1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

The Brexit Party

Discussion in 'Speaker's Corner' started by Mr Badger, May 8, 2019.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. thenewoc

    Mobster

    Joined: Mar 9, 2012

    Posts: 4,862

    Location: West Sussex, England

    It's not relevant for the reasons I've given, there's no rule or compulsion for you to like the answer!
     
  2. GordyR

    Mobster

    Joined: Dec 1, 2003

    Posts: 4,912

    Location: Essex

    BP and UKIP are the only two parties campaigning for a “No Deal” Brexit.

    If between them they fail to reach 50% of the vote, then they are in the minority. Those who voted against “No Deal” parties would make up the majority, and must have their vote respected right?
     
  3. The_Abyss

    Capodecina

    Joined: May 15, 2007

    Posts: 11,763

    Location: Ipswich / Bodham

    And this is why I posted your other posts, so that your reasoning on one matter can be applied to an identical situation when you refuse to answer a simple question.

    And that reasoning is that if the Brexit Party and UKIP - the only parties campaigning for a no deal Brexit - fail to win more than 50% of the vote then there is no public mandate for a no deal Brexit. The public will have sent a message.
     
  4. DarkHorizon472

    Mobster

    Joined: May 16, 2007

    Posts: 3,145

    Another weak attempt to try and redefine the question so you can answer a different question. Only UKIP and the brexit party want a no deal brexit and the latest polling that means about two thirds are against a no deal brexit. So that means a no deal brexit is against the will of the people and anti democratic?
     
  5. thenewoc

    Mobster

    Joined: Mar 9, 2012

    Posts: 4,862

    Location: West Sussex, England

    It doesn't work like that as the others are not all campaigning for remain as I've explained. Therefore I, since you are asking me would not consider your statement to be true.
     
  6. Cern

    Mobster

    Joined: Jul 3, 2008

    Posts: 3,413

    Location: London

    I think its VERY safe to say that Labour are NOT in favour of a No Deal Brexit. Please provide evidence to the contrary if you have any.

    The Tories could possibly end up backing No Deal under new leadership, so it all depends on who becomes May's successor.

    If we are talking about a mandate for **NO DEAL** then the parties are aligned as follows: [ Lib Dem + Green + CUK + SNP + PC + Labour ] vs [ BP +UKIP ] with the Tories and DUP stances being uncertain.
     
  7. DarkHorizon472

    Mobster

    Joined: May 16, 2007

    Posts: 3,145

    Your still trying to redefine the question so you can answer a different question. Why can you not admit that only a third want a no deal brexit and two thirds the democratic majority don’t ?
     
  8. thenewoc

    Mobster

    Joined: Mar 9, 2012

    Posts: 4,862

    Location: West Sussex, England

    I've just explained you can't use 50% as the measure of success in this case since there isn't a binary set of options on offer in this election.

    It's pretty immaterial anyway since you already have a democratically elected HoC who democratically triggered Art.50 of which the clock has already run down about 3 times already.
     
  9. thenewoc

    Mobster

    Joined: Mar 9, 2012

    Posts: 4,862

    Location: West Sussex, England

    Labour have voted down the WA on multiple occasions.
     
  10. thenewoc

    Mobster

    Joined: Mar 9, 2012

    Posts: 4,862

    Location: West Sussex, England

    No, I believe removing Labour & Tories from that equation would be more accurate.
     
  11. DarkHorizon472

    Mobster

    Joined: May 16, 2007

    Posts: 3,145

    The same democratically elected HoC rejected a no deal brexit,

    So in your words democratically the elected HoC rejected a no deal brexit, two thirds of voters reject a no deal brexit which you would have to agree makes a no deal brexit even more against the will of the people and anti democratic?
     
  12. The_Abyss

    Capodecina

    Joined: May 15, 2007

    Posts: 11,763

    Location: Ipswich / Bodham

    Except you can't. There's a recent example - the negotiations between the two parties trying to see if they can agree how to leave. Their policy is to leave.

    Let's put it another way then, to help you. If the Brexit Party and UKIP combined receive more than 50% of the vote, do you agree (as do I) that this would be a mandate from the public to leave with no deal?
     
  13. GordyR

    Mobster

    Joined: Dec 1, 2003

    Posts: 4,912

    Location: Essex

    Of course it works like that... A party doesn’t have to be for remain in order to not be for “No Deal”.

    - The Conservatives are for their WA.
    - Labour is for a Customs Union.
    - Everyone else is for a second referendum.

    So again, there are only two parties who are campaigning for No Deal. If they fail to reach 50%, then they are in the minority. Therefore, even though some of the other parties disagree on what should happen, they all agree that they don’t want No Deal, and since they are the majority their votes must be respected, right?

    This is according to your own logic, you do realise that of course?

    Quite incredibly, in your attempts to wriggle out of answering this question properly, you have in fact been making the case that leave voters all voted for different things, and that therefore, simply saying there was a majority for ‘leave’ is not good enough.

    Bravo.
     
    Last edited: May 24, 2019
  14. Cern

    Mobster

    Joined: Jul 3, 2008

    Posts: 3,413

    Location: London

    What has this got to do with anything? Labour's reasons for voting down the WA are totally different to the ERG's reasons for doing the same. Labour want a Customs Union and perhaps more, how can you possibly construe this as support for No Deal? 1/10, must try harder.
     
  15. robfosters

    Caporegime

    Joined: Dec 1, 2010

    Posts: 31,012

    Location: Welling, London

    I do, but it wouldn’t matter a jot as BP & UKIP are not MP’s, and the remain parties still wouldn’t submit to the public’s will, no matter how strong the mandate is.
     
  16. garnett

    Mobster

    Joined: Mar 25, 2008

    Posts: 4,790

    And yet only yesterday you were saying...
     
  17. The_Abyss

    Capodecina

    Joined: May 15, 2007

    Posts: 11,763

    Location: Ipswich / Bodham

    Those remain parties as in the Lib Dems, SNP and the Greens.

    Interesting that you say that it won't matter a jot, as the other Brexit Party cheerleader on here seems to think that it is very important in order to send a message. Brexiters are unable to agree on what sort of Brexit they want, but now we seem to have people supporting the same party - the same one policy party - who don't agree on why they're running.
     
  18. Mr Badger

    Soldato

    Joined: Dec 27, 2009

    Posts: 6,525

    I would be utterly amazed if even half of those that have voted for the Brexit Party have a realistic grasp of what the impact of a No Deal crash out would actually be for the UK. And no, a vague fantasy about things carrying on pretty much the same except for stopping freedom of movement and the UK saving money by no longer paying anything to the EU doesn't really count.
     
  19. Cern

    Mobster

    Joined: Jul 3, 2008

    Posts: 3,413

    Location: London

    I think this is indeed a big problem for the Brexit Party moving forwards, it's not clear that everyone who has voted BP actually wants No Deal or even agrees on much else beyond that.

    Here's a little anecdote of what happened to me today:

    After voting I walked home with a neighbour who is very strongly in favour of Brexit but wants a negotiated deal (even May's deal) and stated clearly she didn't want No Deal because of the potential for economic damage. But she admitted she had just voted for the Brexit Party knowing fully their position on No Deal because her vote was a protest and she wanted to send a message to the government about failure of the negotiations.

    But here's where it gets weird, she also told me she's normally a Lib Dems voter for local elections and is so hacked off with the Tories she'd even consider voting Lib Dems at a General Election, despite their Remain stance! Then she added, definitely not the Brexit Party at a GE because she can't stand Farage and didn't agree with him on much (and yet had just voted for him).

    When pressed about why she wanted to leave the EU in the first place it was the usual stuff about FoM and payments, plus a fear of the rise of the far right throughout Europe. When I pointed out that she'd just voted for Farage who has well-documented sympathies in that direction, I got an awkward look, followed by a dismissive flick of the hand and "ah but I'm just protesting, Farage won't do well at a General Election". I said he would if people kept empowering and legitimising him by voting for him.

    Having gone down such an odd avenue of discussion we both agreed one thing, that the Tories are the real cause of all this mess and we agreed to leave it there. Most bizarre, I'm still bewildered really. But it does show you can't take for granted what anyone's reasons are for voting the way they do.
     
  20. Murphy

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Sep 16, 2018

    Posts: 2,445

    No he answered a question that was not asked, nobody, not even thenewoc, mentioned the last result of the general election, he used polling data to show the divide between eurosceptic and europhiles were fairly evenly matched when that was not the point being put forward by the person he responded too.

    And I didn't ask thenewoc to answer the question, he choose to answer it when he responded to it by quoting said question.

    Look it's quiet simple someone posted a question that to paraphrase asked If the only two parties who are advocating leaving without a WA don't get more than %51 of the vote does that mean the majority do not support leaving the EU without a deal? Which thenewoc answered by saying the divide between eurosceptic and europhiles is fairly evenly split. Now like i said mistakes can be made and people are more than welcome to dismiss question and propose different ones, but to refute a question that was not put forward is dishonest and inevitably leads to convoluted arguments while people try to establish exactly who said what and who's answering what question.
    I wonder if McstylisT is ever going to have one of those "are we the bad guys" moments.
     
    Last edited: May 24, 2019
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.