ThePrisoner
Well-known member
Fcuk me - this is the best yet
Starmer: No to a Second Referendum
- Thread starter The Ruthsayer
- Start date
BoroMart
Well-known member
The reason labour are not going to discuss a second ref is because the reason they lost the last GE was because it became a brexit vote. They want to put it behind and move onwards. That isn't to say at some point that they won't change, but they will be eager to avoid it being this election, rather the one after.
Because all referendums in the UK are advisory and not binding the High Court in London could not because of this “technicality” rule that it should be voided and run again because of unlawful practices in the way it was run according to the evidence was illegal. But the courts hands were tied.
We should all be a bit pi$$ed off about that surely. Because it will remain illegal by virtue of the actions taken…the evidence remains. Only the technicality gets in the way.
I agree there’s no feasible way back for a very, very longtime. I just hate being blatantly turned over.
gizasqueezemister
Well-known member
Ok now I’m on the right thread. From what I have read, the strategy appears to be lie to the electorate because they have proven themselves too thick to vote responsibly. Then once in, rip up the manifesto and move to EU lite then back to full membership once the fuss has died down. I hear what the cunning strategists are saying but surely the integrity boost comes from having the courage to put cards firmly on the table. Who knows, maybe the best play for KS is to act less like a politician. Johnson’s nail in the coffin has been / will be his lies. Perhaps this policy ruse is not the best way for KS to enter No.10.
The Ruthsayer
Well-known member
It’s just a simple example of how, for me, there is a failure to adapt funding to be sympathetic to local culture. In my previous abode we applied for funding for a small cycle path. EU insisted it was 2m wide with lighting more suitable for an F1 circuit that would have destroyed the ambience of the park. If you consider my point a little more carefully, you will appreciate that this level of remoteness and inflexibility materially harms the EU.Fcuk me - this is the best yet
ThePrisoner
Well-known member
You're on a wind up aren't you and I've been suckered?
Lefty
Well-known member
I’m not labelling people thick because they don’t concur with my views, I’m labelling them stupid because all of them, whether they were City accountants or economists, Eton and Oxford educated MP’s or whoever, all of them exhibited stupidity somewhere down the line in their decision making process.
I don’t care who you are, what your job is, how educated you are and whether you are an Einstein like genius, you’re also, sometimes, absolutely stupid.
Citing some good criticisms of the EU as all the validation needed to leave is one example of an error in process, because that was not the appropriate way to reason an answer to the question put.
Unravel_Morrison
Well-known member
The EU won't just let us back in so its a moot point.
I think regardless of the party, the next serious PM in power will look to encourage greater cooperation with the EU.
I think the fact that he's being attacked from both sides of the Remain/Leave sides means he's probably got it about right.
Unravel_Morrison
Well-known member
So when the UK funded it, what did they insist on in terms of lane width?
Borothruandthru
Well-known member
So Keir has tied himself to a corpse.
No longer a Tory brexit ?
Have politicians no common sense ?
We have nobody to vote for. At least the greens agree on something.
No longer a Tory brexit ?
Have politicians no common sense ?
We have nobody to vote for. At least the greens agree on something.
The Ruthsayer
Well-known member
'Exhibited stupidity...in their decision making process'. Sorry Lefty, that sounds to me like you are labelling them stupid for voting to Leave. Maybe they were, but we have all made incorrect decisions in the past, even though we acted in what we considered to be an intelligent and disinterested manner. My point was, that if we are to begin to heal the divide in this country, (which needs to happen before we talk to the EU) then we need to stop assigning derogatory labels to Leave voters.
The Ruthsayer
Well-known member
Here's two benefits that are of great importance to me, though I appreciate not all will share my view:38 posts so far and still nobody can put their finger on what the reasons for, or what the obvious benefits of leaving would be …add this to literally 100’s of post on the board on the subject.
The same people, and money, lots and lots of it who funded the leave campaign are exactly the same people who put Trump into the White House. Using exactly the same methodologies. Why? What was in it for themselves and others.
It’s a view
Charter Cities: The Real Reason for Brexit and the Bigger Picture
With our economy in tatters and the frightening roll back of our democratic rights now beginning to expose the true nature of Brexit, some…medium.com
Scrote
Well-known member
Starmer was the tactical genius behind presssing for a second referendum ahead of being in power...
And yet the 'sensibles' castigated Corbyn for doing exactly the same thing. The hypocrisy is staggering.
This just misrepresents what Sturgeon has consistently put forward as an argument for a new referendum - the Scots were lied to over their EU membership. A fundamental change in circumstances is exactly when you should be voting if you don't want democracy further devalued.
I'm not a particular fan of the SNP but if we're supposed to be a union of equals then why can't Labour put forward a good argument for being aligned with Scotland? Pandering to little-englanders isn't going to help revive the fortunes of the UK.
Nero
Well-known member
Once this current generation of mainly poor Politicians is out of the way, I hope the next generation are more likely to realise the Brexit vote was one that isolated the country in a way that only benefits a select few.
It's a shame Labour are in a position where they can't even attempt to explain why Brexit is a total disaster. Starmer knows do that and the Billionaires in charge of the right-wing press will go into brain washing overdrive. It will galvanise the charlatan and the likes of 18th Century Rees-Mogg.
I hope the Lib Dems and Greens continue to make the case for the Single Market, Customs Union and EU as it already appeals to reasonably minded people. Hopefully more start to understand it's the best thing for the country.
It's a shame Labour are in a position where they can't even attempt to explain why Brexit is a total disaster. Starmer knows do that and the Billionaires in charge of the right-wing press will go into brain washing overdrive. It will galvanise the charlatan and the likes of 18th Century Rees-Mogg.
I hope the Lib Dems and Greens continue to make the case for the Single Market, Customs Union and EU as it already appeals to reasonably minded people. Hopefully more start to understand it's the best thing for the country.
MolteniArcore
Well-known member
You have to be in power to change things. Starmer obviously thinks getting the Brexit 2nd Ref monkey off his shoulder now means the Tories can't use it as a weapon over the next few months. I suppose in some respects it's quite clever that way. In 18 months the public will have forgotten about it but the Tories can't fight the election using Brexit.
If labour get into power they can ease the Brexit pains and maybe if they get a 2nd or 3rd term bring us ever closer to the EU.
If labour get into power they can ease the Brexit pains and maybe if they get a 2nd or 3rd term bring us ever closer to the EU.
BlindBoyGrunt
Well-known member
Starmer was fully aware that a second referendum was bad policy when, during his 2019 party conference speech, he went off script without informing Corbyn, McDonnell et al. of his underhand plan and announced exactly this. It was against party policy and Corbyn's weakness was that he should have sacked Starmer then and there.
Andy_W
Well-known member
Not really.
He's said the policy for them being in power would be to not have a second referendum, and move on, which I think most in the UK would support, Labour, Tory or whatever. Even as a "hardcore remainer" I don't want a second referendum, so can't imagine many leave voters do, or those who were fairly central, so it likely wouldn't get over the line anyway.
Not many sane people think brexit is going well, and for the good of the country (not them the individual), but it doesn't mean they support having another brexit vote, not many want to go through the instability of it again. Outside investment doesn't want us having votes every 5-10 years either, they want continuity/ stability.
However, joining the SM, paying for access to it, joining the CU (which he's not said he would do either), or still allowing foreign workers where we need them is not EU lite, it's just one of the many versions of brexit which leavers "won" based on. We would still be out of the EU, so they still "won", and the hardest of brexits was only the choice of ~30% of leavers or about 15% of those wo voted on the subject.
Picking the policy of the UK for 2,3,5 elections away is not the choice of KS or the current labour crop, nothing is set in stone for 10-30 years down the line, and it would be absolutely ludicrous to tie ourselves up in knots like that. Policies have to be relatively fluid, over long periods as you adapt to economic changes. Not being able to adapt to a want for change (in any direction) would always be on the table, just like it's still on the table now for the Tories in 5-25 years etc, no matter what the current crop of Tories are saying. If the Tory deck collapses, which it likely will, then it could be a new crop of Tories coming in pushing for better access to the single market, EU workers and cutting red tape. Apparently the Tories are meant to be "good for the economy", so maybe the new crop will realise that cutting off the neighbouring trade bloc of 600m people/ wasn't the greatest idea in the world, the same line of thought that they used to have (which worked well for the UK for 50 years).
KS has not really lied on the topic yet, so probably not a good idea to apply some sort of false equivalence with the current Tory crop, who've done nothing but lie about it.
The quickest we could get back into the EU is probably still 5-10 years after having a vote for it (not saying we need/ want one), and by that time we will have probably had 90% of the irreversible damage already, so it gives less validity to actually having a vote, or there being a vote which would get over the line anyway. i.e there would be little point.
We could go back to similar growth as the EU in maybe 10 years time, and that may be the best we can hope for, but it would be growing from a lower base to where we could have been, had we stayed in the EU. Effectively in 10 years we may be 100% of where we are now, then we kick on 2-3% a year from there, but in that time the EU will probably be 110% to where they are now, and they'll be kicking on 2-3% on top of that.
The damage of the 2016 vote is largely well and truly baked in now, till 2030 at least, probably more like 2035-2040. Outside investment and workers have already been scared off by how much the UK is insistent on self harm, and if we move to having referendums ever 10 years (which nobody wants) then it's going to do us no favours. Outside or even internal investment wouldn't put their money on a racing driver that likes changing direction from forward to reverse, or a driver who thinks he can take on the world after drinking 10 pints, which is how BJ is acting now.
This is how the Starmer fans work. The guy never says anything so they just make up their own policies and assume he's secretly planning the same. Its become such a habit that now when he does say something, e.g. "a Labour government won't rejoin the single market or a customs union", they still just ignore it and assume the reverse is right. He's not left wing though so of course don't call it a personality cult.
Andy_W
Well-known member
He wasn't in power then, it was a different time then, and Labour had zero hope of getting in power back then. He could see the Tory version of brexit was going to be an absolute disaster (like anyone could), so going against that then was probably the right call. Had he supported leave (or backed the Tories), then all it would have done is made him look like he agreed with the farce to come, it wouldn't have increased their chances of winning the 2019 election and it would have stopped them from being able to say "you got us into this mess" from 2019-2024 now, which is clearly working (hence the Tory decline).
Wanting a second referendum (or a vote on the deal) in 2018 was the right thing to want, then, now it isn't. We already have 6 years of damage baked in, there's nothing turning that ship around.
KS stance has been to control the centre, when the centre moves, move with it, it's the only way for Labour to win.