|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 49 (9221 total) |
| |
KING IYK | |
Total: 920,792 Year: 1,114/6,935 Month: 395/719 Week: 37/146 Day: 10/8 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Brexit - Should they stay or should they go? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 739 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
caffeine writes:
I didn't keep it but as I recall (and looking it up in Wikipedia) it was probably the Austrian version with an edelweiss. Which logo do you have on the obverse?And our geese will blot out the sun.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
caffeine Member (Idle past 1351 days) Posts: 1800 From: Prague, Czech Republic Joined:
|
I didn't keep it but as I recall (and looking it up in Wikipedia) it was probably the Austrian version with an edelweiss. I like the ones that make you guess where it's from. Some are really dull. ie:
Just in case you didn't recognise the weird stylised profile, we're gonna bung the Queen's name and the name of the country on in big letters. Where's the fun? Others make the country name a little less obvious:
but once you've learnt that the RI logo is Republicca Italiana there's no more fun. Austria's are some of my favourites - much more subtle. They all incorporate a flag design but it doesn't always leap at you without colour. They sometimes use heads, and then you're struggling to think what the Grand Duke of Luxembourg looks like before you realise that it's a famous historical figure from Austria. Finland makes some of my favourites though:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Diomedes Member Posts: 998 From: Central Florida, USA Joined: |
quote: Brexit: UK asks EU for further extension until 30 June - BBC News Not sure how this will play out. Donald Tusk is apparently urging for a longer extension with a provision to leave earlier if needed. It seems to me that May is still playing the same game: trying to run down the clock to the point where her deal is the only option left. Interestingly, there will also be no more indicative votes on alternatives for Brexit. They voted on whether they should continue doing indicative votes and it ended with a tie in parliament: 310-310. The speaker then broke the tie and voted with the noes. So as it stands, May is now meeting with Corbyn to see if they can hash out some compromise to her deal, which likely means having a customs union as part of the solution. This more or less solves the Irish border problem and would negate the need for the backstop. Hardline Brexiteers obviously don't like it because it keeps the UK too closely aligned with the EU. But it appears to be the only way forward.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
caffeine Member (Idle past 1351 days) Posts: 1800 From: Prague, Czech Republic Joined: |
Interestingly, there will also be no more indicative votes on alternatives for Brexit. They voted on whether they should continue doing indicative votes and it ended with a tie in parliament: 310-310. The speaker then broke the tie and voted with the noes. Fun fact - this is the first tie in the Commons since 1993. That tie (317-317) was a vote on the Maastricht Treaty! The EU really is a topic that seems to divide people.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 18064 Joined: Member Rating: 5.0 |
Keir Starmer - Labour’s Brexit guy - reports that the Government ministers aren’t offering any changes. Which pretty much sinks any chance of a cross party deal.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Diomedes Member Posts: 998 From: Central Florida, USA Joined: |
quote: Brexit: UK and EU agree delay to 31 October - BBC News I wonder if there is any symbolism in the fact that the new deadline is Halloween. ![]() |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9489 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: |
Substitute trump for brexit and the rant almost fits for the US.
Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts "God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness. If your viewpoint has merits and facts to back it up why would you have to lie?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Diomedes Member Posts: 998 From: Central Florida, USA Joined:
|
My favorite line:"May's been flip flopping more than a dying trout; which for her is actually quite a flattering visual comparison." ![]()
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8717 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 4.9 |
Is that right? Brexit Party polling at 30%+?
That's a lot of people that still want to leave despite all the downsides raveled in the last few years. Well, the will of the people and all that. (ABE) source Thank you Percy. The 30%+ number was for the European elections.
quote: Later in the piece was the poll for a British general election.
quote: Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given. Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.Eschew obfuscation. Habituate elucidation.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 23191 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.6 |
You don't cite a source, but I did find an article that seemed to be about the same thing: Brexit Party Has More Support Than Britain's Main Parties: Poll. It was about the EU elections, so this poll is about how Britains might vote for representation in the European parliament. It implies that pro-Brexit representation in the European parliament might increase. I don't understand EU politics and so don't know whether this is significant or not, i.e., that it might play a role in how Brexit plays out.
But the article mentioned another poll about how people would vote in a British general election, and that came out differently:
quote: The paragraph is remarkably sparse on figures, but filling in the blanks we get this:
My interpretations of the article could be off because such articles have a variety of names that I'm not familiar with that they use to refer to the different political parties. For example, I think Tories are the Conservative party, but I could be wrong. I think Farage's party is the Brexit party, but I could be wrong. But if I correctly picked up the gist of that article, and if those poll figures hold up, then after a new general election the Conservatives and the Brexits would form one alliance, and the Labour party would try to find common cause with enough Liberal Democrats and Other to take control of Parliament. If Labour takes control of Parliament would that make a cancellation of Brexit possible? Sorry if I'm way off. It would be welcome if someone could clarify. I know a lot has been written here and I should understand this better, but I don't. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
caffeine Member (Idle past 1351 days) Posts: 1800 From: Prague, Czech Republic Joined: |
My interpretations of the article could be off because such articles have a variety of names that I'm not familiar with that they use to refer to the different political parties. For example, I think Tories are the Conservative party, but I could be wrong. I think Farage's party is the Brexit party, but I could be wrong. You are correct on both points.
But if I correctly picked up the gist of that article, and if those poll figures hold up, then after a new general election the Conservatives and the Brexits would form one alliance, and the Labour party would try to find common cause with enough Liberal Democrats and Other to take control of Parliament. If Labour takes control of Parliament would that make a cancellation of Brexit possible? Sorry if I'm way off. It would be welcome if someone could clarify. I know a lot has been written here and I should understand this better, but I don't. There's a few things to bear in mind here. First, there's a fundamental problem with your idea of a Tory/Brexit coalition. It would very much depend what sort of Tory party we had - particularly the leadership. A lot of the Tories are against Brexit. This is one of the central reasons that this whole process has turned into such a mess - neither of the two biggest traditional parties have a coherent policy on the European Union - both include members strongly committed to the European project and others strongly opposed, with a variety of intermediate positions. I also think the Tories would be wary of allying with the Brexit party in any case, since they are aware that it's not a real political party. It's a single-issue campaign hastily thrown together - and the likelihood of it holding together coherently should it have a massive electoral success is slim. For a glimpse into what I'm thinking of - look at the current UKIP contingent in the EU Parliament. After the big UKIP success in the last election, they elected 24 MEPS. Now, shortly before the next election; there are only two MEPs which still call themselves UKIP. Those two no longer sit with the EFDD (UKIP's European political alliance) - they decided to instead go and caucus with the fascists. They found there another former UKIP member, now sitting as an independent fascist after being expelled from the party. 14 of the UKIP MPs joined the Brexit Party - one of which had previously left UKIP to form his own Libertarian Party. Three refused to join the Brexit Party and sit as independents in the EFDD. One quit UKIP for the centre left, Eurosceptic SDP. One quite UKIP and joined the Tories. Two others quit the party and sit as unaffiliated independents - one after his failed leadership bid led to a fistfight with a fellow member and one in protest over the party's Islamophobia. The Brexit will be the same. It's a motley alliance of xenophobes, old-school socialists, libertarians, and others with a load of incompatible principles - united solely on the one issue of leaving the European Union. It will fall apart pretty rapidly. The other thing to bear in mind here, is that those numbers you're looking at are not going to be representation in Parliament; even if they're accurate vote figures. UK general elections are not elected proportionally - the same as in the US. The structure of the multiparty system means that parties can get significant vote shares without significant representation in Parliament. In 2015, the Lib Dems got 8% of the vote, and 1% of the seats. UKIP got almost 13% of the national vote, but they only won them 1 seat out of 650. To get people in Parliament you don't need a large vote total - you need a geographically concentrated vote. To see how this works look at the Scottish Nationalists - they got much less than half UKIP's total votes; but this gave them 56 MPs, in contrast to UKIP's one. The Green Party got almost as many votes as the SNP, but they also only elected one MP. The SNP's votes are (obviously) concentrated in Scotland, and so matter more than the widely distributed support for parties like UKIP, Greens and Lib Dems. ABE: If you want to fill in your question marks, by the way, the full results of the Opinium survey were as follows: Labour: 28%Tory: 22% Brexit: 21% Lib Dem: 11% Green: 6% Other: 12% Edited by caffeine, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 23191 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.6 |
Thanks for all the info. Some of it was overload, but generally it was very helpful, especially where you explained how the parties aren't necessarily unified within themselves around some key issues.
Given that a Tory/Brexit coalition is an iffy thing, does that mean the Labour party has a good chance of controlling Parliament if there's a new general election? And if they did would they work toward finding ways to end Brexit? --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 18064 Joined: Member Rating: 5.0 |
Given the First Past the Post system it depends on the distribution of votes. Labour and the Tories will almost certainly get more seats than the numbers suggest.
I think those figures would give Labour more seats than the Tories, but I don’t think they’d get a majority. Not that they would stop Brexit if they did, unless something changes. Labour’s policy is pro-Brexit and they are reluctant to even go with a second referendum. I don’t think that a General Election is very likely at the moment, but everything is so up in the air it is hard to rule anything out.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
caffeine Member (Idle past 1351 days) Posts: 1800 From: Prague, Czech Republic Joined: |
Given the First Past the Post system it depends on the distribution of votes. Labour and the Tories will almost certainly get more seats than the numbers suggest. I think those figures would give Labour more seats than the Tories, but I don’t think they’d get a majority. There's very little chance of anyone winning a majority. The lowest vote share that has ever sufficed for a single-party majority (since Irish independence) was 36.9% (this was David Cameron's slim victory when he ran on the promise of a referendum). In reality though, I am guessing, since if the vote share in the opinion poll is correct it's uncharted territory. There has never have been a UK election in which the top two parties had less than 50% collectively - probably never less than about 65%. Election results like that opinion poll will probably mean a Commons whose composition is wildly out of whack with the popular vote. Funny that a decade ago we had a referendum to reform our electoral system, which lost dramatically. And yet now we're in a situation where the two largest parties may not receive a majority of the popular vote collectively.
Not that they would stop Brexit if they did, unless something changes. Labour’s policy is pro-Brexit and they are reluctant to even go with a second referendum. Though Labour did commit to a second referendum in their official party platform. The fact that they are nonetheless reluctant to follow through is probably a large contributor to why they're polling so poorly (even if they're the most popular single party in the polls, 28% is pretty appalling considering they got 40% of the vote in the 2017 election).
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Heathen Member (Idle past 1610 days) Posts: 1067 From: Brizzle Joined: |
Labour’s policy is pro-Brexit and they are reluctant to even go with a second referendum.
There appears to be a whiff of change in the air in this respect:not explicitly to reverese Brexit, but increaseing likelyhood of a confirmatory vote. Brexit: Cross-party deal must include new referendum - Sir Keir Starmer - BBC News Keir Starmer makes a point in his guardian interview that although the LIb Dems are the major "Remain" party, (their EU election material bears the headline "Bollocks to Brexit"), they are unlikely to be in a position to action that opinion unless there is a general election. But, as it stands the EU election is the mother of all protest votes and will be seen as a massive opinion poll on brexit. So as voters we have a choice:-Vote Labour or Tory for pro-brexit but with a deal, (A deal that shows no sign of being agreed or ratified). -Vote Lib Dem to register our oppostion to brexit in all its forms. -Vote Brexit to register our support to leaving on WTO terms. none of this will be binding, and as I said will simply be indicitave of the prevailing mood. The two main parties have already been hurt badly in the local elections, with the party making the most gains being the Lib Dems. But the Lib Dems are still suffering the backlash for going into government with the tories during the Cameron/Clegg Years.In a different universe they (Lib Dems) would have gone into coalition with Labour under Ed Milliband and there would never have been a referendum. Edited by Heathen, : No reason given.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2025