The now-enacted will of (some of) the people

[darrenm]

1 minute ago, chrisp65 said:

Are you suggesting their desire for votes and the preservation of their own pay packets outweighs their actual political convictions?

I'm clearly no politician, I'd have thought it better to say what you believe on such a massive defining issue and then try and argue and educate the electorate around to your way of thinking. Rather than pretend to agree with them and try and find a back door route.

So, they're a pro leave pro brexit party.

 

I'm genuinely struggling to see how it's not clear labour and tory are both brexit parties. 

That's why you're clearly no politician  what you're suggesting would put you on 5% with the lib dems and leave the Tories free to **** the country up as much as they like for generations.

What's clear about the term brexit? What does it mean?

[blandy]

11 minutes ago, darrenm said:

Out of the 2 major parties, Labour are closer to remain than Tories. They aren't pro-remain but they're not hard brexit like Tories. So I don't think anyone thinks they're backing remain, but I think most recognise than wanting to stay in the SM & CU is a far better, more sensible option than leaving everything.

Not really imo. Both are leave. Just different versions of leave. The Tories are a massive mess and labour only appears to be sane or organised by comparison. In normal times they’d also be seen for the mess they’re in. 

[chrisp65]

5 minutes ago, darrenm said:

That's why you're clearly no politician  what you're suggesting would put you on 5% with the lib dems and leave the Tories free to **** the country up as much as they like for generations.

What's clear about the term brexit? What does it mean?

I'm sure Nye Bevan would be proud of the current labour shadow cabinet and their ability to argue for what they believe in.

There is one thing that is clear about the term Brexit. It absolutely cannot result in someone leaving the EU and having a deal that is better than or even remotely equal to membership. If the EU give us a reasonable deal, it's the end of the EU and I don't see a desire among the 27 to disband.

If Labour can see that, but choose not articulate it, well that's as disgraceful as the tory policy of power at any cost.

Hey ho, still 16 months before we need to massively improve our trade deals with China, India, USA, Australia...they're all lining up to give us a better deal as a nation of 67 million than as a union of 750 million.

Labour will be equally to blame in this for not offering an opposition. Nobody will be interested to hear how labour would have worded the suicide note differently.

 

[peterms]

17 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

Are you suggesting their desire for votes and the preservation of their own pay packets outweighs their actual political convictions?

No, I'm not.  The number of Labour people for whom their employment depends on supporting brexit will be tiny, I suggest.  The problem they face is that in some of their core constituencies, many of their traditional voters support leave, and others, including much of the party, don't.   That has to be managed, delicately.

17 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

I'm clearly no politician, I'd have thought it better to say what you believe on such a massive defining issue and then try and argue and educate the electorate around to your way of thinking. Rather than pretend to agree with them and try and find a back door route.

There's ways and means.  Full frontal assault is likely to be unproductive.  There's argument, and there's hectoring.  Laying the ground for debate is better.  You may have noticed that the main concern of the Brexiters is to close off any further debate: "The country has decided! There's no more to be said!".  That's because they fear further discussion will expose the weaknesses in their position.

18 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

I'm genuinely struggling to see how it's not clear labour and tory are both brexit parties. 

Labour isn't, and the Tories are divided.

[chrisp65]

14 minutes ago, peterms said:

Labour isn't {brexit}

They need to update the manifesto on their website and let Corbyn know.

 

 

[darrenm]

1 minute ago, chrisp65 said:

They need to update the manifesto on their website and let Corbyn know.

 

 

I don't think you answered my question about what brexit actually is.

[dont_do_it_doug.]

10 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

They need to update the manifesto on their website and let Corbyn know.

 

 

I actually think you need to define what you mean by 'pro Brexit', because The Labour Party campaigned in favour of remain. 

If the question is are Labour pro democracy then yes, absolutely. They are the party of the workers after all. They also seem to be the party of the softest landing possible. 

Cancelling Brexit is a pipe dream concocted by a bunch of nutters to be honest. Total fantasy designed to divide the public even further and it wouldn't surprise me if it's coming from the right. It's no surprise that Alastair Campbell is one of its chief protagonists. 

Edited November 26, 2017 by dont_do_it_doug.

[dont_do_it_doug.]

To expand slightly - I've a feeling the whole 'cancel Brexit' movement is employed to distract us from lobbying the Government to deliver a Brexit which is palatable and workable for the UK. 

The Establishment WANT the economy to tank. They are the only people in a position to benefit from it. 

[chrisp65]

8 minutes ago, darrenm said:

I don't think you answered my question about what brexit actually is.

leaving the European Union.

Once that's a given, and labour have it as a given, then the rest of my post about leaving the EU sort of slots in.

2 minutes ago, dont_do_it_doug. said:

I actually think you need to define what you mean by 'pro Brexit',

leaving the European Union.

Then, all as above.

 

I don't think I'm being weird, but clearly (clearly to me anyway, but I'm beginning to doubt my comprehension skills here) the two main parties are for leaving the EU, as per my original point. 

We will not have an equal or better deal with the EU as they do not wish to dissolve the idea of the EU. We have 16 months to persuade the rest of the world to give us a better deal as the UK than they were prepared to give us as part of the EU. Those deals with Donald Trump and Xi Jinping and  Narendra Modi etc., have to be improved for us at least sufficiently to compensate for the loss from the EU benefits we will lose. Otherwise, we've deliberately diminished ourselves. The rest is fannying around with the wording.

I think what some people are hoping for is a strange snap election where the tories carry on as incompetent meanies, labour play clever word games, win, and then announce haha! we were remain all along!

Ain't gonna happen. 

 

 

[dont_do_it_doug.]

1 hour ago, chrisp65 said:

I think what some people are hoping for is a strange snap election where the tories carry on as incompetent meanies, labour play clever word games, win, and then announce haha! we were remain all along!

Ain't gonna happen. 

Some people maybe, I think that's fantasy.

There's a ton of evidence to suggest that a potential Labour government is starting to position itself as pro remaining in the single market and realistically that's as good a deal as we're going to get. It actually makes very little difference to us economically. The political implications are yet to be discussed because we're having these mad conversations instead.

There can't be a true anti-brexit party because Brexit has already happened. By labelling Labour as 'pro-Brexit' you're buying into the establishment narrative. IMO.

[blandy]

4 hours ago, dont_do_it_doug. said:

Some people maybe, I think that's fantasy.

There's a ton of evidence to suggest that a potential Labour government is starting to position itself as pro remaining in the single market and realistically that's as good a deal as we're going to get. It actually makes very little difference to us economically. The political implications are yet to be discussed because we're having these mad conversations instead.

There can't be a true anti-brexit party because Brexit has already happened. By labelling Labour as 'pro-Brexit' you're buying into the establishment narrative. IMO.

I think that’s almost completely wrong....almost. Brexit hasn’t “already happened”. Buying into the establishment narrative?  It’s their, (the oppositions) policy, to leave. Despite the utter clusterfeck that is the current govt, there’s no general election on the cards, there’s no potential labour government. Brexit will make a huge (negative) difference, it cannot fail to do so. We are heading, one way or another, for a massive, unprecedented set of upheavals.

[bickster]

Someone should put this on a bus and drive it around the country

[ml1dch]

7 hours ago, dont_do_it_doug. said:

To expand slightly - I've a feeling the whole 'cancel Brexit' movement is employed to distract us from lobbying the Government to deliver a Brexit which is palatable and workable for the UK. 

I'm curious. Let's say that last June the whole country threw up it's arms and said "right, let's get behind the decision".

How does this hypothetical world differ from our current one? What is the Government doing that all those mean whingers are preventing it from doing?

[snowychap]

[StefanAVFC]

Kate Hoey is a moron.

[Chindie]

At this point I think you can just say 'is a Brexiteer politician' and everything else is implied.

[dont_do_it_doug.]

4 hours ago, blandy said:

I think that’s almost completely wrong....almost. Brexit hasn’t “already happened”. Buying into the establishment narrative?  It’s their, (the oppositions) policy, to leave. Despite the utter clusterfeck that is the current govt, there’s no general election on the cards, there’s no potential labour government. Brexit will make a huge (negative) difference, it cannot fail to do so. We are heading, one way or another, for a massive, unprecedented set of upheavals.

Article 50 has been invoked. We've already pulled the trigger. By distracting us with talk of cancelling the whole thing 'they' are cockblocking any genuine attempts to pressure the current government into delivering a Brexit which works for us. We're having the wrong debates. You may not believe in the power of the electorate to make a difference but I do and despite the hyperbole, it is possible that Brexit isn't a total economic disaster. If it were carried out by a Labour government. 

Yes it is our policy to respect the result of the referendum. If, and I think you're wrong on this, there is no general election on the horizon then why mention Labour policy at all? 

[peterms]

28 minutes ago, snowychap said:

I'm going to build a wall, and the ROI will pay for it.

[dont_do_it_doug.]

By the way cancelling Brexit, or providing a promise to do so, would be political suicide for the Labour Party. They are already struggling in places you wouldn't traditionally expect them to struggle and by turning their backs on those people in Blackpool and Grimsby they would bury the party for decades. 

So what do we want here? Hard Brexit and another 20 years or Tory rule or a soft Brexit and a Labour government. There is nothing in between. Labour know this.

[dont_do_it_doug.]

3 hours ago, ml1dch said:

I'm curious. Let's say that last June the whole country threw up it's arms and said "right, let's get behind the decision".

How does this hypothetical world differ from our current one? What is the Government doing that all those mean whingers are preventing it from doing?

We're lobbying MP's to deliver a realistic Brexit which doesn't bury the economy for 50 years. You're asking me a hypothetical question which is extremely difficult to answer though, but I do believe this clear divide isn't working and it isn't helping. The right wing press are finding it all too easy to go on the attack. 

"We have always been at war with Eastasia"