/term times I think it would be on shakier ground to stop leaving the EU but goverment elected on that promise would still have a democratic mandate. I don't think its right route but will argue to remain anyway.



On a second referendum on detail I'd like three options
Reject
Accept
Remain

50%+ remain = remain
50%+ accept and remain = accept and leave
50%+ reject = try to renegotiate but ultimate accept and leave

 

[Which Tyler]

My previous post on abuse suffered by my wife...

I'm sure you'll all be amazed that this has been eating at me a bit.
I have reported the abuse to my MP, and asked him to publicly condemn such behaviour; I have also reported it to the police who are logging it for statistical purposes, but otherwise there's not a lot they can do - which is important in and of itself. My MP has so far condemned the behaviour... in a private email to myself, but nothing seems to have appeared in the press, twitter or facebook. The cops are sending a community officer around to talk about CCTV type options.

This stuff is happening, and far worse than Ali and I have suffered, and twitter / facebook seems to be full of people witnessing abuse, sitting there quietly and tweeting about how awful it was.

IMO it is incumbent upon all of us to actively object to abuse; to (intellectually) confront and challenge the abuser, to publicly offer our support to the victim we have just witnessed; and to do so in a way that leaves no doubt in the abuser's mind that their behaviour was unacceptable.
Currently the racists and biggots seem to think that the leave vote is a mandate to spout their hatred. It is no such thing; and we all need to make this point to them.

There is a petition at change.org asking the home office to condemn the behaviour; pity it's not on petition.parliament.uk, but there we go.
I urge anyone on here to sign that petition; to email their MP to publicly oppose biggotry; and I would urge anyone who actually witnesses abuse to step up and confront it. I urge victims to report it, to their MP and to the police.
As Edmund Burke said "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing".

 

[Groundhog]

I'm sure you'll all be amazed that this has been eating at me a bit.
I have reported the abuse to my MP, and asked him to publicly condemn such behaviour; I have also reported it to the police who are logging it for statistical purposes, but otherwise there's not a lot they can do - which is important in and of itself. My MP has so far condemned the behaviour... in a private email to myself, but nothing seems to have appeared in the press, twitter or facebook. The cops are sending a community officer around to talk about CCTV type options.

This stuff is happening, and far worse than Ali and I have suffered, and twitter / facebook seems to be full of people witnessing abuse, sitting there quietly and tweeting about how awful it was.

IMO it is incumbent upon all of us to actively object to abuse; to (intellectually) confront and challenge the abuser, to publicly offer our support to the victim we have just witnessed; and to do so in a way that leaves no doubt in the abuser's mind that their behaviour was unacceptable.
Currently the racists and biggots seem to think that the leave vote is a mandate to spout their hatred. It is no such thing; and we all need to make this point to them.

There is a petition at change.org asking the home office to condemn the behaviour; pity it's not on petition.parliament.uk, but there we go.
I urge anyone on here to sign that petition; to email their MP to publicly oppose biggotry; and I would urge anyone who actually witnesses abuse to step up and confront it. I urge victims to report it, to their MP and to the police.
As Edmund Burke said "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing".

Saw a facebook post showing hundreds of people talking about being told to go home, and to pack up their stuff and leave.
Anyone else see Farage today? Egomaniacal, useless pathetic pond scum. The prick trying to slag off an institution he collected a salary off for years saying how they've never had a real job. The ***** went to public school. Can't speak for other countries but nearly all of the Irish MEP's have had a tougher run of it than Farage ..... He is the reason bricks were weaponised.

 

[munstermuffin]

Was on Last Word today (a current affairs radio show here in Ireland) that now is where mess really starts because Parliament have to vote it through and 2/3s want to stay and it like a big conflict of interest. Can anyone explain that to me

 

[pagliaccio_euforico]

Farage was quoted today as saying "Can we all just grow up, stop this absolute scare-mongering nonsense?" in regards to talks about the economy crashing... pretty sweet coming from you'd think

 

[j'nuh]

Who's changed their minds?

Look I don't think a million people changed their minds overnight there has been exactly zero evidence to suggest otherwise. Any calling for an immediate referendum and super majority have their head in the sand the horse has bolted on that one.

Have you seen the survation poll?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...ond-remain-latest-will-we-leave-a7105116.html

1.1m changed their minds from leave to remain, 700k changed their minds from remain to leave. Net = 400k swing to remain.

These changes would have put leave at winning by 470,000 instead of 1.27m.

Of course, that means that still leave is winning. But for the winning margin to be cut down to 40% of what it was is pretty insane. This is the effect of a single weekend - just imagine the effect a recession could cause.

So yeah, leave still have the democratic mandate right now. But I doubt they will hold on to it.

 

[McTallshort]

So 1.1 million people have told the not so independent they have changed their minds.....really?

 

[j'nuh]

The left are in such a dire state right now. It really is depressing. Lib Dems presided over their own demise, trading their party to dilute the Tories for 5 years. It was not a great trade-off tbh.

But Labour... they are even worse in a way. Lib Dems hurt themselves but the damage is contained to themselves. Without an electable Labour, it will hurt workers all over the country. They are caught in a war of ideology. The PLP is dominated by Blairites and other red Tories (if not by numbers, by experienced politicians). They won a few elections and believe they are invincible. They don't realise that the working classes gave up on them after the recession. Blairites are simply not electable anymore.

Meanwhile, the left beat the drum over policies that just aren't a priority for the public any more (nationalisation namely). They are too unpopular with the media, the left/right swing voters, and apparently their own MPs. I like Corbyn and I would like to see a slow shift to the left, but it's too much of a leap right now.

In the short-term, Labour has to rally under a soft left candidate. And when I say rally, I mean everyone behind the candidate, members included. They need to unify their voter base and the PLP, and get back on-side with the media. I really wanted it to be Lisa Nandy, but Angela Eagle would be good too.

In the long-term, Labour has to go into a "grand left coalition", bring in PR, then fracture. Labour has become too wide a party to cater for its supporters and the wider public. The two sides will no doubt work together in regular coalitions (along with some combination of LDs, Greens, Plaid and SNP), but each side needs to govern its own affairs and not break down into these spats. The left side should aim to win back support from the working classes, from non-voters and UKIP defectors. The right needs to contend the middle with the Tories.

Without doing this, Labour risk an indefinite Tory rule.

So 1.1 million people have told the not so independent they have changed their minds.....really?

Survation, not the Independent.

 

[ncurd]

The Lib Dems are not a left party if people stop saying it they'll be less surprised when we do centrist things.

 

[j'nuh]

Totally disagree. Mark Pack put out a wonderful strategy on how the party values align with those of the centre-left, and to build a core vote, the party needs to engage more with this side.

See "Where to find a core vote", page 4 and 5 here: http://www.markpack.org.uk/building-a-core-vote-for-the-liberal-democrats-the-20-strategy/

In particular:

On the basis of answers to several such questions, together with counting voters who strongly object to immigration as not-so-tolerant-and-open regardless of their other answers, we can estimate the tolerant and open section of the electorate at about 38%....
If we look at the 38% of the electorate that looks tolerant and open and consider their economic views, about a fifth put themselves right of centre on whether the government should redistribute incomes, about a fifth are centrists and three fifths are left of centre, of whom one in three are very strongly in favour of redistribution and two out of three somewhat in favour. Similarly on questions about privatisation, nationalisation and tax and spend, the median tolerant and open voter is on the centre-left.

And tbh, it makes sense to me. It seems almost paradoxical to me that you would vouch for the fairness of liberalism, and not support re-distribution of income. Which is why the Orange Bookers lost us so much - they built a platform on a somewhat centrist position, heavy on the liberalism... but when they went into coalition, they gave the Tories the means to implement austerity, cut benefits etc. It's totally at odds with the concept of liberalism, and I can see why so many deserted the party for it. Labour are the only realistic coalition partner for the Lib Dems.

 

[ncurd]

Yes left of center that sticks us with Blairites (just with fair bit of added liberism) not the Crobyns or the greens we're a centerist party have been for bloody long time. The left of Conservative party are pretty close to us as well.

Yes I support the redistribution of income but so the Tories to some extent hence the tax and benefit systems.

Honestly the bit that gets my goat is most people think we're left of labor even when Clegg was in charge. That's simply because they confuse liberalism with left wing. Yes liberalism does align well with the left but not entirely.

Plus as a small party it's not about grabbing votes it's about doing what you believe in. If I were a full on lefty I'd be part of labor or the greens.

 

[Peat]

Please go and tell Tom Watson he's a Blairite or Red Tory. Go on. Please.

Maybe Labour wouldn't be in such a sorry state if people didn't keep using those terms. There's not too many Blairites left in the Labour party and as for Red Tory, if they were Tories, they'd be in the Tory party. They're not. They don't want to be. They want to be in Labour, they want to direct this country towards helping the disadvantaged have better lives. There's no accuracy to them and instead they've become insults. I'm not sure in what spirit you meant them J'nuh, but 9/10 I see them online, they're insults. I'm sure some will respond with the many points in similarity that they have - and aye, there are some - but then there's a lot of things the same between otters and beavers, but that doesn't make them the same animal.

Labour's right is not the enemy of Labour's hard left. Sometimes its a rival, but it is mainly an ally. Because its Labour. But this gets lost in a narrative where everyone who's not with Corbyn is some rabid Blairite dreaming of a new reign of 10,000 PFI contracts and a 100,000 bombs on the Middle East just because. Apparently Lisa Nandy is a Blairite now.

Please don't use language that feeds that narrative. Or, yes, the split will happen. It doesn't need to, it shouldn't happen, but it seems to be getting likelier. Maybe about PR it might make sense but not now and to be honest, a broad church remains stronger. The Gang of 4 was bad enough for Britain's left. The Gang of 170 will be a bit mental to be honest.


Hey Ncurd - if that does happen - think the Lib Dems would be up for another merger?

 

[ratsapprentice]

there's not too many blairites left in the labour party and as for red tory, if they were tories, they'd be in the tory party. They're not. They don't want to be.

qft

 

[j'nuh]

Please go and tell Tom Watson he's a Blairite or Red Tory. Go on. Please.

Corbyn's lost the faith of his PLP. But that's a more recent development compared to the ongoing feud between the left and right of the party - a feud that has been around since Blair took the party to the right. If you just listen to the UKIP defectors and Northern people, there is a hell of a lot of people who feel abandoned by Labour.

Maybe Labour wouldn't be in such a sorry state if people didn't keep using those terms. There's not too many Blairites left in the Labour party and as for Red Tory, if they were Tories, they'd be in the Tory party. They're not. They don't want to be. They want to be in Labour, they want to direct this country towards helping the disadvantaged have better lives. There's no accuracy to them and instead they've become insults. I'm not sure in what spirit you meant them J'nuh, but 9/10 I see them online, they're insults. I'm sure some will respond with the many points in similarity that they have - and aye, there are some - but then there's a lot of things the same between otters and beavers, but that doesn't make them the same animal.

Labour's right is not the enemy of Labour's hard left. Sometimes its a rival, but it is mainly an ally. Because its Labour. But this gets lost in a narrative where everyone who's not with Corbyn is some rabid Blairite dreaming of a new reign of 10,000 PFI contracts and a 100,000 bombs on the Middle East just because. Apparently Lisa Nandy is a Blairite now.

Please don't use language that feeds that narrative. Or, yes, the split will happen. It doesn't need to, it shouldn't happen, but it seems to be getting likelier. Maybe about PR it might make sense but not now and to be honest, a broad church remains stronger. The Gang of 4 was bad enough for Britain's left. The Gang of 170 will be a bit mental to be honest.

For the record, I would actually prefer a soft left candidate, especially Nandy, to Corbyn.

But yes, I think Labour's right is to some degree the enemy of Labour's "hard left".

I lived in Bradford for the first 19 years of my life. Between ages 7 and 19, New Labour held government. In spite of this, and a booming economy, Bradford, like a lot of Northern towns and cities, got nada. I lived in an area where bricks would regularly come through bus windows because of racial tensions. Unemployment was bad, opportunities scarce, and Bradford back then had a similar feel to the rest of the country right now. A planned "regeneration effort" for the city was repeatedly delayed, although expensive bids for the Olympics and football world cups occurred. Rather than improve transport links around the North, Labour decided connecting the country to London was the priority. To me and a lot of people, it felt like Labour cared about London and not a great deal else. When people talk about the plight of Northern towns and cities, and how they feel abandoned by Labour, I feel very sympathetic towards that. New Labour had a lot of successes in some areas throughout the country, such as on child and pensioner poverty, but understanding and adapting post-industrial towns for the modern service-driven world was a failing of New Labour. When the recession came along and even further damaged hurting, poor towns and cities, it was the final nail in the coffin for New Labour, especially in the North.

More recently, in the 2015 General Election, Labour's platform (despite being under the leadership of someone supposedly of the left) was austerity, albeit not as much as Tories or Lib Dems. Austerity hurts the working classes far more than the middle and upper classes. But the thing that really got me last year and renewed my anger at Labour was when 184 Labour MPs abstained against the government welfare bill. Of the four leadership candidates at the time, Corbyn was the only one to have broken Harman's whip and voted against it, and he has a lot of goodwill in my books for that.

Labour has shown increasing apathy towards the working classes. They take the working class vote for granted and then try to win the middle vote. Prudent maybe, but it angers your core. Which is where we are at now. People feel like Corbyn speaks for the working classes, and it feels to them like the Labour establishment are shutting that out, continuing to turn their backs on the working classes.

 

[Peat]

You're still wrong. They're not the enemy.

Sometime rival, maybe. Bad friend, yeah, that could work. I'm not here to say that New Labour and its works are wonderful for Labour's hard left and the working classes - which are two different things, just like Labour's right and New Labour are two different things.

But they're not the enemy. Someone who's willing to be in the same political party as you is not your enemy.

At least, they're not unless the hard left want them to be the enemy. But you'd like to think Labour's hard left have enough enemies in the world without making more.