Brexit Thread VII - Revenge of the Brexiteers

[AmazonQueen]

Then again you shouldn't have to still ensure you do what you decided to do 3 years ago.
The main issue with the referendum was that it should have asked for some type of enforced majority (eg 60%). But that would also have been hard to sell, and Cameron wanted to be PM, so to hell with you plebs

The main issue with the referendum is that Cameron didn't expect to lose so it said nothing about what type of Brexit we were actually voting on or how that was to be decided.
May could've got Brexit (or at least this 1st stage) done fairly quickly if she'd gone for a Norway-style deal but her obsession with ending free movement prevented that.
Now we're supposed to accept a deal that will rip up environmental standards, workers rights etc.

 

[Arakhor]

Maybe I should have used "one" instead of "I" as I was talking generally. But yes I don't see the contradiction between "I'm unhappy that I am forced to do something I don't want to do" and "I will do something I don't want to do because I'm forced to, and am unhappy about this".

Well, if you say so, but if you think that (starting the process of!) leaving the EU is worth a possible five more years of a Tory government that you would ordinarily oppose, then you must accept that there are probably tens or hundreds of thousands of people who are also trapped in that particular vicious cycle and roughly half of them are likely to vote on the opposite side.

 

[Kyriakos]

The main issue with the referendum is that Cameron didn't expect to lose so it said nothing about what type of Brexit we were actually voting on or how that was to be decided.
May could've got Brexit (or at least this 1st stage) done fairly quickly if she'd gone for a Norway-style deal but her obsession with ending free movement prevented that.
Now we're supposed to accept a deal that will rip up environmental standards, workers rights etc.

Cameroon was terrible, but it was the british (english at any rate) who voted him into power. With the help of the lib-dems the first time, of course.
Even Gordon Brown would have been better.

 

[Senethro]

The original referendum should have been on policy, not ideology.

 

[Manfred Belheim]

Well, if you say so, but if you think that (starting the process of!) leaving the EU is worth a possible five more years of a Tory government that you would ordinarily oppose, then you must accept that there are probably tens or hundreds of thousands of people who are also trapped in that particular vicious cycle and roughly half of them are likely to vote on the opposite side.

Not sure which bit of what I said the "if you say so" applies to. But... yes... that's exactly why I'm saying I don't like that this is the way things are. Unclear about what the confusion is here. As far as I can tell I've not said anything that is contradictory here, and what you're telling me I "must accept" seems to be the very thing I was complaining about in the first place, so I obviously do accept it (as in accept that it is the case, not as in accept it as satisfactory, but it seems like you meant it in the former sense).

 

[Arakhor]

It's only "the way things are" because people like you are apparently making it that way. I can't imagine how anyone would want to leave the EU so much that they would willingly sign up to years upon years of Tory policies that they would never normally support, when there isn't even a meaningful benefit from leaving the EU in the first place! That's just insanity as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Manfred Belheim]

Hmm. Unnecessarily antagonistic. What if you felt the way you feel about leaving the EU, but were a Tory voter? If they stand on a manifesto of "Brexit no matter what", are you saying you suddenly wouldn't care about it and would vote for them anyway? Or would you find yourself in a position where you had to seriously consider voting for Labour or the Lib-Dems, despite not generally agreeing with their policies? Or what about Lib-Dem voters who also voted to leave the EU, and now find their party of choice committed to completely reversing that decision? It works both ways, but your answer for the first case is probably "well they were Tory voters so scum in the first place, so I don't care" and in the latter case "well they voted to leave so scum in the first place, so I don't care". I'm trying to make a general point about how the whole situation is bad for all parties (other than those whose party of choice and stance on Brexit happen to coincide), and your response is just "well you're not voting for what I want, so you're the problem". Brilliant.

It's not because of "people like me", it's because of the parties themselves choosing to take hardline and opposing positions on a matter that should already have been settled, and one which is clearly quite important to get settled, forcing voters into a position where there pretty much isn't any choice other than to use the election as another proxy referendum, because that's what all the parties are treating it as. Yes that's great for you if the party you support also shares your stance on Brexit, but you're still implicitly going along with the game of it being a proxy referendum, it's just that it doesn't personally inconvenience you.

 

[Senethro]

I agree. It is the fault of the governing party for failing to hold a second referendum on actual policy positions, so that elections didn't become followups referenda.

 

[Hrothbern]

That backstop in that new deal:
Perhaps it is too early yet.. more understanding to come from articles with experts

But what I understand so far is that the backstop disappeared
NI is in the EU single market and customs union and after the transition period and after another 4 years it stays default in, unless the Stormont (NI Parliament) changes that (within the restrictions of the Good Friday agreement)

If the DUP wants to get out, they will have to find a majority in the Stormont for that (in 2024)

 

[Arakhor]

I'm trying to make a general point about how the whole situation is bad for all parties (other than those whose party of choice and stance on Brexit happen to coincide), and your response is just "well you're not voting for what I want, so you're the problem". Brilliant.

At no point did I say that my position was correct, use the word 'scum' or any of the other pejoratives you seem to think I did. I said I couldn't comprehend how a non-Tory would want to leave the EU so much that they would willingly subject themselves to Tory policies for up to five years or more (feel free to enlighten me so that we all learn something). I was following on from your complaint that elections are now just EU referenda in disguise and saying that you are part of the problem you say you abhor.

What if you felt the way you feel about leaving the EU, but were a Tory voter? If they stand on a manifesto of "Brexit no matter what", are you saying you suddenly wouldn't care about it and would vote for them anyway?

You may have forgotten but that was the case before May's disastrous 2017 election. Both of the main parties were saying that the referendum result needed to happen, but I still voted Labour, because otherwise I would be complicit in allowing a Tory to return in my constituency.

 

[Manfred Belheim]

At no point did I say that my position was correct, use the word 'scum' or any of the other pejoratives you seem to think I did. I said I couldn't comprehend how a non-Tory would want to leave the EU so much that they would willingly subject themselves to Tory policies for up to five years or more (feel free to enlighten me so that we all learn something).

You don't need to be able to comprehend how that could be, you just need to accept that it can be, and almost undoubtedly is. As is the reverse. And even if they're not quite willing to go that far, they're still put in the position of making that choice, or giving up on their preferred position on Brexit. And I am unhappy with this state of affairs. And that this state of affairs is caused by the parties themselves taking these stances, and not by "people like me" (whatever aspect of me-hood you're referring to with that).

 

[Lexicus]

It's not because of "people like me",

I'm just going to stop you right here, because if you voted Leave and want to know whose fault all this is, find the nearest mirror and point at yourself.

 

[Kyriakos]

That backstop in that new deal:
Perhaps it is too early yet.. more understanding to come from articles with experts

But what I understand so far is that the backstop disappeared
NI is in the EU single market and customs union and after the transition period and after another 4 years it stays default in, unless the Stormont (NI Parliament) changes that (within the restrictions of the Good Friday agreement)

If the DUP wants to get out, they will have to find a majority in the Stormont for that (in 2024)

Which is pretty strange. How can part of a country (assuming the UK is still one country) be both in and out of the Eu?
Oh, I forgot. This is 1)the Eu and 2)a tory UK gov. That's how.

 

[AmazonQueen]

assuming the UK is still one country

Not for much longer.

 

[Hrothbern]

Which is pretty strange. How can part of a country (assuming the UK is still one country) be both in and out of the Eu?
Oh, I forgot. This is 1)the Eu and 2)a tory UK gov. That's how.

There are "de jure" and "de facto" ownerships as well.
Perfectly normal and well defined in laws.

 

[Yeekim]

There are "de jure" and "de facto" ownerships as well.
Perfectly normal and well defined in laws.

Not to mention there were parts of UK that never were inside the EU...

 

[AmazonQueen]

Not to mention there were parts of UK that never were inside the EU...

I think you'll find Jersey, Isle of Man etc are crown dependencies and not part of the UK, they have no MPs.

 

[Manfred Belheim]

I'm just going to stop you right here, because if you voted Leave and want to know whose fault all this is, find the nearest mirror and point at yourself.

I don't really know what the communication problem is here. I'm laying out a non-partisan point about how having two different concerns conflated into a single vote, when it shouldn't have to be that way and where those two concerns are going to be in conflict for a great many people (on various sides of the argument), is a poor state of affairs. And all I'm getting in response is a string of "bad man vote for things I don't like is bad"-type responses.

If the political parties aren't willing to respect the results of a previous referendum, and are determined to use a general election as a proxy to re-run the vote, then that is just a bad thing in principle (regardless of which way it's done), and it's not the fault of people for taking part in the referendum in the first place. "If you hadn't voted to leave then there would have been no reason for parties you would have otherwise voted for to stand on a platform of overturning your previous vote" is undoubtedly a true statement, but you're pointing your ire gun in the wrong direction if you're choosing "citizen who voted" as the target, rather than "political party going rogue".

 

[AmazonQueen]

I don't really know what the communication problem is here. I'm laying out a non-partisan point about how having two different concerns conflated into a single vote, when it shouldn't have to be that way and where those two concerns are going to be in conflict for a great many people (on various sides of the argument), is a poor state of affairs. And all I'm getting in response is a string of "bad man vote for things I don't like is bad"-type responses.

If the political parties aren't willing to respect the results of a previous referendum, and are determined to use a general election as a proxy to re-run the vote, then that is just a bad thing in principle (regardless of which way it's done), and it's not the fault of people for taking part in the referendum in the first place. "If you hadn't voted to leave then there would have been no reason for parties you would have otherwise voted for to stand on a platform of overturning your previous vote" is undoubtedly a true statement, but you're pointing your ire gun in the wrong direction if you're choosing "citizen who voted" as the target, rather than "political party going rogue".

All general elections have different concerns conflated into a single vote, usually a lot more than 2.

 

[Arakhor]

The "undemocratic backstop" is now a Stormont-controlled "full-stop", to quote media sources today. NI will supposedly legally be in the UK customs zone, but in practicality fall within the EU customs zone, as arbitrated by the ECJ. As I understand it, this will take effect immediately and last for four years, to be prolonged every 4-8 years by a majority vote in Stormont. There will be no unionist/nationalist veto and if Stormont chooses to leave (from as early as 2023), then there will be a two-year transition period whilst the EU devise a new way to protect the GFA/prevent a hard border in Ireland.

In effect, the DUP were thrown under a bus (maybe the "£350 million a week" bus?) and the other unionists are now blasting the DUP for their presumption. The DUP have said that they will vote against the deal on Saturday, not merely abstain, leaving Johnson needing to find some 30 votes from the Lexiters, former Tories and independents, even assuming that all other Tories (and the ERG) vote for the motion.