Brexit delayed

[Mellsblue]

356/373


Brx: 31.6%
LD: 20.3%
Lab: 14.1%
Grn: 12.1%
Con: 9.1%
SNP+PC: 4.6%


Leave: 5.8M
Remain: 6.7M



MEPs (waiting for Scotland & NI), 2014 => 2019

Farage's ego, 23 => 28
Lib Dem, 1 => 15
Labour, 18 => 10
Green, 3 => 7
Conservative, 18 => 3
Plaid, 1 => 1

9 to be declared

Labour aren’t Remain. It would be more accurate to put Remain + Labour and Leave + Con, as per your original source, for those with a second ref as a policy. So, the result does give credence to the idea of a second ref but, given those figures, it’ll be close, yet again.
BBC’s breakdowns:

[Mellsblue]

Farage is claiming his triumph to be clear indications of the UK electorates willingness to leave on no deal. Yet more votes for parties with remain policies.

Real shame all the media will focus on is Farage.

Yep. As per usual, it’s been spun every which way depending on your viewpoint.

Are you counting Labour as Remain, too?

[Which Tyler]

Labour aren’t Remain.

That might, possibly be why didn't count labour as a remain party? Although, TBH, I did do exactly what you suggest I should have done, so...
Oh, and my original source had no such thing at the time of my postings.

FTR, I played with putting con and lab in a group of their own for wanting a negotiated deal, but... It's just too complicated to boil either party down to any position on Brexit. The leaderships want a negotiated departure, but neither parliamentary parties do, and I think I'm right in saying that neither set of party members do.
IMO, if you count Con as pro-Brexit, you have to count labour as pro-Remain, and accept that both are wrong and water down the conclusions consequently, I left them out of that calculation.

[Sandydragon]

Farage is claiming his triumph to be clear indications of the UK electorates willingness to leave on no deal. Yet more votes for parties with remain policies.

Real shame all the media will focus on is Farage.

Yep. As per usual, it’s been spun every which way depending on your viewpoint.

Are you counting Labour as Remain, too?

No. I was viewing it as a third for hard Brexit, a bit more for remain and others undecided or for softish Brexit. Overall it’s still very close, but the idea that all leavers votes for hard Brexit can be disputed.

[Which Tyler]

6 million people sign a petition to revoke art50 "nothing to see here"
5.8 million people vote for Hard Brexit (whilst a million more vote for RevoteOrRevoke) "we MUST be included at the negotiating table" "Huge vote for hardest of hard Brexits" etc etc

[Sandydragon]

6 million people sign a petition to revoke art50 "nothing to see here"
5.8 million people vote for Hard Brexit (whilst a million more vote for RevoteOrRevoke) "we MUST be included at the negotiating table" "Huge vote for hardest of hard Brexits" etc etc

Good point.

[Mellsblue]

6 million people sign a petition to revoke art50 "nothing to see here"
5.8 million people vote for Hard Brexit (whilst a million more vote for RevoteOrRevoke) "we MUST be included at the negotiating table" "Huge vote for hardest of hard Brexits" etc etc

Good point.

It is a good point, but the Remain side have spun it the other way just as hard. Yet another example of the extremes Brexit has led to.

[Mellsblue]

Farage is claiming his triumph to be clear indications of the UK electorates willingness to leave on no deal. Yet more votes for parties with remain policies.

Real shame all the media will focus on is Farage.

Yep. As per usual, it’s been spun every which way depending on your viewpoint.

Are you counting Labour as Remain, too?

No. I was viewing it as a third for hard Brexit, a bit more for remain and others undecided or for softish Brexit. Overall it’s still very close, but the idea that all leavers votes for hard Brexit can be disputed.

Yep. Farage’s claims are nonsense.

[Banquo]

How you read it depends on what you personally want to happen next. Its a mess, that will take an awful long time to resolve.

If we had a 'people's vote' what would the question now be?

[Mellsblue]

Labour aren’t Remain.

That might, possibly be why didn't count labour as a remain party? Although, TBH, I did do exactly what you suggest I should have done, so...
Oh, and my original source had no such thing at the time of my postings.

FTR, I played with putting con and lab in a group of their own for wanting a negotiated deal, but... It's just too complicated to boil either party down to any position on Brexit. The leaderships want a negotiated departure, but neither parliamentary parties do, and I think I'm right in saying that neither set of party members do.
IMO, if you count Con as pro-Brexit, you have to count labour as pro-Remain, and accept that both are wrong and water down the conclusions consequently, I left them out of that calculation.

I’ve not sat here doing any in depth maths, but going by your figs I’m struggling to see how LD + Gr + plus the nationalists is greater than BP + Con. I honestly don’t see how you could say Lab are pro-Remain. I certainly can’t see the logic of ‘if you count Con as pro-Brexit, you have to count labour as pro-Remain’. The Cons are unashamedly pro-Brexit whilst Labour ran on a pro-Brexit manifesto, have a pro-Brexit leader and have a second ref as their last resort.

[Puja]

How you read it depends on what you personally want to happen next. Its a mess, that will take an awful long time to resolve.

If we had a 'people's vote' what would the question now be?

The only way to do it would be a ranked preference system of the three main options - leave with a deal, leave without a deal, call the whole thing off. Anything else would leave ambiguity for someone to argue about.

Puja

[Mellsblue]

How you read it depends on what you personally want to happen next. Its a mess, that will take an awful long time to resolve.

If we had a 'people's vote' what would the question now be?

Yep. It’s being spun every which way possible. If Labour actually grew some balls and took a position it would all be a lot clearer.
That said, however you look at it, the country is split virtually 50/50.

As for the second ref, now May has gone it No Deal v Remain. Which is squeaky bum territory.

[Mellsblue]

How you read it depends on what you personally want to happen next. Its a mess, that will take an awful long time to resolve.

If we had a 'people's vote' what would the question now be?

The only way to do it would be a ranked preference system of the three main options - leave with a deal, leave without a deal, call the whole thing off. Anything else would leave ambiguity for someone to argue about.

Puja

What deal? There isn’t one. It died with May. Well, it actually died months ago but May kept it on life support longer than the doctors recommended.

[Banquo]

How you read it depends on what you personally want to happen next. Its a mess, that will take an awful long time to resolve.

If we had a 'people's vote' what would the question now be?

The only way to do it would be a ranked preference system of the three main options - leave with a deal, leave without a deal, call the whole thing off. Anything else would leave ambiguity for someone to argue about.

Puja

But there is no deal on the table.

[Puja]

How you read it depends on what you personally want to happen next. Its a mess, that will take an awful long time to resolve.

If we had a 'people's vote' what would the question now be?

The only way to do it would be a ranked preference system of the three main options - leave with a deal, leave without a deal, call the whole thing off. Anything else would leave ambiguity for someone to argue about.

Puja

What deal? There isn’t one. It died with May. Well, it actually died months ago but May kept it on life support longer than the doctors recommended.

Fair point, although I feel there should be some kind of soft Brexit on the ticket. Otherwise it feels like rigging the vote - while leave/remain might be 50/50, there's not the same balance for No Deal. Having a deal is a legitimately popular option and for it not to be on the paper means that there's a swathe of people going unrepresented and, worse, something that people can argue about after the vote.

Puja

[Banquo]

The only way to do it would be a ranked preference system of the three main options - leave with a deal, leave without a deal, call the whole thing off. Anything else would leave ambiguity for someone to argue about.

Puja

What deal? There isn’t one. It died with May. Well, it actually died months ago but May kept it on life support longer than the doctors recommended.

Fair point, although I feel there should be some kind of soft Brexit on the ticket. Otherwise it feels like rigging the vote - while leave/remain might be 50/50, there's not the same balance for No Deal. Having a deal is a legitimately popular option and for it not to be on the paper means that there's a swathe of people going unrepresented and, worse, something that people can argue about after the vote.

Puja

and how the fck do we get that? Parliament has had its say= we haven't a fckin clue and by and large can't be ar5ed to understand the issues.

[Which Tyler]

Labour aren’t Remain.

That might, possibly be why didn't count labour as a remain party? Although, TBH, I did do exactly what you suggest I should have done, so...
Oh, and my original source had no such thing at the time of my postings.

FTR, I played with putting con and lab in a group of their own for wanting a negotiated deal, but... It's just too complicated to boil either party down to any position on Brexit. The leaderships want a negotiated departure, but neither parliamentary parties do, and I think I'm right in saying that neither set of party members do.
IMO, if you count Con as pro-Brexit, you have to count labour as pro-Remain, and accept that both are wrong and water down the conclusions consequently, I left them out of that calculation.

I’ve not sat here doing any in depth maths, but going by your figs I’m struggling to see how LD + Gr + plus the nationalists is greater than BP + Con. I honestly don’t see how you could say Lab are pro-Remain. I certainly can’t see the logic of ‘if you count Con as pro-Brexit, you have to count labour as pro-Remain’. The Cons are unashamedly pro-Brexit whilst Labour ran on a pro-Brexit manifesto, have a pro-Brexit leader and have a second ref as their last resort.

Did you read what you replied to? Or just too busy spinning?

[Mellsblue]

The only way to do it would be a ranked preference system of the three main options - leave with a deal, leave without a deal, call the whole thing off. Anything else would leave ambiguity for someone to argue about.

Puja

What deal? There isn’t one. It died with May. Well, it actually died months ago but May kept it on life support longer than the doctors recommended.

Fair point, although I feel there should be some kind of soft Brexit on the ticket. Otherwise it feels like rigging the vote - while leave/remain might be 50/50, there's not the same balance for No Deal. Having a deal is a legitimately popular option and for it not to be on the paper means that there's a swathe of people going unrepresented and, worse, something that people can argue about after the vote.

Puja

Absolutely.

[Mellsblue]

What deal? There isn’t one. It died with May. Well, it actually died months ago but May kept it on life support longer than the doctors recommended.

Fair point, although I feel there should be some kind of soft Brexit on the ticket. Otherwise it feels like rigging the vote - while leave/remain might be 50/50, there's not the same balance for No Deal. Having a deal is a legitimately popular option and for it not to be on the paper means that there's a swathe of people going unrepresented and, worse, something that people can argue about after the vote.

Puja

and how the fck do we get that? Parliament has had its say= we haven't a fckin clue and by and large can't be ar5ed to understand the issues.

Absolutely.

[Mellsblue]

That might, possibly be why didn't count labour as a remain party? Although, TBH, I did do exactly what you suggest I should have done, so...
Oh, and my original source had no such thing at the time of my postings.

FTR, I played with putting con and lab in a group of their own for wanting a negotiated deal, but... It's just too complicated to boil either party down to any position on Brexit. The leaderships want a negotiated departure, but neither parliamentary parties do, and I think I'm right in saying that neither set of party members do.
IMO, if you count Con as pro-Brexit, you have to count labour as pro-Remain, and accept that both are wrong and water down the conclusions consequently, I left them out of that calculation.

I’ve not sat here doing any in depth maths, but going by your figs I’m struggling to see how LD + Gr + plus the nationalists is greater than BP + Con. I honestly don’t see how you could say Lab are pro-Remain. I certainly can’t see the logic of ‘if you count Con as pro-Brexit, you have to count labour as pro-Remain’. The Cons are unashamedly pro-Brexit whilst Labour ran on a pro-Brexit manifesto, have a pro-Brexit leader and have a second ref as their last resort.

Did you read what you replied to? Or just too busy spinning?

I did. I just don’t agree with your analysis. What is your logic behind your assertion that Lab must pro-Remain if Con are pro-Leave?

[Sandydragon]

How you read it depends on what you personally want to happen next. Its a mess, that will take an awful long time to resolve.

If we had a 'people's vote' what would the question now be?

The only compromise solution has been sunk. Hard Brexit on WTO rules or remain.

[Mellsblue]

That might, possibly be why didn't count labour as a remain party? Although, TBH, I did do exactly what you suggest I should have done, so...
Oh, and my original source had no such thing at the time of my postings.

FTR, I played with putting con and lab in a group of their own for wanting a negotiated deal, but... It's just too complicated to boil either party down to any position on Brexit. The leaderships want a negotiated departure, but neither parliamentary parties do, and I think I'm right in saying that neither set of party members do.
IMO, if you count Con as pro-Brexit, you have to count labour as pro-Remain, and accept that both are wrong and water down the conclusions consequently, I left them out of that calculation.

I’ve not sat here doing any in depth maths, but going by your figs I’m struggling to see how LD + Gr + plus the nationalists is greater than BP + Con. I honestly don’t see how you could say Lab are pro-Remain. I certainly can’t see the logic of ‘if you count Con as pro-Brexit, you have to count labour as pro-Remain’. The Cons are unashamedly pro-Brexit whilst Labour ran on a pro-Brexit manifesto, have a pro-Brexit leader and have a second ref as their last resort.

Did you read what you replied to? Or just too busy spinning?

Also, why would I spin against myself. I voted to Remain, I’d vote Remain again. I’d leave the Cons if JRM or similar became leader (as stated on here previously), ie we became the BP in all but nam. I think we should accept the result of the ref but don’t think we should no deal. I’d rather anybody win rather than the Brexit Party, other than a Corbyn led Lab which I see as equally as bad as a BP win.
For clarity, I don’t want the BP party to win or the Cons to become BP-light. I’d rather second ref than no deal. I simply don’t agree with your analysis.

[Mellsblue]

How you read it depends on what you personally want to happen next. Its a mess, that will take an awful long time to resolve.

If we had a 'people's vote' what would the question now be?

The only compromise solution has been sunk. Hard Brexit on WTO rules or remain.

What happened to the demand for compromise ? I think Puja has it spot on.

[Puja]

How you read it depends on what you personally want to happen next. Its a mess, that will take an awful long time to resolve.

If we had a 'people's vote' what would the question now be?

The only compromise solution has been sunk. Hard Brexit on WTO rules or remain.

What happened to the demand for compromise ? I think Puja has it spot on.

Unfortunately, they've all got something of a point in that the only concrete compromise proposal around is one that's deader than the proverbial dodo. If there were to be a second ref, I know I'd want a third option on the ballot paper, but I haven't got the first clue what it would be anymore.

Yours sincerely,

Peter

[Mellsblue]

The only compromise solution has been sunk. Hard Brexit on WTO rules or remain.

What happened to the demand for compromise ? I think Puja has it spot on.

Unfortunately, they've all got something of a point in that the only concrete compromise proposal around is one that's deader than the proverbial dodo. If there were to be a second ref, I know I'd want a third option on the ballot paper, but I haven't got the first clue what it would be anymore.

Yours sincerely,

Peter

Agreed. As said, the deal died with May. Goodness knows where we do get a ‘deal’ from but, as you say, not to have one on the ballot paper isn’t good. However, given the extreme nature of the Brexit debate, it’s pretty apposite place for us to end up. I’d also guess it makes Remain the even more likely winner but it’s a big risk to take.