Still the point remains about guilt by association. Not everybody who voted leave talks about Germans as Krauts or Italians as wops or the French as frogs its just a stick remainers like to beat brexiteers with. Its like the snide comments about "empire" and ww2. Why do remainers have such a feeling of shame about their own country? Is the EU so perfect? Whatever side you take on this debacle there is no shame in being British just as I am sure other nations are proud of their heritage. The people aren't the problem in this shambles it's those that represent us whatever their political persuasion.

No shame about the country but, some of the people, especially those driving the leave campaign, make me hurl.
A campaign, where images of people in detention, allegedly queueing up to enter the UK - a truly great example



An anti immigration theme was never going to bring the best out in people was it ?

I think Ken Clarke voted for May’s withdrawal bill every time it was put to Parliament. He called it a ‘dog’s breakfast’, but he can hardly be accused of blocking it or Brexit.

I agree with the problem you identify for those who feel as you do about the EU, of whom there are many. But no deal also brings big problems. We’ve got problems aplenty, just no good solutions... it seems. Maybe the Johnson-Varadkar talks will yield a breakthrough today, and we’ll get something tolerable for enough people.

Both Labour and the Tories, if not putting party before country, had at least twin objectives. Neither leader was willing to work with the other, and in fairness any effort to do so would likely have led to them being quickly removed as leader. It is a reflection on our adversarial political system struggling to adapt to a situation where there are new (sort of) and deep intraparty splits, adding to rather than replacing the traditional interparty differences.

I’m not going to defend labour’s position(s) on Brexit, but it was unrealistic to expect them to vote for May’s hard Brexit deal that was designed to appeal to an entirely different audience... for all that it failed in that too.

The big problem is that Brexit still means so many different outcomes for so many different people as an end result, even after 3 years of fantasy hitting reality.

Picture Brexit as a 30cm ruler. On the far left of the ruler, at 0cm, sits the far left, who see Brexit (or Lexit) as a way of turning the UK into a socialist utopia. On the far right of the ruler, at 30cm, sits the far right, who see Brexit as a way to shut down immigration, close borders, and turn the UK into a capitalist sweat shop. Then at every cm point towards the 15cm point in the middle, you have various other viewpoints, ranging from left leaning socialism, community projects and state ownership, to right leaning corporatism, privatisation, deregulation and low tax. A lot of people are going to be mightily disappointed. Do you think either side are just going to roll over and accept something so extremely at odds to their own views?

Maybe we need to concentrate on the views of the people who see themselves between 13cm and 17cm on the ruler? Presumably, these are the people who have weighed up both extreme ends of the argument, and have distilled them into a possible solution to this charade.

Far too sensible.

It’s good metaphor, but I wonder how many people are left in the 13 to 17cm range, who are eager to have poop thrown at them from the diehards at either end of the ruler. Also seeing yourself as at 13 to 17, doesn’t mean you are - I think a lot of us live in political bubbles, a bit. This is a remain/soft-Brexit leaning thread, i think it is fair to say, but it does benefit from some diversity of opinion.

I think the whole thing has become deeply debilitating for the country, and tiring. I’d wave through May’s deal now, if I could (on condition I could complain about it later). The problem is that those at the ends of the ruler are most passionate about this topic and therefore have the most energy left to keeping pushing their case.

What I find interesting in relation to your metaphor is that most of the key players in Europe, who i would place at 0cm, are from the (relatively mildly) right-wing Liberal/Christian Democrat side of politics. Quite opposed to a socialist utopia.

Excellent post.
However, the middle ground (13 - 17cm) would have been a customs union of sorts, which would be seen by Farage & Co as not having Brexit at all.
The longer that time goes on, without a deal, the more entrenched that many peoples views have become, making concessions almost impossible.
Getting back to your ruler analogy and with the referendum result almost split 50/50, where on earth has the hand of conciliation and reason been for the last 3 years ?
As I say, both sides are further away from agreement now, than at any point during the last 3 years.

Good of you to reiterate the point for me.



Labour MPs voted for the referendum. Pretty much every Labour MP promised to honour and response the result. Labour MPs voted for A50. About 150 Labour MPs represent Leave constituencies. Yet you feel they have no responsibility to see Brexit through? The government did not decide to leave the EU, it was decided by democratic process. And guess what, Labour want to ignore it.

The truth is, opposition MPs don't want to see Brexit through because most are Remainers and simply cannot accept the result. You can twist it any way you like but that is the core of the issue.

BTW, as I'm sure you know, Labour's red lines are simply impossible to achieve and are nothing more than a PR piece, while - like it or not - May's red lines were defined around the main reasons people voted to leave. They may sound 'hard' to Europhile ears but they reflect the wishes of the Leave electorate.

Put a non-ideologically Tory deal in front of the Commons and it should pass. The Tories have been engineering one which suits them ideologically but that was never going to fly once they lost their majority.

I've no sympathy for the Labour party and have never voted for them but the idea they should vote for the quite extreme versions of Brexit May put before the House is laughable.

Are you Lisa Nandy?

It’s an interesting point, actually. Do you think most Brexit-voters favoured May’s deal? There’s probably polling somewhere. My guess would be ‘yes’, although Farage describes it now as the ‘worst deal in history’ and ‘worse than remain’.

Anyway, even after the vote, deciding the next steps should reflect the wishes of the whole electorate, for two reasons. The first is that voting for the losing side doesn’t permanently disenfranchise people or render their views irrelevant. The second is that with such a narrow margin of victory, effectively telling 48% of voters to shut up and accept what the Brexiteers want could only work if the brexiteers had a very, very clearly defined single vision and agreed priorities, great discipline and a degree of pragmatism in the face of inevitable challenges in navigating the divorce process.

Could we reverse a General Election result - no. It is as simple as that.

Yes, at the next election. HTH.

That wouldn't be changing a result, it will be a new vote and it will end up with a coalition, led by the Conservatives.

I wasn’t talking about changing the result. I was starting from the point of accepting Brexit, but that my view on what Brexit should look like should still be as valid and relevant as anybody else’s, despite my having voted Remain, and could even be part of a more viable coalition that relying on the unicorn wing of the Brexit alliance.

If I don’t vote for the party that wins an election, I can still have an opinion on their policies. ‘You lost, shut up’, is not how it either should or does work.

If/when we have another referendum if the result comes out remain by 3-4% I guarantee we will not be subject to all these shennanigens to get the result overturned. The MPs are terrified we might vote for no deal so they are not prepared to even give us that option.

A second referendum will only work if its no deal or remain - then nobody can suggest they didn't know what they are voting for. It cannot be two versions of remain.

Immigration played a big part in the last referendum - it doesn't appear to be anywhere near the issue it was - this election is about who ultimately controls the way we run the country. Is it our elected MPs or is it the European Council a bunch of unelected bureaucrats.

No deal is the fever dream of the hard right (and those who have gambled against the pound, typically some of the same folk). I'd have no problem with it being on a referendum ballot because there is no chance it would get a majority.

It all hyperbole as it will never happened we will simply be presented with two versions of remain.

Labour have pretty much said they will vote down any agreement Johnson gets, such is their quality as a political party.

Maybe they fundamentally disagree with the deal that Johnson is trying to secure.
After all, Labours plan was to have "a customs union", which whilst not satisfying those on the right of the Tory party, it would eliminate the issues in Ireland and allow a free trade deal with the EU

Labour's plan was to remain and present an option so similar as to make remaining an easier choice. Staying in a customs union and the single market and adopting all the EU labour rules is remaining - Labour's 6 red lines were impossible to achieve they knew it all along. To say Labour wanted a deal in b0ll0cks.

I wonder...if the EU refuse an extension (or the idiotic Benn bill is somehow circumnavigated) and the only options are Johnson's deal or no deal - what will Labour do?



I suspect if Corbyn/McDonnell try to whip them into opposing the deal we'll see enough rebels to get it through.

or maybe they are so hatefull and spitefull of Johnson they can't accept what the electorate voted for.