Support NeoGAF

[Huw_Dawson]

So far what I can see Labour's policy as is:

Brexit is happening, no referendum on final deal (Tory policy)
There will be a vote in parliament at the end (Tory policy)
EU nationals will get their rights guaranteed immediately.
The 'Great Repeal Bill' will be renamed to something less stupid sounding.
The bill will guarantee all the workers rights people currently enjoy (Tory policy but nobody believes them).
'Access to' the European market (Tory policy).

Any Labourite want to hop in to correct me?

 

[Napoleonthechimp]

The fact that I'm reading an opinion piece by Tony Blair and not wanting to set my own hair on fire is dark times.

https://www.theguardian.com/comment...r-fight-tories-june-election-brexit-labour-eu

The bastard's right. And he'll be right on June 9th, which is when Corbyn proclaims that the real fight starts.

He's far smarter and competent than anyone on either side of the political spectrum in Westminster.

 

[Jezbollah]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...orbyn-labour-support-first-1920-a7699761.html

The British Communist party will not field candidates in the Election, and will put their support behind Labour. The first time the Party have done that since 1920.

 

[War Peaceman]

He's far smarter and competent than anyone on either side of the political spectrum in Westminster.

Yes, he has very good political instincts. I wish he had stayed in British politics post-government instead of his get rich quick via horrible people scheme.

 

[phisheep]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...orbyn-labour-support-first-1920-a7699761.html

The British Communist party will not field candidates in the Election, and will put their support behind Labour. The first time the Party have done that since 1920.

Can't imagine that will do Labour any good. "Reds under the beds" and all that.

 

[f0rk]

I don't know why they don't have explicitly the same policies as May on Brexit. They're close enough already and if both major parties have the same position on Brexit then (surely?) this election stops being about Brexit (and any other topic must be less hopeless for Labour?).

Well then it's about leadership and ability to deliver, which isn't going to go well for Labour.

 

[DBT85]

Woof. Seems like that core Yes vote is around the 30-35% that a few of us speculated is true.

Honestly can see May calling for another Scottish referendum as soon as whatever EU deal is announced if this kind of trend continues.

Well May said that it's not the right time, so yeah, I imagine we'll get another vote on it soon.

Those numbers do make me wonder how the SNP are going to do, and if they lose votes, are they going Con, Lib or Lab.

 

[Huw_Dawson]

Can't imagine that will do Labour any good. "Reds under the beds" and all that.

I expect Liverpool Lib Dems are going to be extremely happy that they can link Labour to Militant again now.

 

[War Peaceman]

Well May said that it's not the right time, so yeah, I imagine we'll get another vote on it soon.

Those numbers do make me wonder how the SNP are going to do, and if they lose votes, are they going Con, Lib or Lab.

Scotland is pro-vs-anti independence. What does Labour stand for there?

 

[*Splinter]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...orbyn-labour-support-first-1920-a7699761.html

The British Communist party will not field candidates in the Election, and will put their support behind Labour. The first time the Party have done that since 1920.

Honestly didn't know we had a Communist party (until it was mentioned on the last page, anyway).

Also what Phisheep said

 

[WhateverItTakes]

He's far smarter and competent than anyone on either side of the political spectrum in Westminster.

What annoys me is that he apparently never spent any time coaching somebody else on this shit. We need someone with his savvy without his baggage.

 

[Jezbollah]

Can't imagine that will do Labour any good. "Reds under the beds" and all that.

Indeed. This will be a nice little knife to twist for all their opponents.

 

[Huw_Dawson]

What annoys me is that he apparently never spent any time coaching somebody else on this shit. We need someone with his savvy without his baggage.

One of the more influential Lib Dem campaigners said in an email mail-out this morning that Blair seems to be inching ever closer to simply endorsing the Lib Dems, as he is pretty much telling Labour 'just pitch what the Lib Dems are pitching'.

I have no doubt LD party HQ have a plan for when Paddy Ashdown is going to smash down the front door shouting 'SEE I TOLD YOU ALL THERE WOULD BE A REALIGNMENT OF THE LEFT IN '97 AND YOU ALL DIDN'T BELIEVE ME'.

 

[PJV3]

Scottish independence voting intention:

Yes: 37% (-4)
No: 55% (+8)

(via Kantar TNS / surveyed pre-May announcement)
Chgs. w/ Sep 2016.

We will have to see how this changes with Tory domination and the quality of the brexit deal, the left in Scotland will need to shit or get off the pot because the Tories love using the SNP scare to get extra votes.

There's 700 people in the British communist party, it will make all the difference in the world to have their support.

 

[Maledict]

So, honest question for us on the left.

Apart from Brexit, what has May done that makes her so awful?

I ask because I was reading the economists 'one nation tory' column about her, and pondering this morning. She has basically stopped austerity, and at the last budget tied to increase revenue through tax increases (and, by all accounts, a very fair tax increase that removes an imbalance in the tax code).

What is our argument for being against May, that isn't Brexit related, that relates to what she has done since last summer when she took over?

 

[Lagamorph]

So, honest question for us on the left.

Apart from Brexit, what has May done that makes her so awful?

I ask because I was reading the economists 'one nation tory' column about her, and pondering this morning. She has basically stopped austerity, and at the last budget tied to increase revenue through tax increases (and, by all accounts, a very fair tax increase that removes an imbalance in the tax code).

What is our argument for being against May, that isn't Brexit related, that relates to what she has done since last summer when she took over?

Snoopers charter for one thing.

 

[Huw_Dawson]

What is our argument for being against May, that isn't Brexit related, that relates to what she has done since last summer when she took over?

Continuing chaos in both the NHS and the education system. The chaos in the former is leading to a greater risk each year of the system basically collapsing over the winter pressure.

Brexit is the core of the entire situation, though. The reason Hammond took his foot off of the small state pedal was because of Brexit, for example.

 

[Ghost]

So far what I can see Labour's policy as is:

Brexit is happening, no referendum on final deal (Tory policy)
There will be a vote in parliament at the end (Tory policy)
EU nationals will get their rights guaranteed immediately.
The 'Great Repeal Bill' will be renamed to something less stupid sounding.
The bill will guarantee all the workers rights people currently enjoy (Tory policy but nobody believes them).
'Access to' the European market (Tory policy).

Any Labourite want to hop in to correct me?

What's the Lib Dem policy? Because to me the idea of a second referendum on the terms of the deal sounds like the exact kind of shitty politics that got us the first one. There won't be a choice to re-enter the EU at the end of the negotiations, that's not the way Article 50 works (regardless of what the EU president might say to the press) so all the referendum can offer is 'Mays Deal' or 'WTO Deal/Hardest Brexit Imaginable', the Lib Dem gamble would be that no one is stupid enough to vote for the WTO deal...where have we heard that before?

 

[PJV3]

So, honest question for us on the left.

Apart from Brexit, what has May done that makes her so awful?

I ask because I was reading the economists 'one nation tory' column about her, and pondering this morning. She has basically stopped austerity, and at the last budget tied to increase revenue through tax increases (and, by all accounts, a very fair tax increase that removes an imbalance in the tax code).

What is our argument for being against May, that isn't Brexit related, that relates to what she has done since last summer when she took over?

Do I consider her economic policy to be slightly better and more flexible than Osborne's? Yes.

She's welcome to try and maintain austerity along side Brexit but it isn't going to be pretty. Besides that she hasn't really done anything outside of pretty words and every PM right or left does that.

 

[Huw_Dawson]

Yes, we can choose to revoke A50, and Europe would be fine with that. Europe has not said otherwise recently.

The Lib Dem policy is to remain in the single market and to give people the choice of Brexit with a known deal or remaining in the EU at the end of the negotiating period. An actual referendum on reality. Leave will have the same opportunity to convince people as they did in the last referendum, and the government would negotiate in good faith for the best possible deal in case the British public choose leave again.

Labour's policy is a good gesture to EU nationals but otherwise is just 'we are less evil than the Tories, but we will do exactly what the Tories will do'.

Even if the LDs didn't have a legal ability to revoke A50 in government, you'd still get a deal which keeps us in the single market, which is a far better deal for the economy than hard Brexit, some pokey transitional arrangement and hope for a future trade deal.

The core of the Lib Dem policy is that it doesn't have to be a hard damaging Brexit. There can be hope that a better deal can be done, but it needs people to vote for that hope, in big numbers, on the 8th of June.

That is far more policy than just copying the Tory position.

 

[Xando]

What's the Lib Dem policy? Because to me the idea of a second referendum on the terms of the deal sounds like the exact kind of shitty politics that got us the first one. There won't be a choice to re-enter the EU at the end of the negotiations, that's not the way Article 50 works (regardless of what the EU president might say to the press) so all the referendum can offer is 'Mays Deal' or 'WTO Deal/Hardest Brexit Imaginable', the Lib Dem gamble would be that no one is stupid enough to vote for the WTO deal...where have we heard that before?

The UK is still EU member until march 2019 and the EU has offered the UK to reverse article 50 (UK probably gonna lose some benefits in this case though). There wouldn't be any reapplication or anything needed. You'd just need a consensus of the 27 to reverse art. 50

 

[Ghost]

The UK is still EU member until march 2019 and the EU has offered the UK to reverse article 50 (UK probably gonna lose some benefits in this case though). There wouldn't be any reapplication or anything needed. You'd just need a consensus of the 27 to reverse art. 50

Exactly, why would they do that and set the precedent that every member can invoke Article 50 and cause chaos only to re-enter at the last moment. Besides if the UK deal is so good for the EU that the UK people vote against it, why would the member nations turn around afterwards and say 'oh no never mind, we'll take the old arrangement after all'.

It's the exact same nonsense the Brexit campaign used to convince people we'd get a great deal from Europe, "Don't worry about anyone else's motivations or how possible it will actually be, just think about what we want".

 

[Jackpot]

We live in a world where people will actively vote to hurt themselves.

If a poll asked these people if they wanted to jump off a bridge they'd probably vote for it in favour.

Leaving the UK isn't "hurting themselves"?

 

[StayDead]

Leaving the UK isn't "hurting themselves"?

Yes. Yes it is. The poorest areas (already) of the country that make by with the massive help of EU funding are going to lose that funding (see Cornwall). These people have actively voted to make their lives worse.

 

[Xando]

Exactly, why would they do that and set the precedent that every member can invoke Article 50 and cause chaos only to re-enter at the last moment. Besides if the UK deal is so good for the EU that the UK people vote against it, why would the member nations turn around afterwards and say 'oh no never mind, we'll take the old arrangement after all'.

It's the exact same nonsense the Brexit campaign used to convince people we'd get a great deal from Europe, "Don't worry about anyone else's motivations or how possible it will actually be, just think about what we want".

Despite what some in the british media and goverment think the best deal for the EU is the status quo. There will never be a deal that is better than the status quo (except maybe going the norway route where you are defacto in the EU but have no voice in it).

If the UK would ask to reverse article 50 i think this wouldn't be a problem (the UK would probably have to sacrifice some of it's special exceptions).

 

[chromatic9]

You're being very charitable. May's Hard Brexit is absolutely a thing. Remember the weeks of silence other than 'Brexit means Brexit' and 'Red, White and Blue Brexit' *shudder*? That was the time she was calculating her options and decided that leaving the single market was the lesser of two evils for her personally, faced with the potential backlash from the right wing press and her loony eurosceptic backbenchers had she gone with the alternative.

The question on the referendum was clear and simple (in the worst way) - there was no mandate for anything other than not belonging to the EU. Everything that has followed since, starting from May's speech where she effectively decreed a full break AKA hard Brexit is entirely on her.

Hard Brexit has to be a thing. UK did vote to leave.

Problem is European customs, European court, Single market and Freedom of movement. If you keep these things then you haven't left and are required to pay. UK might as well not bother leaving if its to retain these things. When article 50 was activated, Tusk did say there's nothing to say you can't just scrap it.

EU hold the cards. Labour saying we'll press for single market probably means we won't be leaving and just end having a worse deal than now in some faux leave position that won't be fooling leave voters.

Unless EU yield and why should they I can only see a soft Brexit meaning some lower tariffs here and there and maybe some gradual leave to a full leave position.

 

[Jackpot]

Yes. Yes it is. The poorest areas (already) of the country that make by with the massive help of EU funding are going to lose that funding (see Cornwall). These people have actively voted to make their lives worse.

Cornwall isn't in Scotland though. Maybe I'm misreading the situation but you seemed aggrieved at a poll showing only 37% of Scots want independence. Which for me is a good thing as if anything the case for independence has gotten weaker.

 

[War Peaceman]

Guaranteeing the rights of EU Nationals seems like a good, no-brainer move by Labour.

 

[Spaced Harrier]

Leaving the UK isn't "hurting themselves"?

To reject the isolationist, regressive direction England is heading in favour of the open, progressive EU, to get genuine autonomy and Independence not the nonsense peddle to brexiters living in an already independent state (the UK) to maintain the rights of their children to freely work, travel, study and love across the continent they were born in.

It's not cut and dry, leaving the EU has real tangible human cost.

 

[Huw_Dawson]

Guaranteeing the rights of EU Nationals seems like a good, no-brainer move by Labour.

It is, and I am glad they are making it. This is something that has consensus from everyone other than the Tories.

I am confused why they did not vote for it in Parliament when they had the chance, though.

 

[Ghost]

Despite what some in the british media and goverment think the best deal for the EU is the status quo. There will never be a deal that is better than the status quo (except maybe going the norway route where you are defacto in the EU but have no voice in it).

If the UK would ask to reverse article 50 i think this wouldn't be a problem (the UK would probably have to sacrifice some of it's special exceptions).

That might be true about the status quo right now, but I doubt it will be in 18 months time when post brexit plans are finalised, but assuming you're right and the UK does just have to make concessions to get the votes it needs, the government can't know what concessions it will have to make, so we won't be making an informed decision in the second vote either. Will we have a veto? Don't know might have to give it up. Rebate? Almost certainly have to give that up. Existing rules on migrants claiming benefits? *shrug* depends if they ask for it.


This is exactly why the first referendum was such a terrible idea, 2 wrongs won't make it right. What's worse is the Lib Dems know this, they know they won't get enough power to make it happen, they are just playing on remain voters fears, offering them a rope to get out of the hole that's been dug for them, but there isn't anything to tie the rope to.

 

[PJV3]

Despite what some in the british media and goverment think the best deal for the EU is the status quo. There will never be a deal that is better than the status quo (except maybe going the norway route where you are defacto in the EU but have no voice in it).

If the UK would ask to reverse article 50 i think this wouldn't be a problem (the UK would probably have to sacrifice some of it's special exceptions).

The rules around article 50 are vague enough to allow a reversal, I don't think the same could be said for demanding concessions.

 

[Huw_Dawson]

This is exactly why the first referendum was such a terrible idea, 2 wrongs won't make it right. What's worse is the Lib Dems know this, they know they won't get enough power to make it happen, they are just playing on remain voters fears, offering them a rope to get out of the hole that's been dug for them, but there isn't anything to tie the rope to.

'They know they won't get enough power to make it happen' is an entertaining line. That is for the public to decide. If the public wants Lib Dem policy then they should vote for Lib Dems. We have ruled out coalitions, too, to make the choice super easy.

This isn't playing on Remainer fears. Single market membership is better for Britain than us being in a transitional deal followed by a potential trade deal which nobody knows anything about.

This is not about remoaning. The government has a mandate for Brexit.

This is about giving people an actual, educated choice on our future, and to hold the government to account on promises that were made in the campaign.

We cannot allow Brexit to be a stitch up.

 

[Xando]

That might be true about the status quo right now, but I doubt it will be in 18 months time when post brexit plans are finalised, but assuming you're right and the UK does just have to make concessions to get the votes it needs, the government can't know what concessions it will have to make, so we won't be making an informed decision in the second vote either. Will we have a veto? Don't know might have to give it up. Rebate? Almost certainly have to give that up. Existing rules on migrants claiming benefits? *shrug* depends if they ask for it.


This is exactly why the first referendum was such a terrible idea, 2 wrongs won't make it right. What's worse is the Lib Dems know this, they know they won't get enough power to make it happen, they are just playing on remain voters fears, offering them a rope to get out of the hole that's been dug for them, but there isn't anything to tie the rope to.

Well i agree that there is only a worse deal for the UK than it now has. If they'd were to try and reverse art. 50 it probably would lose some of its special rules but if that were the case i'd expect to know exactly what kind of condition that would be before a 2nd vote.

This whole brexit thing is such a shitshow because it was a binary yes/no choice without people having a clear idea on what they exactly voting on.

It should have been something like this:

1. Stay in the EU
2. Leave EU but stay in single market
3. Leave but stay in the customs union
4. Leave completely and revert to WTO (Aka accept no EU regulations or court oversight etc.)

The rules around article 50 are vague enough to allow a reversal, I don't think the same could be said for demanding concessions.

EU parliament brexit guidelines clearly state Art. 50 is reversible when the 27 countries agree but it shall not be as good as the deal the UK currently has.

A revocation of notification needs to be subject to conditions set by all EU-27, so that it cannot be used as a procedural device or abused in an attempt to improve on the current terms of the United Kingdom's membership;

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-39501866

 

[Huw_Dawson]

EU parliament brexit guidelines clearly state Art. 50 is reversible when the 27 countries agree but it shall not be as good as the deal the UK currently has.

Is there any reason the UK would be forced to lose opt-outs other than the EU being spiteful?

 

[Mr. Sam]

1. Stay in the EU
2. Leave EU but stay in single market
3. Leave but stay in the customs union
4. Leave completely and revert to WTO (Aka accept no EU regulations or court oversight etc.)

What would happen if it were, say:

1. 33%
2. 22%
3. 20%
4. 25%

 

[Xando]

Is there any reason the UK would be forced to lose opt-outs other than the EU being spiteful?

UK opt-outs are pretty hated by pretty much anyone except the EU. If every country has a veto the UK would have to offer them favourable deals.

Maybe they agree out of the goodness of their heart but i can't see poland or others not trying to get something for their own people.

What would happen if it were, say:

1. 33%
2. 22%
3. 20%
4. 25%

Haha that would be kinda weird.

Should probably be more something like

1. Stay
2. Leave
2.1 Leave but stay in single market
2.2 Leave but stay in customs union
2.3 leave completely

 

[PJV3]

EU parliament brexit guidelines clearly state Art. 50 is reversible when the 27 countries agree but it shall not be as good as the deal the UK currently has.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-39501866

I meant article 50 itself, the EU Parliament having a position isn't the same thing unless the treaty has changed somehow. I think they will open a reversal up to a legal challenge if they try anything beyond turning a blind eye and the UK looking like plonkers.

 

[empyrean]

What would happen if it were, say:

1. 33%
2. 22%
3. 20%
4. 25%

Well isn't 48% vs 51% the same situation yet we still decided to drive off the cliff with a supposed "clear" mandate.

 

[Maledict]

What would happen if it were, say:

1. 33%
2. 22%
3. 20%
4. 25%

You'd stay exactly as we are now.

That's one way to stitch up a referendum - give multiple options that divide one side. That's what happened when Australia voted on becoming a republic.

 

[Huw_Dawson]

UK opt-outs are pretty hated by pretty much anyone except the EU. If every country has a veto the UK would have to offer them favourable deals.

Ah, but the risk would be that the UK would walk away and leave if opt-outs are not maintained, and that would be worse for everyone. There's no real benefit to punishing the UK as it would encourage nationalism here.

 

[Xando]

I meant article 50 itself, the EU Parliament having a position isn't the same thing unless the treaty has changed somehow. I think they will open a reversal up to a legal challenge if they try anything beyond turning a blind eye and the UK looking like plonkers.

Legal challenge has multiple issues.


If you take it to EU court and 2 years run out you are out without a deal,
If you take it to EU court and the EU stops negotiating during this time while art. 50 ticks and the court rules against you there is no deal.



The EU also already has said they see article as reversible but not without EU wide consensus and if the 2 years (That means even if there is a transitional deal) are over and the UK is out there is clear protocol in article 50 on how to proceed if the UK would want to rejoin

5. If a State which has withdrawn from the Union asks to rejoin, its request shall be subject to the procedure referred to in Article 49.

http://www.lisbon-treaty.org/wcm/th.../title-6-final-provisions/137-article-50.html

Ah, but the risk would be that the UK would walk away and leave if opt-outs are not maintained, and that would be worse for everyone. There's no real benefit to punishing the UK as it would encourage nationalism here.

Well in that case we would be back to brinkmanship of who has more to lose we are in right now. The EU has shown multiple times if it sees itself in a stronger position than the other side it is willing to push the other side onto cliff edge. Just ask Alexis Tsipras.

I still think Greece in 2015 is the best example for how brexit negotiations will turn out. At some point during negotiations the EU will offer the UK a take it or leave it deal that won't be what brexiteers want. Only question is if May folds like Tsipras or if she truly leaves without a deal.

 

[HandsomeCharles]

Corbin announcing that EU citizens would keep their rights to residence under Labour is going to make me have a rethink of my vote. It's one of the single most important things to be right now as I have many European friends currently living in the UK.

 

[Huw_Dawson]

Yup, which is why it is important that the public decides on the final deal.

Starmer is envisioning a final Brexit after transitional deal taking six years, BTW. And he does just mean single market access - no freedom of movement.

He's linking Brexit to devolution of power though so hey, more bodies can be involved in driving the car off the cliff...

Can't see this policy impressing anyone.

 

[*Splinter]

What's worse is the Lib Dems know this, they know they won't get enough power to make it happen, they are just playing on remain voters fears,

Eh that's a very cynical way of describing it. If this election must be about Brexit then I'd at least like one party where I can vote to voice my support for the EU, regardless of how likely that party is to actually win.

This election feels more like the fight for second place anyway. We all know Tories will win, probably by a landslide. I guess Labour are fairly safe to stay in second, but I'm interested to see how much ground the Lib Dem's can gain on them.

(Ok I just looked up 2010/2015 and Lib Dems obviously aren't getting more seats than Labour. Still more interested in this than Conservatives V Labour, at the moment.)

 

[Huw_Dawson]

It would require the Lib Dems to get about 30% for us to get more seats than Labour on universal swing, but we can beat them into third place in the popular vote and gain some good target seats in the process. Anything else would require Timmania.

In that instance you'd have Labour as the formal opposition, but it would have no legitimacy outside of Westminster (and frankly I could see a lot of Blairite remainer MPs defect if that actually happened).

Hell that would be a good thing. There is a clear political grouping for a socialist party in British politics. Realigning Labour as actually socialist and getting social democrats and liberals into the LDs would actually solve both group's problems with message...

So hey, vote Lib Dem to get Blairite MPs to defect and purify Labour as a haven for socialism! You know it makes sense. 👍

 

[PJV3]

Legal challenge has multiple issues.


If you take it to EU court and 2 years run out you are out without a deal,
If you take it to EU court and the EU stops negotiating during this time while art. 50 ticks and the court rules against you there is no deal.



The EU also already has said they see article as reversible but not without EU wide consensus and if the 2 years (That means even if there is a transitional deal) are over and the UK is out there is clear protocol in article 50 on how to proceed if the UK would want to rejoin


http://www.lisbon-treaty.org/wcm/th.../title-6-final-provisions/137-article-50.html



Well in that case we would be back to brinkmanship of who has more to lose we are in right now. The EU has shown multiple times if it sees itself in a stronger position than the other side it is willing to push the other side onto cliff edge. Just ask Alexis Tsipras.

I still think Greece in 2015 is the best example for how brexit negotiations will turn out. At some point during negotiations the EU will offer the UK a take it or leave it deal that won't be what brexiteers want. Only question is if May folds like Tsipras or if she truly leaves without a deal.

I was thinking more of the people in the UK being unhappy we stayed in and paid a forfeit on top. But perhaps the same principle will apply and that wouldn't achieve much for a brexiteer either.

Wasn't the biggest problem for Greece the politics of nations going through austerity themselves bailing the Greeks out. I think that will be our biggest hurdle, countries can't sell the UK coasting nicely on their efforts to their own people, and they want to take juicy bits of business for themselves.

I don't think it's strength so much, it's just cold political reality, we're not very popular at the moment.

It's going to be our last time blaming the EU for national self interest across the continent.

 

[*Splinter]

It would require the Lib Dems to get about 30% for us to get more seats than Labour on universal swing, but we can beat them into third place in the popular vote and gain some good target seats in the process. Anything else would require Timmania.

In that instance you'd have Labour as the formal opposition, but it would have no legitimacy outside of Westminster (and frankly I could see a lot of Blairite remainer MPs defect if that actually happened).

I don't think even that will happen, but if it does then Lid Dems would see more significant media coverage up to 2022, and maybe then we'd see a real fight for 2nd place.

Pretty sad that a fight for second place is the most optimism I can muster for the current situation, but I'm curious what would happen to Labour if they were no longer the opposition. I guess I'm hoping for them to either die or shift further left, just because Labour and Lib dem feel so closely aligned at the moment (except on Brexit obv.) that they're needlessly splitting the centre-left vote.


(I have no idea what I'm talking about so anyone please feel free to jump in with a "that's not how any of this works".)


Edit
You added this while I was typing:

Hell that would be a good thing. There is a clear political grouping for a socialist party in British politics. Realigning Labour as actually socialist and getting social democrats and liberals into the LDs would actually solve both group's problems with message...

So hey, vote Lib Dem to get Blairite MPs to defect and purify Labour as a haven for socialism! You know it makes sense. 👍

I guess that's where I'm currently leaning.

 

[Xando]

I was thinking more of the people in the UK being unhappy we stayed in and paid a forfeit on top. But perhaps the same principle will apply and that wouldn't achieve much for a brexiteer either.

Wasn't the biggest problem for Greece the politics of nations going through austerity themselves bailing the Greeks out. I think that will be our biggest hurdle, countries can't sell the UK coasting nicely on their efforts to their own people, and they want to take juicy bits of business for themselves.

I don't think it's strength so much, it's just cold political reality, we're not very popular at the moment.

It's going to be our last time blaming the EU for national self interest across the continent.

If you think about it the Greek situation is pretty similiar to the UK situation.

Greece wanted a change in EU policy (Austerity) -> wasn't able to get concessions from the EU -> Had a referendum on the deal the EU proposed -> citizens voted no and therefore to leave the EU -> Tsipras went back to brussels to renegotiate -> EU said take the deal or leave -> Tsipras folded.

Now look at the UK situation

UK wanted changes in EU policy (mostly about FoM) -> wasn't able to get enough concessions from the EU -> Had a referendum to take the deal or leave -> citizens voted to leave -> May will go to Brussels to negotiate new terms outside of the EU -> ????

 

[PJV3]

I don't think even that will happen, but if it does then Lid Dems would see more significant media coverage up to 2022, and maybe then we'd see a real fight for 2nd place.

Pretty sad that a fight for second place is the most optimism I can muster for the current situation, but I'm curious what would happen to Labour if they were no longer the opposition. I guess I'm hoping for them to either die or shift further left, just because Labour and Lib dem feel so closely aligned at the moment (except on Brexit obv.) that they're splitting the centre-left vote.


(I have no idea what I'm talking about so anyone please feel free to jump in with a "that's not how any of this works".)


Edit
You added this while I was typing:

I guess that's where I'm currently leaning.

The socialist party would probably die at 15%ish support, voting reform is needed to make it viable.