Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Brexit - Should they stay or should they go?
caffeine
Member (Idle past 1024 days)
Posts: 1800
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008


Message 637 of 887 (853409)
05-27-2019 11:24 AM
Reply to: Message 636 by Diomedes
05-27-2019 10:31 AM


Re: Did the nationalists really "win" this E.U. election?
I think you're framing the French results all wrong. There was no surge for the far right Luke there was in Italy. My takeaway here is that, despite all the social unrest witnessed in France the last couple of years, despite the fact that Macron has historically low approval ratings, Le Pen's party got a lower share of the vote than in the last election. They barely got more votes than the party of a man who is possibly the world's least popular President.
To me, the fact that the far right appear unable to grow their support in France, despite terrorist attacks, and despite widespread dissatisfaction with mainstream parties, is cause for hope, not worry.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 636 by Diomedes, posted 05-27-2019 10:31 AM Diomedes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 638 by Diomedes, posted 05-27-2019 11:39 AM caffeine has replied

  
caffeine
Member (Idle past 1024 days)
Posts: 1800
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008


Message 639 of 887 (853421)
05-27-2019 12:06 PM
Reply to: Message 638 by Diomedes
05-27-2019 11:39 AM


Re: Did the nationalists really "win" this E.U. election?
Perhaps, but I would caution against any complacency. While La Pen did get a lower percentage on the whole, that is partially due to the larger turnout in the recent election. They also received half a million more votes than they did last time.
Ultimately, the main concern from my perspective is the fact that National Rally is the clear opposition as it stands. And depending on how the votes are distributed, the issue is that left leaning individuals will divide their votes across several parties while right leaning individuals could coalesce around La Pen. And that could put her party in the clear majority.
I would interpret all this differently. The right is not uniting around Le Pen - it is the left that has haemorrhaged votes to fascists in France. Like the article you quoted from said - it's in the banlieux where National Rally made gains - these are the traditional strongholds of socialists and communists.
The traditional mainsteam right is voting for Macron's party; or they are the approximately 15% of voters who went for the Republicans or one of the smaller parties that fractured away in the last few years.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not blase about political developments in France - on the contrary I find it very concerning. But the issue as I see it is not that the right is rallying to Le Pen while the left fractures. The issue is that the left has collapsed as a serious political force, and the main divide now appears to be between the centre-right and the far-right.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 638 by Diomedes, posted 05-27-2019 11:39 AM Diomedes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 643 by Diomedes, posted 05-28-2019 9:01 AM caffeine has not replied

  
caffeine
Member (Idle past 1024 days)
Posts: 1800
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008


(1)
Message 646 of 887 (854415)
06-08-2019 3:14 PM


Brexit Party begins its disintegration
I predicted a few pages back that, like UKIP before it, the Brexit Party would slowly disintegrate following its electoral success as its various members realised that, aside from the single issue that united them, they don't agree on much else; and that alliances have been made with reprehensible scum for short-term gain.
Took even less time than I thought. Their Merseyside campaign manager was fired this week once it became clear that he was a former active member of the fascist BNP. It should be pointed out that, in this case, 'became clear' means a journalist noticed. He ran as a candidate for the BNP in 2009, and his blog from those days is still online, so it's hardly a closely guarded secret.
In his own defence, the sacked member said that he'd quit the BNP in disgust once he had discovered, to his shock, "institutionalized racism within the whole of the party." Institutionalised racism in a party of fascists? Who'd have thunk it?
Edited by caffeine, : No reason given.

Replies to this message:
 Message 647 by Theodoric, posted 06-08-2019 3:36 PM caffeine has not replied

  
caffeine
Member (Idle past 1024 days)
Posts: 1800
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008


Message 653 of 887 (854939)
06-14-2019 6:57 AM
Reply to: Message 651 by PaulK
06-13-2019 5:31 PM


Re: Boris Johnson leads in first ballot for PM
To be fair (to us) it’s more like the Primaries than a full election. In fact it’s less open than the Primaries at this stage. Only Tory MPs get to vote
And this is why we know Boris is very unlikely to be PM. He has made himself abundantly clear in no uncertain terms that it is fundamentally wrong for a governing party to change is leader without calling a general election. Here's how he approached the issue when Labour did it.
quote:
They voted for Anthony Charles Lynton Blair to serve as their leader. They were at no stage invited to vote on whether Gordon Brown should be PM . They voted for Tony, and yet they now get Gordon, and a transition about as democratically proper as the transition from Claudius to Nero. It is a scandal. Why are we all conniving in this stitch-up? This is nothing less than a palace coup . with North Korean servility, the Labour Party has handed power over to the brooding Scottish power-maniac.
Obviously, then, he will request Parliament to dissolve itself immediately upon winning any vote, fine, upstanding man of principle that he is.
Edited by Admin, : Fix quote.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 651 by PaulK, posted 06-13-2019 5:31 PM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 655 by PaulK, posted 06-14-2019 7:56 AM caffeine has not replied

  
caffeine
Member (Idle past 1024 days)
Posts: 1800
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008


Message 657 of 887 (855389)
06-19-2019 6:32 AM
Reply to: Message 656 by Diomedes
06-18-2019 2:50 PM


Re: Down to five; Boris still in the lead
Mathematically, Johnson's lead will be very difficult to overtake.
A lead in the Parliamentary votes isn't really relevant though. All that matters is finishing in the top two so as to progress to the final vote by their whole party membership.
Opinion polls suggest the majority of party members will vote for Boris, so all these elimination rounds are likely a bit irrelevant.
Other fun facts from recent polls of Tory party membership. 44% of them would be happy to have Farage as party leader; and a majority consider leaving the EU more important than the continued existence of the United Kingdom, the continued existence of the Cinservative Party, and the healthy functioning of the British economy. There was only oe hypothetical presented in the latest Yougov poll which a (small) majority of party members would be willing to sacrifice Brexit to prevent - Jeremy Corbyn as PM.
Edited by caffeine, : No reason given.
Edited by caffeine, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 656 by Diomedes, posted 06-18-2019 2:50 PM Diomedes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 658 by Diomedes, posted 06-19-2019 8:59 AM caffeine has replied

  
caffeine
Member (Idle past 1024 days)
Posts: 1800
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008


Message 659 of 887 (855400)
06-19-2019 10:30 AM
Reply to: Message 658 by Diomedes
06-19-2019 8:59 AM


Re: Down to five; Boris still in the lead
quote:
I think they are only going through the motions to give the impression of due diligence.
Well, they do still have rules to follow. Even in the current mess I don't think we've quite reached the point where they'd just throw their own party rulebook to save time. What's interesting is how many people thought a challenge was worthwhile. I know there are many Tories who hate the idea of Boris, but perhaps it shows the current mess that they were incapable of coming up with an anti-Boris compromise.
quote:
That basically shows that dogma and zealotry have taken over. Which is quite disconcerting. But unfortunately, they have now made their Brexit bed so to speak. Brexit defines the Conservative party at this stage and I think they believe if they don't deliver, it will fracture the party and alienate their base.
I can see it fracturing the party anyway (to some extent it already has). Almost a third of Tory party members voted Remain, after all. It's interesting that you talk about Brexit defining the party, and I'm most amazed by the fact that a majority of members consider this more important than preserving the Union (the British one, not the European one). The formal name of the party is, after all, the Conservative and Unionist Party. The party was literally founded around the principle of preserving the Union. You'd think that should be the issue that defines them. Astoundingly, even a quarter of Scottish Conservatives said they would want Brexit to go ahead even if it meant Scotland leaving the UK (though obviously the majority of Scottish Conservatives disagreed).
Still, maybe the party will hang together after all around their one shared objective - opposing Jeremy Corbyn.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 658 by Diomedes, posted 06-19-2019 8:59 AM Diomedes has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 660 by PaulK, posted 06-19-2019 1:59 PM caffeine has not replied

  
caffeine
Member (Idle past 1024 days)
Posts: 1800
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008


Message 662 of 887 (855505)
06-20-2019 10:58 AM
Reply to: Message 661 by Diomedes
06-20-2019 9:01 AM


Re: Down to three - Sajid Javid eliminated
Should know by the end of today who are the final two.
Who remembers the heady, reckless days of about three years ago; when the thought of Michael Gove, PM would have been an unconscionable nightmare?
Now we're in 2019, where it looks like the lesser evil.
What the hell happened?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 661 by Diomedes, posted 06-20-2019 9:01 AM Diomedes has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 663 by PaulK, posted 06-20-2019 11:39 AM caffeine has seen this message but not replied

  
caffeine
Member (Idle past 1024 days)
Posts: 1800
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008


(1)
Message 668 of 887 (855687)
06-21-2019 4:19 PM
Reply to: Message 666 by Tangle
06-20-2019 4:49 PM


We're fucked, might as well try to enjoy it.
Well then, in that case the best I can think of it whipping out an old classic.
Edited by caffeine, : typo

This message is a reply to:
 Message 666 by Tangle, posted 06-20-2019 4:49 PM Tangle has not replied

  
caffeine
Member (Idle past 1024 days)
Posts: 1800
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008


(1)
Message 689 of 887 (859089)
07-28-2019 11:26 AM
Reply to: Message 688 by Diomedes
07-27-2019 11:52 AM


Re: So now what?
The only way to avoid a no deal if the current deal cannot be augmented is getting another extension or revoking article 50. I don't see either of those scenarios as being likely. And I don't know if Parliament can vote on a general election. I think that can only be called by the Prime Minister. Correct me if I am wrong.
And that notwithstanding, there is insufficient time to have a general election before the October 31st deadline.
The PM no longer has the power to call an early election. Parliament can, but it needs a two-thirds majority to do so. What they could do is vote no confidence in Johnson's government, and then if no one else can form a government within two weeks an election has to be held.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 688 by Diomedes, posted 07-27-2019 11:52 AM Diomedes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 690 by Diomedes, posted 07-29-2019 10:26 AM caffeine has not replied

  
caffeine
Member (Idle past 1024 days)
Posts: 1800
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008


Message 694 of 887 (859258)
07-30-2019 10:10 AM
Reply to: Message 692 by Tangle
07-29-2019 11:07 AM


Re: How Low Can It Go?
We're about to become a great place for you guys to come for a holiday.
I'm focusing on buying everything I want from the UK in the next few months, while the pound is cheap and before there are any customs dues.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 692 by Tangle, posted 07-29-2019 11:07 AM Tangle has not replied

  
caffeine
Member (Idle past 1024 days)
Posts: 1800
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008


Message 715 of 887 (860196)
08-06-2019 8:32 AM
Reply to: Message 702 by Percy
07-31-2019 7:37 PM


Re: So now what?
The most important detail that your implausible scenario overlooks is the danger of a hard border between England and Scotland. This is also ignored by all those banging on endlessly about another Scottish independence referendum. Freedom of movement with England is more important to most Scots than freedom of movement to France or Poland, and this is the main reason why independence is less likely post-Brexit, not more; regardless of collective delusions to the contrary.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 702 by Percy, posted 07-31-2019 7:37 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
caffeine
Member (Idle past 1024 days)
Posts: 1800
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008


Message 737 of 887 (862321)
09-04-2019 8:50 AM
Reply to: Message 736 by AZPaul3
09-03-2019 8:42 PM


They can now discuss whether to order the PM to renegotiate the Halloween drop dead date? Why not discuss whether an election is needed? Why not debate whether Brexit is stupid and should not be pursued? Debate whether Her Majesty should have Her Royal Executioner sharpen his ax?
I'm not really sure if Parliament can order government how to negotiate. They can refuse to ratify any agreement negotiated in contradiction to their instructions, but that doesn't really help in this case. British exit from the EU on 31st Oct is already agreed. They can vote no confidence in a government that refuses to negotiate in accordance with their instructions, but that doesn't give Parliament the ability to negotiate anything themselves, unless the opposition is willing to unite together with those expelled from the Tory party to declare confidence in a temporary caretaker government, which would then have the ability to negotiate a delay with the EU.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 736 by AZPaul3, posted 09-03-2019 8:42 PM AZPaul3 has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 739 by Diomedes, posted 09-04-2019 9:56 AM caffeine has not replied
 Message 740 by Percy, posted 09-04-2019 10:05 AM caffeine has replied

  
caffeine
Member (Idle past 1024 days)
Posts: 1800
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008


(1)
Message 738 of 887 (862322)
09-04-2019 9:50 AM


Brexit fact of the day
The last time a new PM lost the first parliamentary vote held under their premiership was 1894.

Replies to this message:
 Message 761 by caffeine, posted 09-10-2019 6:55 AM caffeine has not replied

  
caffeine
Member (Idle past 1024 days)
Posts: 1800
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008


Message 747 of 887 (862424)
09-05-2019 3:55 AM
Reply to: Message 740 by Percy
09-04-2019 10:05 AM


I'm not sure what all the language means, some of the terminology is unfamiliar, but what we're reading over here is that parliament will vote Wednesday on whether to block the government (apparently a separate entity from parliament under the direction of Boris Johnson) from leaving the EU with no deal on 10/31.
In Parliamentary systems, when people talk about the government they mean the executive branch.
And that is indeed what's being reported, I'm just a bit confused; since as I understood it the negotiation of treaties is a prerogative of the crown - meaning it would be something were Parliament cannot tell government what to do.
No one seems to be mentioning this, though, so I'm clearly just not too educated on constitutional law. I had a look at the bill and it indeed contains the exact text of the letter the PM is to send to the European Council in the event no deal is agreed.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 740 by Percy, posted 09-04-2019 10:05 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 760 by caffeine, posted 09-10-2019 4:21 AM caffeine has not replied

  
caffeine
Member (Idle past 1024 days)
Posts: 1800
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008


Message 760 of 887 (862676)
09-10-2019 4:21 AM
Reply to: Message 747 by caffeine
09-05-2019 3:55 AM


Boris' cunning plan to get around the law requiring him to request an extension was, apparently, to send two letters to Brussels. The first, as mandated by law, would request the Council for an extension to the leave date. The second would request the Council to ignore the first.
Exact content of the second letter is not clear. "Only joking!"; "I had my fingers crossed so it didn't count"; or simply "Noooot!" are all possibilities. Legal experts have weighed in that all would leave Johnson guilty of contempt, however.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 747 by caffeine, posted 09-05-2019 3:55 AM caffeine has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024