BREXIT |OT2.0| No thread is better than a bad thread

Binabik15

Member
Oct 28, 2017
995
I still think it's pretty astonishing. You can sort of understand how watching Fox leads people to like Trump in the US, but the British media does a pretty consistent job of exposing what an absolute shit Trump is, and it's still not enough for these troglodytes. I'm not surprised that there are some who like him, but a fucking majority of them think that Donald Trump would be a good Prime Minister? Jesus Christ. At best they're idiots, at worst they're basically traitors.
Looking at the shit they are in favour of, no, they're not misinformed by the media or whatever, they're simply vile, disgusting racists and xenophobes. Just like Lil Dump.


With your current politics, I have no idea why you would want to do away with monarchy. There is more reason to switch to a real monarchy and do away with parliament.
If she pulled the UK out with no deal the gutter press and the gammons would make her Empress, no?

I'll say it again, both US and UK need a political reboot like e.g. France and Germany got after losing (ok, and winning, but we want the humble version) wars.
 
OP
OP
Uzzy

Uzzy

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,330

Labour to campaign for a second referendum and remain in a no deal/Tory deal scenario. Good good.
 

null

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,291



This Corbyn climb down, is still not a full switch is it?
what more do you want?

They support a second ref on any deal (including one they would hypothetically negotiate should there be an election and they win).
They say remain should be an option on any ballot.
They'd campaign to remain.
 
Last edited:

31GhostsIV

Member
Oct 26, 2017
1,673
When I read the Guardian headline I just knew he would still be on that fence somehow. "We back remain against the Tory deal or no deal".. but no doubt would still try to implement a deal of his own if in power.

Labour, please drop Corbyn and his puppet masters Milne and Len etc.
 

null

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,291
When I read the Guardian headline I just knew he would still be on that fence somehow. "We back remain against the Tory deal or no deal".. but no doubt would still try to implement a deal of his own if in power.

Labour, please drop Corbyn and his puppet masters Milne and Len etc.
what fence? If there's a Tory/No deal they'll support a second ref and if there's an election first (and they win) they'll put the deal to a second ref.

There's always going to be a deal. whether it's Tory or Labour there has to be a deal in some form before it goes on a ballot.
 
OP
OP
Uzzy

Uzzy

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,330
what more do you want?

They support a second ref on any deal (including one they would hypothetical negotiate should there be an election and they win).
They say remain should be an option on any ballot.
They'd campaign to remain.
Yup. If you want a second referendum, Labour policy is for you. They're promising a second referendum in all circumstances, with remain as an option.
 

theaface

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,992
Not sure what else Corbyn can do to appease some people.

But then I see those people as about as reasonable as the Brexit party.
Take the following two statements:

A) Labour supports a second referendum*

*with caveats, provisos and disclaimers

B) Labour supports a second referendum.

A lot of people want B, but always seem to get a version of A. Brexit is a polarizing issue and there are few people that have patience for the fallacy that it's still possible to appease both sides of the debate.

Their position on the Tory-negotiated deal and a referendum is fine. The messaging compared to other parties is weak, however. Instead of "if this, then we back that" approach, NOW is the time to be hammering home that the Tory deal is a disaster and a failure, and it needs to go to the public NOW.

Their position on a Labour-negotiated Brexit is still typical cakeism. 3 years on and there's no real substance to their belief that they can deliver their slightly-softer-than-the-Tories Brexit without having the exact same problems re: Irish border OR delivering a Brexit so soft as to be pointless.
 

31GhostsIV

Member
Oct 26, 2017
1,673
what fence? If there's a Tory/No deal they'll support a second ref and if there's an election first (and they win) they'll put the deal to a second ref.
Where does it say this? Because in the Guardian live feed he's not clearly defining what would happen if Labour gained power. He's just opposing the Tory deal (or no deal).

And as for the Brexit Party comment above, Jesus Christ. Personally I draw more parallels between the blind following of Farage and Corbyn supporters.
 

jelly

Member
Oct 26, 2017
9,236
It's fine to a point if Labour don't get into power because they would be full on remain versus no deal/Tory deal, however the chances of such a ballot being on the table or there ever being one, slim to none so it's easy for Labour to positon themselves as remain in this case, nothing to lose.

If there is a snap election before Brexit, what would their Brexit position be, this is were it unravels fast and goes into unicorn nonsense fence sitting, they wouldn't be remain 100%, they would be Labour fantasy deal and we already know they want to cherry pick that the EU won't accept so we are back to square one, Tory fantasy versus Labour fantasy Brexit.
 

Flammable D

Member
Oct 30, 2017
10,762
It's fine to a point if Labour don't get into power because they would be full on remain versus no deal/Tory deal, however the chances of such a ballot being on the table or there ever being one, slim to none so it's easy for Labour to positon themselves as remain in this case, nothing to lose.

If there is a snap election before Brexit, what would their Brexit position be, this is were it unravels fast and goes into unicorn nonsense fence sitting, they wouldn't be remain 100%, they would be Labour fantasy deal and we already know they want to cherry pick that the EU won't accept so we are back to square one, Tory fantasy versus Labour fantasy Brexit.
The obvious and crucial contextual difference you're omitting being that Tory default in the case they don't get what they want is no deal, which Labour have consistently and constantly ruled out.
 
Oct 25, 2017
3,164
Take the following two statements:

A) Labour supports a second referendum*

*with caveats, provisos and disclaimers

B) Labour supports a second referendum.

A lot of people want B, but always seem to get a version of A. Brexit is a polarizing issue and there are few people that have patience for the fallacy that it's still possible to appease both sides of the debate.
A is a more useful option to take in terms of room to manoeuvre.

But it's dumb because by picking A over B you're still getting side eyed by those who you picked A to appease anyway. And we all know if Labour actually got into power, before brexit gets decided (if it ever does, or if it's even possible), Corbyn trying to sell 'his deal' would kill him and his faction. So why bother with A at all?

It's a good step but it's not exactly gonna make them surge in the polls. The people who are minded to switch to lib dem/green would just focus on the small print, especially come election time if the caveats are still there. But I dunno if their internal polling has them wargaming certain seats over others.
 

Flammable D

Member
Oct 30, 2017
10,762

null

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,291
Where does it say this? Because in the Guardian live feed he's not clearly defining what would happen if Labour gained power. He's just opposing the Tory deal (or no deal).

And as for the Brexit Party comment above, Jesus Christ. Personally I draw more parallels between the blind following of Farage and Corbyn supporters.
These were agreed by the unions

Scenario 1

Tory deal
Labour support second ref (deal/no-deal vs remain)
Will campaign to remain

Scenario 2

(Labour win election)
Labour deal
Will support second ref (deal vs remain)
No agreed position (would probably remain neutral but let MPs camapign however they want like Harold Wilson did in '75)

either way the support is now > Get deal, second ref, [deal] vs remain.

with a Labour government this is guaranteed whereas now the Tories could just shut it all down and vote for the deal as is.

edit: I see the letter he sent to members only acknowledges scenario 1 for now but the above were both agreed so if there was an election this is what would more than likely happen (unless there's another change before then but that seem unlikely as there's nothing else to offer)
 
Last edited:

SMD

Member
Oct 28, 2017
2,914
People nailing Corbyn on semantics annoyed he's not being specific enough for them to nail him on semantics.
 

kradical

Member
Oct 25, 2017
898
Labour are now fully committed to a second referendum with remain as an option in any scenario. They would campaign for remain in any scenario other than the very unlikely case that they come to power and manage to negotiate a great deal with the EU - and even in that case they would put their negotiated deal to a referendum with remain as an option. Anyone who still says nothing has changed and this is more Corbyn fence sitting is not arguing in good faith.
 

solidussnaku

Member
Nov 29, 2017
692



This Corbyn climb down, is still not a full switch is it?
It's the biggest 'climbdown' he has done in ages, and the biggest switch we will get. Unless you want them to broker a deal they will spend many months doing once they get in power just to rubbish it and run a ref on remain Vs no deal.

Yes, that would be the best option.

/S ,of course.


This position makes absolute sense given the amount of people that voted leave and would do so again. The ground is shifting evermore for remain winning, but sure as shit it's not at that stage yet where it's a lock. The idea labour WON'T do a second ref when they get in power is fucking mental.

They are fully expecting a snap election, a ref in any circumstance will be in the next manifesto, right next to what they agreed to today.

Labour now, by and large, is a remain party and a second ref one.

We can split hairs, but let's be honest now, that will be against Corbyn, not this big shift in the absolutely right direction.
 
OP
OP
Uzzy

Uzzy

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,330
Take the following two statements:

A) Labour supports a second referendum*

*with caveats, provisos and disclaimers

B) Labour supports a second referendum.

A lot of people want B, but always seem to get a version of A. Brexit is a polarizing issue and there are few people that have patience for the fallacy that it's still possible to appease both sides of the debate.

Their position on the Tory-negotiated deal and a referendum is fine. The messaging compared to other parties is weak, however. Instead of "if this, then we back that" approach, NOW is the time to be hammering home that the Tory deal is a disaster and a failure, and it needs to go to the public NOW.

Their position on a Labour-negotiated Brexit is still typical cakeism. 3 years on and there's no real substance to their belief that they can deliver their slightly-softer-than-the-Tories Brexit without having the exact same problems re: Irish border OR delivering a Brexit so soft as to be pointless.
Labour's position is B) though. They support a second referendum in all circumstances. 'Labour supports remain' is the statement that comes with caveats.
 

Puroresu_kid

Member
Oct 28, 2017
3,697
Finally we have some kind of direction but honestly this shouldn't have taken so long. Labour should have been behind a second referendum and unequivocally remain months ago.
 

PJV3

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,616
London
Corbyn can't maintain his position in the relative freedom of opposition, i'm not sure what remainers are worried about in the remote chance he forms a government, he will fold and at worst waste time negotiating with the EU.
 
OP
OP
Uzzy

Uzzy

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,330

Grieve's attempt to stop the prorogation of Parliament hasn't been selected. Welp.
 

Gawge

Member
Oct 27, 2017
393
Mr Corbyn, by giving me - and all People’s Vote supporters - exactly what I wanted and asked for, you’ve made it impossible for me to vote Labour
 

jelly

Member
Oct 26, 2017
9,236
I feel like nothing of importance happens until we are much closer to the cliff edge.
 

Gawge

Member
Oct 27, 2017
393
Think this is a good article, particularly:

"Centrist thinking is focused on two false premises. The first is that the 2012 London Olympic ceremony represented an idyllic high-point of culture and unity in the UK, rather than occurring amid the brutal onslaught of austerity, with food bank use growing and the bedroom tax ruining lives. The second is that the UK became divided by Brexit and the 2016 vote, rather than it being a symptom of long-term problems: the decline of industry and the public sector begun by Margaret Thatcher and continued by Tony Blair and David Cameron; vast inequality of opportunity, wealth and health; and the number of people being routinely ignored in a system with a huge democratic and electoral deficit. "

 

Dougald

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,608
Labour's position is B) though. They support a second referendum in all circumstances. 'Labour supports remain' is the statement that comes with caveats.
This is exactly right. I had the email from Corbyn and it set out that

- Any party who negotiates a deal (or attempts to no deal) should put it to a referendum where the other option is remain
- Labour would campaign to remain against any Conservative deal (that doesn't "protect the economy and jobs", whatever that means) or no deal

Which, by implication, means Labour would campaign for their own deal if they were in government, but still put it to a referendum
 

Tzarscream

Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,885
Think this is a good article, particularly:

"Centrist thinking is focused on two false premises. The first is that the 2012 London Olympic ceremony represented an idyllic high-point of culture and unity in the UK, rather than occurring amid the brutal onslaught of austerity, with food bank use growing and the bedroom tax ruining lives. The second is that the UK became divided by Brexit and the 2016 vote, rather than it being a symptom of long-term problems: the decline of industry and the public sector begun by Margaret Thatcher and continued by Tony Blair and David Cameron; vast inequality of opportunity, wealth and health; and the number of people being routinely ignored in a system with a huge democratic and electoral deficit. "

What a load of shite.

I really hate this attitude of Corbynites lumping in critics of Corbyn as some sort of right wing centrists that have invaded the party and must be removed. I generally agree with most of Corbyns political stances in essence, but in practice he’s just not a good leader and he isn’t a remainer.

Being a remainer or agreeing a critic of Corbyn does not then make you a fucking idiot that thinks the 2012 olympics solved racism. It makes you somebody that craves to see some real leadership.

Corbyn could honestly fart in to a microphone and some people would give a standing ovation.

Don’t bring that fucking centrist rhetoric from the states back in here. A centrist in the middle of the democrat and republican party is far far far different from a UK centrist and even then, Tom Watson is not a centrist, disagreeing or being critical of Corbyn does not make you a centrist, backing remain does not make you a centrist.
 
Last edited:

PJV3

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,616
London
Watson is a shitty game player who is transparent as fuck, i'm not bothered by his position in the spectrum, he's just not helping.
 

Flammable D

Member
Oct 30, 2017
10,762
What a load of shite.

I really hate this attitude of Corbynites lumping in critics of Corbyn as some sort of right wing centrists that have invaded the party and must be removed. I generally agree with most of Corbyns political stances in essence, but in practice he’s just not a good leader and he isn’t a remainer.

Being a remainer or agreeing a critic of Corbyn does not then make you a fucking idiot that thinks the 2012 olympics solved racism. It makes you somebody that craves to see some real leadership.

Corbyn could honestly fart in to a microphone and some people would give a standing ovation.

Don’t bring that fucking centrist rhetoric from the states back in here. A centrist in the middle of the democrat and republican party is far far far different from a UK centrist and even then, Tom Watson is not a centrist, disagreeing or being critical of Corbyn does not make you a centrist, backing remain does not make you a centrist.


No one said backing remain made you a centrist, but neat projection
 

Gawge

Member
Oct 27, 2017
393
Don’t bring that fucking centrist rhetoric from the states back in here. A centrist in the middle of the democrat and republican party is far far far different from a UK centrist and even then, Tom Watson is not a centrist, disagreeing or being critical of Corbyn does not make you a centrist, backing remain does not make you a centrist.
Fully agree that you can be remain and not a centrist, I don't think the article suggests anything of the sort. It's more stuff like this:

"All the MPs who make a living by constantly attacking the leadership and promoting themselves over the party, Watson included, abstained in the fateful Tory welfare reform vote in 2015 that sparked a huge surge of support for Corbyn. "

Tom Watson is clearly much more towards the centre of British politics.

Personally, I have a lot of issues with Corbyn. I get quite annoyed that I end up being in a position of defending him so much because the objections from the centre are just so annoying.
 

Tzarscream

Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,885
Isn’t this all whataboutism though? Regardless of what you think about James O’Brien, he holds brexiteers to task on a daily basis. Regardless of T Watsons voting history (genuine question what did Ed whip for on that austerity motion?) he’s the deputy head of the opposition and has been holding Corbyn to task on his hand wringing on whether or not to have a clear stance on Brexit, and rightly so.

We cannot actually address the fundamental issues with the country until Brexit is solved, and if it’s solved in the wrong way it’ll be 10 times harder than it is now, and it’s already really fucking hard.

I am so sick of people capitulating to brexiteers who won a very narrow vote on lies, and i am deeply, deeply disappointed in Corbyn for not condemning it from the start.
 

newline

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
426
London, United Kingdom
Take the following two statements:

A) Labour supports a second referendum*

*with caveats, provisos and disclaimers

B) Labour supports a second referendum.

A lot of people want B, but always seem to get a version of A. Brexit is a polarizing issue and there are few people that have patience for the fallacy that it's still possible to appease both sides of the debate.

Their position on the Tory-negotiated deal and a referendum is fine. The messaging compared to other parties is weak, however. Instead of "if this, then we back that" approach, NOW is the time to be hammering home that the Tory deal is a disaster and a failure, and it needs to go to the public NOW.

Their position on a Labour-negotiated Brexit is still typical cakeism. 3 years on and there's no real substance to their belief that they can deliver their slightly-softer-than-the-Tories Brexit without having the exact same problems re: Irish border OR delivering a Brexit so soft as to be pointless.
Their message is literally that the tory deal is a disaster/failure and if Labour can't get into power then the tory deal needs to go to a public in a referendum (for which Labour will back remain).

I voted remain in the first referendum but I also get that if Labour thinks they can attempt to secure a reasonable exit deal then they should be given a chance, even if they end up failing. I know that some labour voters didn't vote the same way as me and their side won. They should be appeased by their own party, no matter how shitty that may seem to die hard 'remain or get fucked' ultras. Labour shouldn't (and won't) stand on a platform that craps on a whole part of its base. I also understand that failing for Labour won't mean crashing out of the EU, it'll likely mean staying in.

You're right though, it's not possible to please both sides of the Brexit debate. We should be working on delivering something for those that won the first referendum that isn't a damaging tory Brexit and won't fuck up the economy (risking lives).

If their message sounds weak it's because it's actually rooted in the reality of what the Labour party represents. If you can't agree with that then you just shouldn't vote Labour. But that won't be Jeremy Corbyn's fault.
 

kadotsu

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,191
We cannot actually address the fundamental issues with the country until Brexit is solved, and if it’s solved in the wrong way it’ll be 10 times harder than it is now, and it’s already really fucking hard.
You think centrists and conservatives will let Brexit go? It's the perfect smoke screen for austerity. Brexit won't be solved for another 15 years at least.
 

Tzarscream

Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,885
You think centrists and conservatives will let Brexit go? It's the perfect smoke screen for austerity. Brexit won't be solved for another 15 years at least.
Who are “the centrists”? The lib dems?

I don’t think anybody wants this Brexit issue to drag on any longer from the socialist remainer to the neo-con brexiteer.

Nothing can get done during this period which is why we need very very clear statements of intent from Corbyn right now so he can get in.
 

Git

Member
Oct 26, 2017
2,973
Give it a couple of years and we'll start to see people claiming "centrist is a slur!"
 
OP
OP
Uzzy

Uzzy

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,330
Any thoughts on the reasoning behind this?
Either they ruled it beyond the scope of the bill, which would make some sense. Or there's concern that they don't have the votes and a defeat on it would be taken as 'MP's OK with proroguation of Parliament.'

Other amendments from Grieve have been selected though, and he's not too concerned apparently.
 

RedSparrows

Member
Feb 22, 2019
1,205
They way it is used smacks of point scoring more than anything. But hey, that's what the internet is for really.
 

*Splinter

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,582
If Labour were in power, their options are:

No deal, no referendum
Negotiate a deal, no referendum
Negotiate a deal, referendum
No deal, referendum
Revoke without referendum

Labour have ruled out the first two options, and the fourth is wildly irresponsible. Noone claims to want the 5th so... What does that leave?