Strokes Posted 27 April 2018 Posted 27 April 2018 3 minutes ago, toddybad said: Tbf there isn't much positive about our politics these days is there? I’m sure a man with your stardust can think of something 1
Guest Posted 27 April 2018 Posted 27 April 2018 5 minutes ago, Strokes said: I’m sure a man with your stardust can think of something You're right. And I have. Once Amber Rudd resigns they'll be a need for a female remainer MP to keep the cabinet quotas. I've got the answer
Buce Posted 27 April 2018 Posted 27 April 2018 13 minutes ago, Strokes said: I’m sure a man with your stardust can think of something Toddy. 1
foxinexile Posted 27 April 2018 Posted 27 April 2018 (edited) 2 hours ago, Strokes said: It doesn’t matter, there is a mandate as 85% of the public voted for parties that said that were committed to leaving the single market. So any quibbles over leave or remain campaigns clarity on the subject is dead right there. The public either support it or don’t care enough to vote against it. Such a tired statement (and interestingly one that only ever seems to be parroted by Leave supporters). I voted Labour; I voted Remain and would do again and again and again whether Brexit is/isn't a success; I was aware of Labour's stance on the SM (as it was at the time); my reason for voting Labour was to keep the Tories out of the area in which I live, which worked. Of course I want the UK to remain a part of the SM ... but not as much as I didn't want my constituency painted blue. The election wasn't a vote on whether we should remain part of the SM - and if it was, 85% of the electorate would not vote for it. Edited 27 April 2018 by foxinexile
Strokes Posted 27 April 2018 Posted 27 April 2018 6 minutes ago, foxinexile said: Such a tired statement (and interestingly one that only ever seems to be parroted by Leave supporters). I voted Labour; I voted Remain and would do again and again and again whether Brexit is/isn't a success; I was aware of Labour's stance on the SM (as it was at the time); my reason for voting Labour was to keep the Tories out of the area in which I live, which worked. Of course I want the UK to remain a part of the SM ... but not as much as I didn't want my constituency painted blue. The election wasn't a vote on whether we should remain part of the SM - and if it was, 85% of the electorate would not vote for it. So you fit into the category that you didn’t care enough to vote against it.
foxinexile Posted 27 April 2018 Posted 27 April 2018 3 minutes ago, Strokes said: So you fit into the category that you didn’t care enough to vote against it. I didn't care as much as I did about keeping the Tories out of my area. Staying in the Single Market wasn't the reason I voted Remain. I have no idea about the motivations of around 15,999,950 other Remain voters, but of the ones I do know, none have mentioned staying in the Single Market as their main reason. Leave voters voted as they did for a range of reasons and I imagine the same can be said of Remain voters, but this "85% voted for parties that are committed to leaving the SM" as a kind of vindication that the majority of the electorate now support Brexit is a poor and pretty desperate show. I could turn it around and say why did only 42% vote Tory if (as I hear) they're the party to lead us out of the EU? If membership of the SM was specifically the reason for the way people voted, why wasn't the Tory vote parity with that, 85% too?
Strokes Posted 27 April 2018 Posted 27 April 2018 14 minutes ago, foxinexile said: I didn't care as much as I did about keeping the Tories out of my area. Staying in the Single Market wasn't the reason I voted Remain. I have no idea about the motivations of around 15,999,950 other Remain voters, but of the ones I do know, none have mentioned staying in the Single Market as their main reason. Leave voters voted as they did for a range of reasons and I imagine the same can be said of Remain voters, but this "85% voted for parties that are committed to leaving the SM" as a kind of vindication that the majority of the electorate now support Brexit is a poor and pretty desperate show. I could turn it around and say why did only 42% vote Tory if (as I hear) they're the party to lead us out of the EU? If membership of the SM was specifically the reason for the way people voted, why wasn't the Tory vote parity with that, 85% too? Who said it was specifically a reason to vote for any party? I just said, its been endorsed and It has. 85% voted for it, knowingly or unknowingly, happily or begrudgingly. The result is the same. My argument is, there is no point going on about the referendum campaigns lack of clarity on the single market, as the GE result supersedes it. Thats pretty much all i've said before you all got a bit upset because you know you've endorsed it.
foxinexile Posted 27 April 2018 Posted 27 April 2018 13 minutes ago, Strokes said: Who said it was specifically a reason to vote for any party? I just said, its been endorsed and It has. 85% voted for it, knowingly or unknowingly, happily or begrudgingly. The result is the same. My argument is, there is no point going on about the referendum campaigns lack of clarity on the single market, as the GE result supersedes it. Thats pretty much all i've said before you all got a bit upset because you know you've endorsed it. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this particular area. The General Election 2017 was more, much much more, than a vote about Brexit or the Single Market. Theresa May tried (and failed) to turn it into that and the result showed it wasn't/isn't the most important thing to most of the electorate (myself included). If there had been a statement saying the GE was about one thing only (the UK remaining part of the SM) and nothing else, I would have voted Lib Dems or Green. But it wasn't. We had a referendum in 2016. If either Leave or Remain voters didn't know that Brexit meant leaving the Single Market, then more fool them. There were other issues in the Labour manifesto that I didn't agree with and still don't. Because I voted for them, does it mean I endorsed everything they pledged? Of course not, and what a ridiculous thing that would be to suggest. I can't speak for anyone else, but if we had to vote for a political party on the assumption that this meant we endorsed every one of their pledges, I would never vote again! 2
Strokes Posted 28 April 2018 Posted 28 April 2018 (edited) 6 hours ago, foxinexile said: I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this particular area. The General Election 2017 was more, much much more, than a vote about Brexit or the Single Market. Theresa May tried (and failed) to turn it into that and the result showed it wasn't/isn't the most important thing to most of the electorate (myself included). If there had been a statement saying the GE was about one thing only (the UK remaining part of the SM) and nothing else, I would have voted Lib Dems or Green. But it wasn't. We had a referendum in 2016. If either Leave or Remain voters didn't know that Brexit meant leaving the Single Market, then more fool them. There were other issues in the Labour manifesto that I didn't agree with and still don't. Because I voted for them, does it mean I endorsed everything they pledged? Of course not, and what a ridiculous thing that would be to suggest. I can't speak for anyone else, but if we had to vote for a political party on the assumption that this meant we endorsed every one of their pledges, I would never vote again! Of course you endorse it if you support it with a vote, thats the very definition. You don't have to emotionally agree with something to give it approval. Turning a blind eye is still an endorsement, holding your nose and voting is still an endorsement. By giving a party a vote you are hereby approving (giving permission) for them to go ahead with their manifesto and represent us using that as the blueprint. I.e an endorsement. You can disagree all you like but all of you disagreeing are fooling nobody. You cant pick and choose which parts of the manifesto to take credit for when you put a party into power and claim no part of the things you disagree with. I might like a few elements of the BNPs manifesto, does that mean i should vote for them and just shrug my shoulders at the extreme stuff and say yeah, i dont agree with that bit though? Edited 28 April 2018 by Strokes
Guest Posted 28 April 2018 Posted 28 April 2018 1 minute ago, Strokes said: Of course you endorse it if you support it with a vote, thats the very definition. You don't have to emotionally agree with something to give it approval. Turning a blind eye is still an endorsement, holding your nose and voting is still an endorsement. By giving a party a vote you are hereby approving (giving permission) for them to go ahead with their manifesto and represent us using that as the blueprint. I.e an endorsement. You can disagree all you like but all of you disagreeing are fooling nobody. You cant pick and choose which parts of the manifesto to take credit for when you put a party into power and claim no part of the things you disagree with. I might like a few elements of the BNPs manifesto, does that mean i should vote for them and just shrug my shoulders at the extreme stuff and say yeah, i dont agree with that bit though? You're making our argument for us. We remainers might have liked the lib dems talking about a second referendum but should we have voted for them even though that was their only policy of 50 policies that we agreed with? Or should we have chosen our political party based on broader agreement with policy? You're making a completely ridiculous and false argument. Ultimately it's one that doesn't matter anyway. It will be MPs that decide what happens - the MPs we all voted in. You'll get whatever they want you to get.
Strokes Posted 28 April 2018 Posted 28 April 2018 1 minute ago, toddybad said: You're making our argument for us. We remainers might have liked the lib dems talking about a second referendum but should we have voted for them even though that was their only policy of 50 policies that we agreed with? Or should we have chosen our political party based on broader agreement with policy? You're making a completely ridiculous and false argument. Ultimately it's one that doesn't matter anyway. It will be MPs that decide what happens - the MPs we all voted in. You'll get whatever they want you to get. I see nothing you've written that counters anything at all, whatsoever. Im not telling you what you should have done, i am merely telling you what you have done. I would not have voted for any party that supported the EU because its important to me. And i would have voted for either of the party that supported referendum and based my vote soley on that. As it was i didnt have too because both parties backed the referendum, so i could pick between them. So toddy when i said the other day, i would vote UKIP if the tories betrayed us on brexit and you said, theyre racist. Surely i can just pick the bits i like and just not endorse the rest of them and its all fine by your logic? 1
Guest Posted 28 April 2018 Posted 28 April 2018 12 minutes ago, Strokes said: I see nothing you've written that counters anything at all, whatsoever. Im not telling you what you should have done, i am merely telling you what you have done. I would not have voted for any party that supported the EU because its important to me. And i would have voted for either of the party that supported referendum and based my vote soley on that. As it was i didnt have too because both parties backed the referendum, so i could pick between them. So toddy when i said the other day, i would vote UKIP if the tories betrayed us on brexit and you said, theyre racist. Surely i can just pick the bits i like and just not endorse the rest of them and its all fine by your logic? As had been pointed out, labour promised all of the benefits of membership of the single market and customs union. They didn't promise to leave. They could very easily have been talking about renegotiating to allow certain sectors to reduced migration swiss style. We've had one vote on Brexit and I.voted remain. If you're so convinced everybody wants out of the single market now let's have a second referendum?
Strokes Posted 28 April 2018 Posted 28 April 2018 (edited) 8 minutes ago, toddybad said: As had been pointed out, labour promised all of the benefits of membership of the single market and customs union. They didn't promise to leave. They could very easily have been talking about renegotiating to allow certain sectors to reduced migration swiss style. We've had one vote on Brexit and I.voted remain. If you're so convinced everybody wants out of the single market now let's have a second referendum? Thats a pretty desperate argument toddy, even for you but I'll stop if you are seriously going to claim that Labours manifesto does not mean leaving the SM. It also states an end to FOM which nips the swiss argument in bud. You cant end FOM and stay in the single market, we all know this by now dont we? Edited 28 April 2018 by Strokes
Rogstanley Posted 28 April 2018 Posted 28 April 2018 1 minute ago, Strokes said: Thats a pretty desperate argument toddy, even for you but I'll stop if you are seriously going to claim that Labours manifesto does not mean leaving the SM. It also states an end to FOM which nips the swiss argument in bud. You cant end FOM and stay in the single market, we all know this by now dont we? You can't accuse toddy of making a desperate argument when you're trying to claim the GE gives a mandate for leaving the SM! Comes on strokes, this is ridiculous.
Strokes Posted 28 April 2018 Posted 28 April 2018 2 minutes ago, Rogstanley said: You can't accuse toddy of making a desperate argument when you're trying to claim the GE gives a mandate for leaving the SM! Comes on strokes, this is ridiculous. Again no real counters, why is it ridiculous? It was in both main parties manifestos that we would leave or policies that we would need to leave to be able to enact and that was backed by 85% of the electorate. Explain whats ridiculous?
Rogstanley Posted 28 April 2018 Posted 28 April 2018 (edited) 51 minutes ago, Strokes said: Again no real counters, why is it ridiculous? It was in both main parties manifestos that we would leave or policies that we would need to leave to be able to enact and that was backed by 85% of the electorate. Explain whats ridiculous? It doesn't show support because it was a general election not a referendum on the single market and in a GE people vote on a range of issues. It doesn't give approval or a mandate because neither party got a majority for their proposal. You can't stitch parts of different manifestos together after the election and claim that's what the government are mandated to deliver. Otherwise we could stitch together the labour, lib dem and SNP manifestos and claim the tories are mandated to deliver common themes among those because more than 50% voted for them. Straight away I can see they all support the real living wage and a proper end to austerity, so is it a case of giddy up Tess you're mandated to deliver? (Coming round to the idea at this point tbh) In addition there is the fact that the labour manifesto said it wanted to retain benefits of the single market (it didn't actually expressly state that we should leave it), many people would I'm sure be fine with leaving the single market on the condition that we could keep all the benefits. But we know that isn't going to happen so Labour's position defaults to "putting jobs and the economy first", which probably means not leaving the single market unless all the benefits can be retained. We will scrap the Conservatives’ Brexit White Paper and replace it with fresh negotiating priorities that have a strong emphasis on retaining the benefits of the Single Market and the Customs Union – which are essential for maintaining industries, jobs and businesses in Britain. Labour will always put jobs and the economy first. Edited 28 April 2018 by Rogstanley 1 1
Strokes Posted 28 April 2018 Posted 28 April 2018 2 minutes ago, Rogstanley said: It doesn't show support because it was a general election not a referendum on the single market and in a GE people vote on a range of issues. It doesn't give approval or a mandate because neither party got a majority for their proposal. You can't stitch parts of different manifestos together after the election and claim that's what the government are mandated to deliver. Otherwise we could stitch together the labour, lib dem and SNP manifestos and claim whoever is in government have a mandate to deliver common themes among those because more than 50% voted for them. Straight away I can see they all support the real living wage and a proper end to austerity, so giddy up Tess you're mandated to deliver. In addition there is the fact that the labour manifesto said it wanted to retain benefits of the single market (it didn't actually expressly state that we should leave it), many people would I'm sure be fine with leaving the single market on the condition that we could keep all the benefits. But we know that isn't going to happen so Labour's position defaults to "putting jobs and the economy first", which probably means not leaving the single market unless all the benefits can be retained. We will scrap the Conservatives’ Brexit White Paper and replace it with fresh negotiating priorities that have a strong emphasis on retaining the benefits of the Single Market and the Customs Union – which are essential for maintaining industries, jobs and businesses in Britain. Labour will always put jobs and the economy first. Carefully missing the FOM pledge again i see. Like i said to toddy, if you cant accept that is a manifesto to leave the SM and that is the argument you are going to hide behind. There is no point continuing. I dont need you to accept it for me to know it to be true, nor do i care. If you vote for a party you are endorsing its manifesto, thats a fact.
Guest Posted 28 April 2018 Posted 28 April 2018 1 hour ago, Strokes said: Thats a pretty desperate argument toddy, even for you but I'll stop if you are seriously going to claim that Labours manifesto does not mean leaving the SM. It also states an end to FOM which nips the swiss argument in bud. You cant end FOM and stay in the single market, we all know this by now dont we? The Swiss have a national preference scheme in industries where they have above average employment. That is certainly a temper on freedom of movement and would actually address your concerns about over-supply in low wage industries. Hence me mentioning the Swiss model. The single market doesn't look so bad now, does it?
Rogstanley Posted 28 April 2018 Posted 28 April 2018 1 minute ago, Strokes said: Carefully missing the FOM pledge again i see. Like i said to toddy, if you cant accept that is a manifesto to leave the SM and that is the argument you are going to hide behind. There is no point continuing. I dont need you to accept it for me to know it to be true, nor do i care. If you vote for a party you are endorsing its manifesto, thats a fact. Central points all completely ignored Leaving the single market wasn't in the labour manifesto, that's a fact
Strokes Posted 28 April 2018 Posted 28 April 2018 4 minutes ago, Rogstanley said: Central points all completely ignored Leaving the single market wasn't in the labour manifesto, that's a fact Deluded. So you agree with my argument about endorsement though?
Rogstanley Posted 28 April 2018 Posted 28 April 2018 1 minute ago, Strokes said: Deluded. So you agree with my argument about endorsement though? Leaving the single market wasn't in the labour manifesto. It said they wanted to retain all its benefits and if that wasn't possible then they would put jobs and the economy first. No I don't agree with your argument about endorsement for all the reasons stated in my posts above.
Guest Posted 28 April 2018 Posted 28 April 2018 Somebody has woken up very grumpy that MPs are about to start forcing the government into retreat over anything but a soft Brexit
foxinexile Posted 28 April 2018 Posted 28 April 2018 1 hour ago, Strokes said: Of course you endorse it if you support it with a vote, thats the very definition. You don't have to emotionally agree with something to give it approval. Turning a blind eye is still an endorsement, holding your nose and voting is still an endorsement. By giving a party a vote you are hereby approving (giving permission) for them to go ahead with their manifesto and represent us using that as the blueprint. I.e an endorsement. You can disagree all you like but all of you disagreeing are fooling nobody. You cant pick and choose which parts of the manifesto to take credit for when you put a party into power and claim no part of the things you disagree with. I might like a few elements of the BNPs manifesto, does that mean i should vote for them and just shrug my shoulders at the extreme stuff and say yeah, i dont agree with that bit though? Both the Tories and Labour (albeit differently) have said they will respect the referendum result and ensure the UK leaves the EU. Leaving the SM had to be part of their GE manifestos for this reason. That doesn't mean the GE superseded the 2016 referendum, because the GE wasn't about Brexit - Theresa May tried to make it about that and failed. I'm interested to know why you didn't vote UKIP though, as they clearly are the only party who will ever enact a "Hard" Brexit. Already the Tories have reneged on so much of the bluster that was said (no surprise there). We're staying in the SM for a further two years after March 2019 and by the end of that time who knows what our relationship with the EU27 will look like. So if 85% of the electorate endorsed leaving the SM (which they didn't, because that wasn't what the GE was about), if we had a GE tomorrow all those who vote Tory surely endorse not leaving the SM until the end of 2020 at the earliest by your definition.
Recommended Posts