RugbyRebels

Mellsblue wrote:

Puja wrote:

Mellsblue wrote: 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.

Let's go further. Make the two options "Join the United States of Europe and eradicate Britain!" and "Ban any interaction with foreigners!" If we're going to do polarisation, let's do it properly and do real justice to the standards of the Brexit debate.

Puja

Puja wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

Sandydragon wrote: 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

I agree in principle, but I, now very firmly of the opinion that referendums need to be specific. If a new PM can negotiate a new deal with the EU and that can be an option then great. If not, it’s a straight fight between WTO and remain as we are.

Sandydragon wrote:

Puja wrote:

Mellsblue wrote: 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

I agree in principle, but I, now very firmly of the opinion that referendums need to be specific. If a new PM can negotiate a new deal with the EU and that can be an option then great. If not, it’s a straight fight between WTO and remain as we are.

I've only just noticed that I've signed that post like it's a letter. Clearly my brain is not willing to believe I'm off work today. You're all very polite for not pointing and laughing at me by the way.

Puja

Puja wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

Puja wrote:
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.

Let's go further. Make the two options "Join the United States of Europe and eradicate Britain!" and "Ban any interaction with foreigners!" If we're going to do polarisation, let's do it properly and do real justice to the standards of the Brexit debate.

Puja

Finally, a sensible suggestion.

Sandydragon wrote:

Puja wrote:

Mellsblue wrote: 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

I agree in principle, but I, now very firmly of the opinion that referendums need to be specific. If a new PM can negotiate a new deal with the EU and that can be an option then great. If not, it’s a straight fight between WTO and remain as we are.

Ballsy!! It panders to the arch-Brexiteers and means they become the legit leave option, which is not a good place to be.

Puja wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:

Puja wrote:
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

I agree in principle, but I, now very firmly of the opinion that referendums need to be specific. If a new PM can negotiate a new deal with the EU and that can be an option then great. If not, it’s a straight fight between WTO and remain as we are.

I've only just noticed that I've signed that post like it's a letter. Clearly my brain is not willing to believe I'm off work today. You're all very polite for not pointing and laughing at me by the way.

Puja

Dearest Puja,

I thought it brought some civility and manners to the debate, which is severely needed.

Kind Regards,
Mellsblue Esq.

Puja wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:

Puja wrote:
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

I agree in principle, but I, now very firmly of the opinion that referendums need to be specific. If a new PM can negotiate a new deal with the EU and that can be an option then great. If not, it’s a straight fight between WTO and remain as we are.

I've only just noticed that I've signed that post like it's a letter. Clearly my brain is not willing to believe I'm off work today. You're all very polite for not pointing and laughing at me by the way.

Puja

ha, I thought it was a reference to the Peter Principle, Peter Perfect, Blue Peter or some other Peter I hadn't thought of. Peter Bone, maybe

Random stuff:

1) BP are the biggest single party in the EU parl.
2) Lib Dems are the biggest EU party in London.
3) Pan-EU Green surge - took nine of Germany’s ten largest cities. In France, Les Verts came from nowhere to finish third, greens came second in Finland and broke into double digits in Austria and The Netherlands. In Ireland, Greens trebled their share of the vote and won their first European Parliament seat for 20 years. And in Britain, the Greens enjoyed their best performance in 30 years.
4) After losing a GE, losing seats in the latest local election despite being in oppo, losing double digit % compared to last EU vote, coming fifth in Scot, and finishing behind Plaid Cymru for the first time can Corbyn hold onto the leadership/fence sitting?
5) Does the success of BP push Con MPs towards the more Brexiteery leadership candidates?

The first symptoms of the death of centrism?

Mellsblue wrote:Random stuff:

1) BP are the biggest single party in the EU parl.
2) Lib Dems are the biggest EU party in London.
3) Pan-EU Green surge - took nine of Germany’s ten largest cities. In France, Les Verts came from nowhere to finish third, greens came second in Finland and broke into double digits in Austria and The Netherlands. In Ireland, Greens trebled their share of the vote and won their first European Parliament seat for 20 years. And in Britain, the Greens enjoyed their best performance in 30 years.
4) After losing a GE, losing seats in the latest local election despite being in oppo, losing double digit % compared to last EU vote, coming fifth in Scot, and finishing behind Plaid Cymru for the first time can Corbyn hold onto the leadership/fence sitting?
5) Does the success of BP push Con MPs towards the more Brexiteery leadership candidates?

Labour need to come off the fence and soon, or they will be punished as well as the Tories.

Banquo wrote:

Puja wrote:

Sandydragon wrote: I agree in principle, but I, now very firmly of the opinion that referendums need to be specific. If a new PM can negotiate a new deal with the EU and that can be an option then great. If not, it’s a straight fight between WTO and remain as we are.

I've only just noticed that I've signed that post like it's a letter. Clearly my brain is not willing to believe I'm off work today. You're all very polite for not pointing and laughing at me by the way.

Puja

ha, I thought it was a reference to the Peter Principle, Peter Perfect, Blue Peter or some other Peter I hadn't thought of. Peter Bone, maybe

Nope, just the collapse of my secret identity. Oh well, I wasn't using it for anything anyway.

Puja

Mellsblue wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:

Puja wrote:
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

I agree in principle, but I, now very firmly of the opinion that referendums need to be specific. If a new PM can negotiate a new deal with the EU and that can be an option then great. If not, it’s a straight fight between WTO and remain as we are.

Ballsy!! It panders to the arch-Brexiteers and means they become the legit leave option, which is not a good place to be.

The current place and any negotiated deal from the next Tory PM are not good places to be either. And really if the country wants a hard Brexit that's their democratic right.

Puja wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Puja wrote:
I've only just noticed that I've signed that post like it's a letter. Clearly my brain is not willing to believe I'm off work today. You're all very polite for not pointing and laughing at me by the way.

Puja

ha, I thought it was a reference to the Peter Principle, Peter Perfect, Blue Peter or some other Peter I hadn't thought of. Peter Bone, maybe

Nope, just the collapse of my secret identity. Oh well, I wasn't using it for anything anyway.

Puja

Our recollection of it will surely fade

Digby wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

Sandydragon wrote: I agree in principle, but I, now very firmly of the opinion that referendums need to be specific. If a new PM can negotiate a new deal with the EU and that can be an option then great. If not, it’s a straight fight between WTO and remain as we are.

Ballsy!! It panders to the arch-Brexiteers and means they become the legit leave option, which is not a good place to be.

The current place and any negotiated deal from the next Tory PM are not good places to be either. And really if the country wants a hard Brexit that's their democratic right.

Agreed. That is our democratic right. As someone arguing to uphold the result of the referendum despite losing, I couldn’t agree more. No deal Brexit as the legitimate version of Brexit is a bigger worry than a deal as, in that scenario, the extreme has become the mainstream. There are degrees of good and bad, it’s not black or white.

Digby wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

Sandydragon wrote: I agree in principle, but I, now very firmly of the opinion that referendums need to be specific. If a new PM can negotiate a new deal with the EU and that can be an option then great. If not, it’s a straight fight between WTO and remain as we are.

Ballsy!! It panders to the arch-Brexiteers and means they become the legit leave option, which is not a good place to be.

The current place and any negotiated deal from the next Tory PM are not good places to be either. And really if the country wants a hard Brexit that's their democratic right.

At present, the country doesn't want a No Deal Brexit - it's unarguably mental and this election shows that it only commands 35% of the vote even when only the rabidly invested turn out. However, that's mostly because the Overton window has No Deal as being an extreme option that is clearly mental. Legitimise it as being the alternative to "No Brexit" and it'll become mainstream. And, despite it being extreme and stupid, as previously discussed, the electorate as a whole is underinformed, easily swayed, and occasionally deeply stupid, so all bets are off if it comes down to a binary choice. Especially because Farage is a master at turning it into the, "the elite hate you, this is the option for freedom, this is the option for the glory of Britain, this is the option for the ordinary working man," choice rather than it remaining the extreme option that should stay out on the fringes.

Puja

Puja wrote:

Digby wrote:

Mellsblue wrote: Ballsy!! It panders to the arch-Brexiteers and means they become the legit leave option, which is not a good place to be.

The current place and any negotiated deal from the next Tory PM are not good places to be either. And really if the country wants a hard Brexit that's their democratic right.

At present, the country doesn't want a No Deal Brexit - it's unarguably mental and this election shows that it only commands 35% of the vote even when only the rabidly invested turn out. However, as previously discussed, the electorate as a whole is underinformed, easily swayed, and occasionally deeply stupid, so all bets are off if it comes down to a binary choice. Legitimising No Deal as *the Brexit option* is asking for trouble, because Farage and co can turn it into the, "the elite hate you, this is the option for freedom, this is the option for the glory of Britain, this is the option for the ordinary working man," choice rather than it remaining the extreme option that should stay out on the fringes.

Puja

We agree again. Must be a glitch in the matrix

As an aside, we are currently on hols in the Peak District. A bloke on an adjacent table at the restaurant boldly declared that anyone not respecting the referendum result was a traitor and should be hanged. I had to physically stop the long suffering Mrs Mellsblue from going over and giving him a piece of her mind.

Puja wrote:

Digby wrote:

Mellsblue wrote: Ballsy!! It panders to the arch-Brexiteers and means they become the legit leave option, which is not a good place to be.

The current place and any negotiated deal from the next Tory PM are not good places to be either. And really if the country wants a hard Brexit that's their democratic right.

At present, the country doesn't want a No Deal Brexit - it's unarguably mental and this election shows that it only commands 35% of the vote even when only the rabidly invested turn out. However, that's mostly because the Overton window has No Deal as being an extreme option that is clearly mental. Legitimise it as being the alternative to "No Brexit" and it'll become mainstream. And, despite it being extreme and stupid, as previously discussed, the electorate as a whole is underinformed, easily swayed, and occasionally deeply stupid, so all bets are off if it comes down to a binary choice. Especially because Farage is a master at turning it into the, "the elite hate you, this is the option for freedom, this is the option for the glory of Britain, this is the option for the ordinary working man," choice rather than it remaining the extreme option that should stay out on the fringes.

Puja

If the country doesn't want no deal vote for something else. Not that I love the idea of a plebiscitary democracy but it's where we are

Mellsblue wrote:

Puja wrote:

Digby wrote:
The current place and any negotiated deal from the next Tory PM are not good places to be either. And really if the country wants a hard Brexit that's their democratic right.

At present, the country doesn't want a No Deal Brexit - it's unarguably mental and this election shows that it only commands 35% of the vote even when only the rabidly invested turn out. However, as previously discussed, the electorate as a whole is underinformed, easily swayed, and occasionally deeply stupid, so all bets are off if it comes down to a binary choice. Legitimising No Deal as *the Brexit option* is asking for trouble, because Farage and co can turn it into the, "the elite hate you, this is the option for freedom, this is the option for the glory of Britain, this is the option for the ordinary working man," choice rather than it remaining the extreme option that should stay out on the fringes.

Puja

We agree again. Must be a glitch in the matrix

As an aside, we are currently on hols in the Peak District. A bloke on an adjacent table at the restaurant boldly declared that anyone not respecting the referendum result was a traitor and should be hanged. I had to physically stop the long suffering Mrs Mellsblue from going over and giving him a piece of her mind.

I'm shocked the sort of person to vote Brexit is the sort of person to back the death penalty, who knew.

Digby wrote:

Puja wrote:

Digby wrote:
The current place and any negotiated deal from the next Tory PM are not good places to be either. And really if the country wants a hard Brexit that's their democratic right.

At present, the country doesn't want a No Deal Brexit - it's unarguably mental and this election shows that it only commands 35% of the vote even when only the rabidly invested turn out. However, that's mostly because the Overton window has No Deal as being an extreme option that is clearly mental. Legitimise it as being the alternative to "No Brexit" and it'll become mainstream. And, despite it being extreme and stupid, as previously discussed, the electorate as a whole is underinformed, easily swayed, and occasionally deeply stupid, so all bets are off if it comes down to a binary choice. Especially because Farage is a master at turning it into the, "the elite hate you, this is the option for freedom, this is the option for the glory of Britain, this is the option for the ordinary working man," choice rather than it remaining the extreme option that should stay out on the fringes.

Puja

If the country doesn't want no deal vote for something else. Not that I love the idea of a plebiscitary democracy but it's where we are

That's kind of mine and Mells's point - if we don't give them the option to vote for something else, then they may choose no deal just out of it being presented as an acceptable option, rather than batshit insane. And everything has to go through public vote now - we're not so much a democracy as we are a Simon Cowell show.

Mellsblue wrote:We agree again. Must be a glitch in the matrix

As an aside, we are currently on hols in the Peak District. A bloke on an adjacent table at the restaurant boldly declared that anyone not respecting the referendum result was a traitor and should be hanged. I had to physically stop the long suffering Mrs Mellsblue from going over and giving him a piece of her mind.

An acquaintance of mine on Facebook made a fairly innocuous post about the elections. He's very strongly Remain, so it was as you'd expect, but the affable discussion in the comments very abruptly right turned into this:



Puja

Mellsblue wrote:

Digby wrote:

Mellsblue wrote: Ballsy!! It panders to the arch-Brexiteers and means they become the legit leave option, which is not a good place to be.

The current place and any negotiated deal from the next Tory PM are not good places to be either. And really if the country wants a hard Brexit that's their democratic right.

Agreed. That is our democratic right. As someone arguing to uphold the result of the referendum despite losing, I couldn’t agree more. No deal Brexit as the legitimate version of Brexit is a bigger worry than a deal as, in that scenario, the extreme has become the mainstream. There are degrees of good and bad, it’s not black or white.

We have been heading towards black and white politics for years; this referendum process has just reinforced it.

Puja wrote:
That's kind of mine and Mells's point - if we don't give them the option to vote for something else, then they may choose no deal just out of it being presented as an acceptable option, rather than batshit insane. And everything has to go through public vote now - we're not so much a democracy as we are a Simon Cowell show.


Puja

Then they choose it. I'm not saying there shouldn't be other options, but there should be an option for no deal.

And yes, we are on the way to the Hunger Games

Digby wrote:

Puja wrote:
That's kind of mine and Mells's point - if we don't give them the option to vote for something else, then they may choose no deal just out of it being presented as an acceptable option, rather than batshit insane. And everything has to go through public vote now - we're not so much a democracy as we are a Simon Cowell show.


Puja

Then they choose it. I'm not saying there shouldn't be other options, but there should be an option for no deal.

And yes, we are on the way to the Hunger Games

Wait, what? What the hell are you arguing with us for then? Neither Mells nor I said there shouldn't be a No Deal option, just that there should be a Deal option on there as well, which sounds like what you've just said.

Puja

Puja wrote:

Digby wrote:

Puja wrote:
That's kind of mine and Mells's point - if we don't give them the option to vote for something else, then they may choose no deal just out of it being presented as an acceptable option, rather than batshit insane. And everything has to go through public vote now - we're not so much a democracy as we are a Simon Cowell show.


Puja

Then they choose it. I'm not saying there shouldn't be other options, but there should be an option for no deal.

And yes, we are on the way to the Hunger Games

Wait, what? What the hell are you arguing with us for then? Neither Mells nor I said there shouldn't be a No Deal option, just that there should be a Deal option on there as well, which sounds like what you've just said.

Puja

Because it’s Diggers and it’s 2-4-1 snowballs at the local.

Having now had the time to have a thorough browse on social media, there seems to be a lot of my arch-Remainer friends cutting up the results with the Conservatives not being classed pro-Brexit. I’m struggling to understand this. What is the logic with not including the Con’s (pathetic) % vote in the Leave total when comparing Remain v Leave?

Mellsblue wrote:Having now had the time to have a thorough browse on social media, there seems to be a lot of my arch-Remainer friends cutting up the results with the Conservatives not being classed pro-Brexit. I’m struggling to understand this. What is the logic with not including the Con’s (pathetic) % vote in the Leave total when comparing Remain v Leave?

I'm getting that a lot too, as well as occasional attempts to claim Labour votes as Remain. I think the logic is that votes for Labour and Conservatives "don't count" on Brexit because people voting for those were voting for reasons other than Brexit. Which, I can see their point, and I'd imagine there's a reasonable amount of truth in that, but you'd have to expect that the majority of Conservative voters in that election were also Leave fans.

In short, I believe the logic of parsing the data that way is that, "It proves the point that I want to make," as is true for 90% of all political data analysis.

Puja