Poll: Poll: Prime Minister Theresa May calls General Election on June 8th

Who will you vote for?

  • Conservatives

  • Labour

  • Lib Dem

  • UKIP

  • Other (please state)

  • I won't be voting

Results are only viewable after voting.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Skunkworks said:
Just to clarify, you'd be fine with Brexit winning as the 3 Brexit votes represent more than Remain?
Click to expand...

If the three Brexit groups decided to work together and form a coalition then no, I have no issues with that. It would also hinge on all three deciding they wanted to work together towards Brexit and one of the groups wasn't happier forming a coalition with the remain group.

That may sound confusing, but as we were discussing elections I assume you're not actually using that example to indicate a non binding referendum question? In that case the situation is totally different as already mentioned (and the question should not have got past the election commission as I have already pointed out).

Perhaps what you should have asked is if the result ended up as:

Conservative - 30
Lib dem - 45
Labour - 20
UKIP - 3
BNP - 2

And whether I would be happy if the conservatives, labour, UKIP and BNP formed a coalition without the lib dems. No I wouldn't, but at he same time I'd acknowledge that they have the right to do so.
 
dowie said:
You can make a similar argument re: remain. Some remain supporters will be in favour of ever closer union, other remain supporters would want to stop any further integration, some who might like the status quo might rather soft Brexit/EEA over moves towards federalisation and some might want to 'change the EU from within'. There are any number of different outcomes that could change the views of people on either side of the vote.
Click to expand...

Which is why if that was a referendum question it shouldn't be allowed without multiple remain options as well. Then the whole thing would get too confusing if someone then decided it was a binding referendum and the wishes of "the people" should be enacted.

It would be very useful to gauge the mood of the public and base policy on however.
 
I don't think it is feasible - some of the examples mentioned there are conditional on future events etc.. you could end up with several hundred options for such a referendum
 
The best thing atleast is that prospect that so many Labour losses will boost the Federalism/Voting system reform this Union desperately needs, then at least two "major" parties will agree and eventually people will get bored of May's rhetoric.
 
Moses said:
It depends, no? What if we end up with hard Brexit, which only leaves 25% happy? What if remain is preferable to soft Brexit wanters if it's between remain and hard Brexit?

Given the campaign didn't have a settled vision for Brexit, you can't just choose one vision of it and claim that all Brexit supporters wanted that particular vision of Brexit.
Click to expand...

Getting bored of this argument, its a fallacy. As you put it, you say that the Brexit campaign did not provide a clear message, yet people STILL voted for it.

Why is this? I know why, because after decades of membership they weren't happy and with the ability to vote on our membership of the EU extremely sparse they'd decided they'd had enough whatever the cost and to take the opportunity to change it.
 
kitch9 said:
Getting bored of this argument, its a fallacy. As you put it, you say that the Brexit campaign did not provide a clear message, yet people STILL voted for it.

Why is this? I know why, because after decades of membership they weren't happy and with the ability to vote on our membership of the EU extremely sparse they'd decided they'd had enough whatever the cost and to take the opportunity to change it.
Click to expand...

Yet the EU was not the source of the majority of their problems. Stupid gonna stupid.
 
Azza said:
Huge decrease in tax income, increased unemployment, vat cut, bank bail outs, slower housing market etc etc

But yeah lets still blame Labour for the subprime mess.
Click to expand...

I wasnt picking on any of those other points - the discussion was about the deficit and its definition. However you see it when the handover was done they handed over a huge deficit that the coalition government had to fix
 
I still don't understand why people wanted to leave the EU for any other reason than immigration. Regardless of your view on that subject, it's a legitimate thing and people can have their legitimate views on that. I concede my own bias - I have no threat to my job security from immigrants and I quite like having everything cheaper.

Everything else raised as being objectionable about the EU was pretty much a non-sensical moot point seemingly made up to hide real justifications for leaving (i.e. 'sovereignty') or laughably ignorant. It's like everyone has applied backwards reasoning - decide your outcome and then try to justify it.

Inefficiency within the EU would be another terrible reason to leave - as is its increasing political nature (another 'legitimate thing' but not affected in one bit with us leaving and nothing above and beyond our existing diplomatic relationships... which are now going to be worse than before).

Well... done and dusted now. I suppose I can take a sort of perverted solice that I'm not going to be someone that 'loses out', relatively speaking, compared to average joe.

Fingers crossed that we get a 'decent deal' with leaving. Not that anyone has the slightest clue what that will be...
 
chroniclard said:
Yet the EU was not the source of the majority of their problems. Stupid gonna stupid.
Click to expand...

Actually the EU had and still has numerous problems, some specific to the UK and some pertinent around the group.

These concerns were valid and do not seemed to be faced up to, hence the rise of eurosceptism as a whole.

Frankly the real issue here is that we have been pushing towards the apex of globalisation for a while now, which has not benefitted the majority of people. The EU has been perceived to impact this.

Hence why I suspect even Corbyn didn't fight particularly hard on the issue, as the left side of politics always had reservations about the impact of a larger labour pool.
 
chroniclard said:
Yet the EU was not the source of the majority of their problems. Stupid gonna stupid.
Click to expand...

True, to an extent. But many feel the EU has been the source of a minority of their problems over a long period of time. It's certainly not the most significant problem we have, but resentment has festered over time. Where we get regular opportunities to display our dismay at the government of the day, last year was the first opportunity people have had to really vent their frustration at the EU. Pro Remain or pro Leave, it's difficult to argue we don't get the short end of the straw within the EU. The debate has largely been over whether that's a bad enough situation to see us walking away.
 
sports_brah said:
Hence why I suspect even Corbyn didn't fight particularly hard on the issue, as the left side of politics always had reservations about the impact of a larger labour pool.
Click to expand...
I respectfully disagree, current far-left movement don't care at all about larger labour pools - they even think immigration should be increased. I agree that's bizarre and makes no sense at all for a movement supposedly representing working people to support something that's inevitably going to reduce pay and conditions for working people but these are the times we live in. The reason Corbyn and his comrades don't like the EU is because of European competition laws that force privatisation of public assets.
 
Anyone else in the weird position of being ideologically opposed to the Tories, yet feeling like they're the only party with enough breadth over the EU issue to make the right calls? It's not about "Hard Brexit" or "Soft Brexit" or any other type of Brexit; it's about being able to shift position depending on the success or failure of the negotiations.

It's kind of frustrating. Domestically, I think the Tories are starting to make a bit of a hash of things. Yet I think Labour, in their current form, would be worse. It's not the policies with Labour so much as the people; they don't inspire confidence. I've always been ideologically aligned with the Lib Dems, but their position on negotiations has me concerned. The EU know what the LD want, and I fully expect they'd make it difficult to attain, knowing all too well how hard it would be for the Lib Dems to walk away from the table. I wouldn't be surprised if they'd walk out of any potential coalition before they'd walk away from the EU. I find that worrisome.

I'm expecting a larger Tory majority from this election. I also expect it'll be the last successive Tory government; Brexit is going to be a mess. The Tories are going to come out of the process tired. If it weren't for Brexit and the distraction it provides, I wouldn't be confident in their ability to win this election despite a divided Labour Party with an unpopular leader. They've made too many unpopular domestic policy decisions, and appear to have no good answers on traditional election hot topics like the NHS and education.
 
Last edited:
Nitefly said:
I still don't understand why people wanted to leave the EU for any other reason than immigration.
Click to expand...

My reasons, or at least a main one, rather simply, was fear of deeper integration.

Now I could have been wrong, but in my opinion a landslide vote to remain part of the EU would have meant that sooner or later we would have had pressure on subjects such as adopting the Euro.

Also I fundamentally disagree with how the EU/ Eurozone (different heads of the same beast) has treated Southern Europe.

I leave vote to me would have at least put a marker down with the EU. Enough is enough. Fallout would have then been at bare minimum no further integration ranging to what is now called a 'hard brexit'
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom