Euro Elections

[Top Cats Hat 10]

9 minutes ago, Pettytom said:

If the winners of the referendum acknowledged that the views of the 48.5% were also important, we could look for a soft Brexit and then get on with the rest of our lives. 

The problem with that is that any form of 'soft Brexit' will almost certainly have to involve some kind of customs union as well as financial payments to the EU. All without any democratic say in how rules are made and leaving the UK subject to the jurisdiction of the ECJ.

 

The elephant in the room then is 'well that is actually worse than we have now where at least we have a say', so logically it then makes more sense to revoke Article 50 and remain.

 

It is a binary choice. We either leave or remain.

[I1L2T3 10]

1 hour ago, Lockdoctor said:

Yes, I agree the country is split.  However, the European election result tells us that the single  party which  won the EU election in the UK by a considerable margin campaigned for leaving the EU on 31st October on WTO terms.  The only way to end this matter is for the UK to leave the EU on 31st October with or without a deal and implement the democratic  2016 EU referendum result.

No it’s not the only way to resolve the matter if only 31% of voters (possibly) indicate a preference for a WTO exit. Noting that even in the Brexit Party there is a wide range of views.

 

I know somebody who went to one of the Brexit Party rallies in the North West and just chatting with fellow supporters he found there is a fairly wide range of views. WTO is the strongest for sure but not all Brexit Party supporters are following that line.

[I1L2T3 10]

13 minutes ago, Top Cats Hat said:

The problem with that is that any form of 'soft Brexit' will almost certainly have to involve some kind of customs union as well as financial payments to the EU. All without any democratic say in how rules are made and leaving the UK subject to the jurisdiction of the ECJ.

 

The elephant in the room then is 'well that is actually worse than we have now where at least we have a say', so logically it then makes more sense to revoke Article 50 and remain.

 

It is a binary choice. We either leave or remain.

Everybody must be aware that a Johnson government means revoke becomes the most likely outcome.

 

The man wants to be PM and it is all he ever desired. He can’t carry no deal - nobody can - but he could carry the alternative if it means him surviving as PM.

 

Thats the difference with Johnson. He seemingly lacks integrity and sees himself as a kind of Churchillian figure. If gathering a rump of Tories and sundry other MPs in a kind of coalition of national unity to deliver revoke meant he could be PM for 10 years he’d do it. In a heartbeat.

 

It depends how much others want to cooperate with him. If they don’t want to cooperate then they’ll probably deliver revoke without him.

[Voice of reason 0]

2 hours ago, tinfoilhat said:

But sending farage and Johnson to EU negotiations (We live in a world where that is now a strong possibility) will not make the EU change it's mind and massively change their standpoint, if anything the only they'll say is no more extensions to get those two <removed> out the door. 

 

Just wanting a unicorn deal will not make it happen. There isn't one to be had given the make up of the house of commons and the power that the DUP hold.

 

That's right. What I'm doing is trying to separate the issue from the other posters statement.

Brexit party won the highest number of votes. That is  a fact.

The rights and wrongs of what they believe is another issue. The consequences of what they propose is one thing. But they won the most votes, so what's to be done?

I'd suggest if the powers that be hadn't been so stubborn in their views it wouldn't have come to that.

In fact if previous governments had listened more, then the referendum wouldn't have even happened, let alone result in a Leave result.

1 hour ago, Top Cats Hat said:

Remind me again what happened when we didn't leave on 29th March?

The following European election resulted in a hard brexit party winning most seats by a long margin.

Edited May 27, 2019 by nikki-red

[L00b 441]

1 hour ago, Lockdoctor said:

 The Brexit Party have won the European Election. The Brexit Party took a bigger percentage of the European Election vote and have won more seats than UKIP did in the 2014 European Elections.  As Ann Widdocombe pointed out voters had only one reason to vote for the Brexit Party while voters chose the other parties for more reasons. 

 

The result of the European Election tells us that the desire for the UK people to leave the EU hasn't fallen and the vast majority of the people who voted to leave the EU are happy to leave the EU without a deal.  It is the same people who voted to remain in the EU and haven't accepted the 2016 democratic EU referendum result who don't want the UK to leave the EU without a deal.  The only way the UK will get a better deal than what is on offer is by having a new Prime Minister who the EU know is genuinely prepared to leave the EU without a deal. 

 

The Brexit Party will be the largest single party from one single country in the European Parliament. It says a lot about the EU that the largest single party from one country is a party that doesn't want to be there.   The EU should have already thrown us out by now, but they haven't because they still want our country's money.

There are no circumstances in which UK MEPs, and only UK MEPs, vote on any issue. So whether the Brexit Party is "the largest single party from one member state", or not, is about as relevant as 29 seats out of 751.

 

The Brexit Party phenomenon tells you nothing about the EU, particularly when the anticipated EU-wide voter rally for extreme parties did not actually happen in the end (give the media some time to process that one and catch up, poor darlings were caught all dressed up with nowhere to go this morning).

 

You're right on the need for the EU to chuck the UK  England out, that said. This Brexit farce has gone on way too long, and by the evidence of last Thursday's turnout, Remainers don't deserve any more patience from the EU27 than Brexiters. Get smart: reach to Remainers across the room and find some common Brexiting ground already.
 

 

Edited May 27, 2019 by L00b

[Top Cats Hat 10]

By the way, whoever was trying to claim that Magid Majid didn't win needs to take it up with Look North who not only said that he had won but also showed an interview with him as a winning candidate.

[WiseOwl182 10]

3 hours ago, altus said:

Polling just before the EU elections that asked people which party they would vote for and whether they supported leave or remain has the Conservative voters split 50%/50% and the Labour voters split 75%/25% in favour of remain.

 

Your figures should have:

 

Half of Conservatives 4.4%

Quarter of Labour 3.7%

 

Which gives a total of 44.9% for leave.

No, as I keep saying, it's the platform that the party is standing on that counts, not what you estimate the intentions of their voters to be. The Tories are a leave party, so all of their votes count for leave. Labour are supposedly leave but soft Brexit, so 50/50 is fair.

[WiseOwl182 10]

1 hour ago, L00b said:

There are no circumstances in which UK MEPs, and only UK MEPs, vote on any issue. So whether the Brexit Party is "the largest single party from one member state", or not, is about as relevant as 29 seats out of 751.

 

 

And there in a nutshell is why Brexit happened. We've found ourselves in a position where our laws can be passed on the basis that our biggest party in EU elections and therefore our representatives in the EU parliament make up 29/751 and in your own words, have no relevance. This is why people find it undemocratic and want to regain sovereignty. 

[I1L2T3 10]

10 minutes ago, WiseOwl182 said:

No, as I keep saying, it's the platform that the party is standing on that counts, not what you estimate the intentions of their voters to be. The Tories are a leave party, so all of their votes count for leave. Labour are supposedly leave but soft Brexit, so 50/50 is fair.

The Tories are a majority soft Brexit party too, in terms of the views of their MPs

 

The ERG make the most noise but they are maybe 20% or less of the Party in Parliament

[tinfoilhat 11]

1 minute ago, WiseOwl182 said:

And there in a nutshell is why Brexit happened. We've found ourselves in a position where our laws can be passed on the basis that our biggest party in EU elections and therefore our representatives in the EU parliament make up 29/751 and in your own words, have no relevance. This is why people find it undemocratic and want to regain sovereignty. 

And how’s that working out?

[ez8004 10]

1 minute ago, WiseOwl182 said:

And there in a nutshell is why Brexit happened. We've found ourselves in a position where our laws can be passed on the basis that our biggest party in EU elections and therefore our representatives in the EU parliament make up 29/751 and in your own words, have no relevance. This is why people find it undemocratic and want to regain sovereignty. 

You are behaving undemocratically by thinking like that you hypocrite. Why is your vote worth more than another EU citizen in these elections?

[altus 537]

7 minutes ago, WiseOwl182 said:

No, as I keep saying, it's the platform that the party is standing on that counts, not what you estimate the intentions of their voters to be. The Tories are a leave party, so all of their votes count for leave. Labour are supposedly leave but soft Brexit, so 50/50 is fair.

If you're arguing whether people support brexit, it's the the intentions of the voters that count.

 

Following your argument, if a party changes its official position on brexit all their voters' views on it would also change.