You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
I can’t be bothered to engage further with anyone who seriously thinks pissing away 5.5%+ of our GDP is a price worth paying to not have to “mention ze brexit”.
No one has said it's a price worth paying not to mention brexit, but it's a valid question as to why working people would care very much about a few percent of GDP when almost none of it comes to them. Besides, if a (debatable) 5% loss in GDP is the main argument behind rejoinng then you've already lost the argument. No one is going to vote to rejoin the EU just so they can avoid a 5% loss of GDP, because no one apart from a few politicians, businessmen and economists cares very much about it.
I can’t be bothered to engage further with anyone who seriously thinks pissing away 5.5%+ of our GDP is a price worth paying
People struggle with big numbers (and I mean that generally not pejoratively, it's part of the human condition). 5.5% doesn't all that sound much does it. Assuming I've worked this out correctly:
5.5% of our GDP (using 2021 figures) is £136,239,985,750.
By way of comparison, the £350M/week bus lie was £18,200,000,000pa.
Ie, the hit to GDP is 750% greater than the figure that Leave.EU (falsely) claimed was our EU membership bill. If we use the actual net membership cost figure it's closer to 1500%.
there are plenty that would love for this to be the case...
some of whom have tried to shut folk up
Are you, in fact, saying that you are being persecuted for banging on about Brexit? How is it prohibited? Who is preventing you talking about Brexit?
If you haven't heard "we won you lost shut up and get over it" before, I can only assume you've been living in a cave for the last half a decade.
Nonetheless. There are a handful of prolific posters on STW who are really keen to cancel the discussion. There's a couple on this thread. I'd name names but it feels a bit redundant.
There are a handful of prolific posters on STW who are really keen to cancel the discussion.
It's the 'why' that interests me, TBH.
There are a handful of prolific posters on STW who are really keen to cancel the discussion
On the contrary, I'm very enthusiastic about discussing EU membership. But bring something new to the discussion beyond 'we told you so' and the associated glee when people suffer from it. The remain side of the argument has descended to the level of the brexiteers themselves. 'You lost get over it' on one side, 'ha ha we told you so' on the other. It's infantile.
There are a handful of prolific posters on STW who are really keen to cancel the discussion.
It’s the ‘why’ that interests me, TBH.
It's the why you keep cancelling yourself and reappearing with a new username that interests me Danny.
I suppose there is an 'opportunity cost' to EU membership. We have to choose. That means what would life be like if the UK was still in? More of the labour market being undermined by cheap Eastern European labour..? But easy access to Eu schemes like Horizon and Objective 1 status.
Leaving has created a huge impact on the UK. What we are lacking are new laws and a framework to operate effectively. ie new trade deals, import/export rules with EU, access to cheap labour, effective border controls. These are the details which need good policy. The current cabinet are just not capable of doing it.
bring something new to the discussion beyond ‘we told you so’ and the associated glee when people suffer from it.
You may be correct regarding some corners but I doubt "glee" is the right word in most cases. Rather it's hard to be sympathetic towards the vocal cheerleaders like, as a random example, Tim Martin who are one by one realising their mistake yet are still doubling down.
The fundamental flaw in this train of thought is that there are no winners and losers amongst the electorate. We all win or lose collectively, and it's increasingly turning out to be the latter isn't it. The only winners of brexit are the Rees-Moggs of this world who are laughing all the way to their offshore bank.
Leave voters were duped. It was a highly sophisticated confidence trick. It is really that simple. The sooner they hold their hand up and recognise that, the sooner the rest of the country will be more charitable towards them. If someone is struggling in 2023 and yet still defending brexit then a pox on them, it's a problem of their own machinations largely driven by xenophobia and I cannot bring myself to care.
"Sorry" would go a long way also.
But bring something new to the discussion beyond ‘we told you so’ and the associated glee when people suffer from it.
OK.
When the shit hit the fan recently in Sudan, if we had still been in the EU we wouldn't have had to send special forces in just to get the consular staff alone out. The EU airlift was a far better and more joined up operation.
If we were still in the EU, we would have a returns agreement in place with France for the small boat refugees - although that wouldn't mean being able to say a blanket 'no' to all.
If we were still in the EU, Kent would not be one big lorry park as often as it is.
If we were still in the EU we would have access to Horizon funding for these world class universities that we are constantly trumpeting.
If we were still in the EU we would have had a seat at the table in the recent EU-US talks about future economic cooperation with regards to the more high tech end of trade that we ought to be targeting (renewables, IT etc).
That's just a few. No 'I told you so', no triumphalism - refute them.
If you categorise having obvious stuff pointed out as 'I told you so', then there is no room for debate - but I guess that is kind of the idea.
Now, that's it for me because, frankly, if people are determined to avoid acknowledging what we all know to be true, then there is literally no point. No one has been called anything nasty, no abuse, nothing to lash out against other than several examples of where being outside of the EU has cost the UK.
A Bientot.
If we were still in the EU we could probably be able to buy strawberries and eggs without supermarkets rationing them.
Anyway. We should probably try and get back on topic before this thread gets turned into Yet Another Brexit Argument and the moderators close it.
Anyway. We should probably try and get back on topic before this thread gets turned into Yet Another Brexit Argument and the moderators close it.
Yes. There's no point anyway - for reasons given above.
👍
A Bientot.
And off he goes again. Soon to return with another username. What is it now? Five? Six?
If we were still in the EU
And that's where the remain/rejoin movement goes wrong. We're now out of the EU, probably never to return within our lifetimes. Any argument that starts with those words is hypothetical. Instead start asking, how can we have better relations with the EU, how can we have more beneficial trade, how can we collaborate on security, scientific, economic, technological and other policy areas for our mutual benefit? That's where we are now, mourning about about what we've lost and hoping for it to come back is a pointless waste of energy.
Yes, maybe, we need to suck up Brexit.....
But the speed that the opinion polls are showing the scale of bregret, the # of younger folks who want a part of the EU, the impact on trade....
But we may see the swing toward rejoin move very quickly
Watching the Wizard of Oz remake on Saturday, and the lack of engagement from younger demographics suggests that the tory attempts to skew the agenda are, ultimately, doomed
But we may see the swing toward rejoin move very quickly
its already happening and the polls show it
What a defeatist attitude Dazh - and also pie in the sky in that there is no mitigating brexit to any significant amount without CU and SM
Giving up is the waste of time, Fighting to rejoin is the way forward
Instead start asking, how can we have better relations with the EU, how can we have more beneficial trade, how can we collaborate on security, scientific, economic, technological and other policy areas for our mutual benefit?
Whose responsibility is that? Why are they making a piss poor job of it?
It's not, really. a question of who is better off in or out...we're all better off in. Those who shout sovereignty are interested in their marginal gains
the reason we're out is that vested interests (JRM, Odey, barclay bro, rothermere etc) want to avoid tax.
and because the uk has never had a coherent regional/industrial strategy we are letting this class war w*nk take the lead.
The fact that the West Midlands has lost 1M cars (1.6m 2014 to 600k 2022) is a shocking result of this
Worth a squiz
Plus Jo Bird stood for the Greens, having been chucked out of Labour, and won
Worth a squiz
Plus Jo Bird stood for the Greens, having been chucked out of Labour, and won
What's that got to do with brexit?
Fighting to rejoin is the way forward
EDITed for less shittyiness:
Have you considered getting involved in the campaign? Serious question.
Watching the Wizard of Oz remake on Saturday, and the lack of engagement from younger demographics suggests that the tory attempts to skew the agenda are, ultimately, doomed
I thought there was good evidence that the median age of Tory voters is getting older and older?
Have you considered getting involved in the campaign? Serious question.
Im all campaigned out with the dignity in dying campaign.
The fact that the West Midlands has lost 1M cars (1.6m 2014 to 600k 2022) is a shocking result of this
Not quite. The fact that the West Midlands has lost 1M cars (1.6m 2014 to 600k 2022) was a wholly predictable result of this.
What’s that got to do with brexit?
You've seen the thread title, yes?
tjagain Full Member
Clear and obvious lesson for labour. No great enthusiasm for labour and becoming enthusiastic brexiteers has cost them huge numbers of votes with pro EU parties doing really well
What do reckon of this TJ?
Euractiv, a news provider part funded by the EU, doesn't seem to be reporting that Labour's brexit stance has cost them "a huge number of votes"
"UK Labour Party wins big among Brexit supporters in local elections.
Support for the Labour Party was up by seven points compared with 2021 in the biggest Brexit-supporting wards"
Is that because Euractiv has been blinded by their enthusiasm for brexit or because your claim isn't true?
Do we still have that addin to hide certain users posts?
Or that the conclusions from that report sound about as watertight as a broken colander.
Show their working.
Show their working.
In Euractiv's article? All they refer to is:
Figures from the BBC’s ‘key wards’ data, which was obtained by the Observer
Presumably the Observer trusts the BBC'S 'key wards' data. The question I guess is whether you trust the Observer.
Based on the belief that Euractiv and the Observer probably haven't got an axe to grind on the issue I trust their conclusions a tad more than TJ's.
And as you probably won't bother reading the link here is another important point made in the Euractiv article:
Labour made gains in some areas that backed leaving the EU in the 2016 Brexit referendum, which the party will need to win over if it wants to achieve a majority at the next general election.
So according to Euractiv what happened last Thursday was an important step for Labour if they want to achieve a majority at the next general election.
Which is the complete opposite to the claim made by TJ.
how can we have better relations with the EU, how can we have more beneficial trade, how can we collaborate on security, scientific, economic, technological and other policy areas for our mutual benefit?
By starting the process to rejoin, the sooner the better.
If that's not the answer, feel free to present your alternative solution, and show your working for why it's better.
Presumably the Observer trusts the BBC’S ‘key wards’ data. The question I guess is whether you trust the Observer.
I don't trust anyone. I want to see the data and make up my own mind. I thought you would too.
There's a lot of questions to be asked of that report, not least of which is "define 'brexit-supporting ward'" - how is that support being measured? It reads as though they're gauging it on the 2016 outcome rather than soliciting current opinion.
We've seen this before, votes for Labour are a GE is spun as a vote for pro-brexit rather than anti-Tory.
I don’t trust anyone. I want to see the data and make up my own mind. I thought you would too.
Not at all. Whilst I always start from the perspective of questioning everything I can be hugely trusting of sources of information, especially if I feel confident that I know their agenda/motivation.
There’s a lot of questions to be asked of that report, not least of which is “define ‘brexit-supporting ward'”
That's a question that you need to ask Robert Ford, professor of politics at Manchester University, who was part of the BBC’s results and analysis team.
Although it might be easier for you to simply reject the article as it probably doesn't fit into your preferred narrative. Instead find an article that does!
Again Ernie - that is not what I said. I agree they did win over brexit supporting areas - hardly surprising since they became brexiteers. Where labours result was poor and voters turned to pro EU parties was in pro EU areas
Not at all. Whilst I always start from the perspective of questioning everything I can be hugely trusting of sources of information, especially if I feel confident that I know their agenda/motivation.
Sure, if those sources are verifiable.
But where's the source here beyond "someone said"? If not the raw data then where are the trustworthy BBC and Observer reports? Unless I missed it, there's no citations linked in that article.
That’s a question that you need to ask Robert Ford
Well, no, it's a question we need to ask of you if you're presenting it as an argument without further qualification.
Although it might be easier for you to simply reject the article as it probably doesn’t fit into your preferred narrative.
Similarly it might be easier for you to simply accept the article if it does fit into your preferred narrative.
I don't have a narrative and I'm not rejecting anything. Rather I'm saying, show us.
Anyway. Local elections, then? How do we think Redcar is doing?
TJ's premise is and continues to be that as the country turns more away from Brexit (not in dispute) that by refusing to commit to rejoin / closer formal collabs / whatever then labour is not converting voters that are making this realisation. And has pointed to the LD and Green vote in the locals as evidence, I think that above may counter that view somewhat, but equally maybe I too am looking for evidence that supports rather than refutes.
The other issue, is that if the extra votes come in the areas that already are likely to vote Labour (or not Tory) then - so what? You only get one seat still, and the ones that will influence the overall result are the red wall seats where the risk of reopening the leave/rejoin debate, and importantly allowing the Tories an issue to campaign against them on, is not worth the risk.
But....If the local results mirrored to the GE next year.... so what if we got a hung parliament and a coalition government? Yes, there's a risk of paralysis but hopefully it would be Green/LD/Lab and maybe wise on the events last time, some more progressive policies would be enacted and red lines mean what they mean. Maybe even another look at changing the voting system. Might be wishful thinking but as long as the primary purpose of getting this lot out happens, the rest can be worked up.
This is where I differ from TJ and some others. Some sort of ideological purity that means they won't vote for the obvious choice, which is Tories out by whatever means necessary.
That’s a question that you need to ask Robert Ford
Well, no, it’s a question we need to ask of you if you’re presenting it as an argument without further qualification.
I am not presenting any argument. I am providing a link to a pro-EU news provider, that references a pro-EU newspaper, which makes the opposite point to TJ.
TJ claims that Labour's brexit stance has "cost them huge numbers of votes", whilst the article I linked focuses on how well Labour did in the local elections, the best local election result for over 20 years according to the article, and claims Labour won votes "which the party will need to win over if it wants to achieve a majority at the next general election".
I have not expressed any opinion at all with regards to Labour's stance on brexit and its effect on the local elections. All I have done is rejected TJ's suggestion that last week's local elections results were all about brexit.
Voters last week knew damn well that the local elections had nothing to do with brexit. As the leader of the LibDems Ed Davey has pointed out voters are more concerned with Tory incompetence.
TJ is blinded by his fanatical pro-EU, pro-independence, pro-SNP although he doesn't vote SNP, views.
I don’t trust anyone. I want to see the data and make up my own mind. I thought you would too.
There's a detailed article in the Observer, well worth a read.
All I have done is rejected TJ’s suggestion that last week’s local elections results were all about brexit.
Once again - thats not what I said. I am pro independence not pro SNP as well
the other jonv gets my point
My westminster constituency the tories have no chance of winning. It matters not one jot who I vote for. If it was a labour / tory marginal then I would have a difficult decision to make. Tories are a poor third. they are never going to win it so I do not have that difficult decision and can happily abstain or vote for a pro EU party
MY local council the labour party are in coalition with the tories - no way could I vote labour because its not an anti tory vote
All I have done is rejected TJ’s suggestion that last week’s local elections results were all about brexit.
Once again – thats not what I said.
You are Sir Keir Starmer and I claim my bucket full of pork pies.
tjagain Full Member
Clear and obvious lesson for labour. No great enthusiasm for labour and becoming enthusiastic brexiteers has cost them huge numbers of votes with pro EU parties doing really well
Disaster for tbe tories
I hope that its the wake up call for labour and they change the destructive brexiteer nonsense but i have little faith they will.
So you hope that these local election results are a wake up call for Labour, and their destructive brexiteer nonsense, but you don't think that last week’s local elections results were all about brexit?
I can't imagine that makes sense even to you.
You quote me then distort what I said?
I believe their brexiteer position cost them a lot of votes and the voting patterns show this
I did not say " its all about brexit"
Edit: IE their position on brexit was one factor and I believe a large one that led to the lack of enthusiasm for labour
I believe their brexiteer position cost them a lot of votes
but not in the battleground seats where next year's GE will be won and lost
and the voting patterns show this
The analysis in the link I posted isn't so certain.
Just because people are increasingly of the opinion Brexit was a bad mistake / in favour of rejoining in some form, that doesn't automatically mean they would straight away vote for any party with that as a pledge. It's far more complex than that, and as others have posted the electorate has to some extent accepted that it won't / can't happen in the near term and that we need to stabilise and fix what we can outside of that. We might have an economy that is 5% smaller or whatever as a result, but are we better with an economy that is 95% the size of what it may have been w/o Brexit but working 'properly' or the size it would have been but being used incompetently or fraudulently by a bunch of scheming profiteers?
The three main parties all have said that rejoin is off the table (for now) and yet >80% of voters voted for these three (Sky news analysis after about 75% of votes were in showed 83% these three / 17% all others). I know it's 60:40 ish now against Brexit, however that question is phrased. How does that maths work if it isn't for people like me - still totally aware that brexit was and is a terrible mistake, but also aware that we can't reverse it in a click of the fingers and consequently doing the best to make sure that further damage is limited.
You call me a Brexit apologist if you want, I'm a pragmatist playing the cards we have been dealt now rather than demanding some different ones when that isn't within the rules of the game.
but not in the battleground seats where next year’s GE will be won and lost
Scotland is also going to be a key battleground in the GE. Labour seem to think they are going to have a resurgence in Scotland due to the SNP's issues. Polling at the moment suggests they might be right.
However, they are asking Scottish people to vote them even though they completely ignore Scottish concerns in the name of appeasing Brexit voters. As time goes by I'm not sure how well that is going to play.
Both the Red Wall voters and Scotland are apparently going to be crucial for a Labour majority and there is absolutely no way to appease both at the same time.
How does that maths work if it isn’t for people like me – still totally aware that brexit was and is a terrible mistake, but also aware that we can’t reverse it in a click of the fingers and consequently doing the best to make sure that further damage is limited.
This idea that rejoining the EU is not possible within the next decade/next 30 years/our lifetimes has become a common cry on this forum.
There is no evidence whatsoever that this is the case and yet people repeat it as if it is an undeniable truth.
Wishful thinking?
I know - that is a challenge. But I suspect that the likelihood of going SNP to Tory is even slimmer than going SNP to Labour-with-nose-held-for -tactical-reasons. Or indeed giving up SNP allegiance when there's no palatable alternative.
Are LibDem's any force in Scotland?
There is no evidence whatsoever that this is the case and yet people repeat it as if it is an undeniable truth.
It took a year to set up a referendum, and that was 7 years ago and we're still not done..... of course there's no evidence how long it would take, this is unchartered territory but it must be a timetable of years, surely. Starting with everything that comes before even having another referendum.
In those years we have to deal with many pressing issues and i want someone better than the current clownshow in place and doing that.
It would be lovely to be a Bobby Ewing shower moment, mind....
Are LibDem’s any force in Scotland?
Nope 🙂
https://ballotbox.scot/uk-parliament/polling
Like I said, Labour are improving at the moment due to the SNP imploding. However, at some point before the GE they are going to have to answer the question, 'Why are you bending over backwards to accommodate Red Wall voters while giving us nothing.'
I'm not sure how you answer that without pissing off Scotland.
lib dems are no longer much of a force in Scotland. depends which vote - they have 4 mps very regionally based. 5 msps.
theotherjonv - fair enough if you do not agree with my views - at least you understand the point. IMO the votes and seats gained in the red wall will be outweighed by the seats they do not take in pro EU areas as votes go to pro EU parties splitting the anti tory vote
No doubt at all in Scotland their brexiteer position will be weaponised against them and will greatly reduce the seats they could take - there is anopen door for labour there with the weakness of the SNP but they cannot even see it
I’m not sure how you answer that without pissing off Scotland.
Split Scottish labour off from England and make it two parties in an alliance
I’m not sure how you answer that without pissing off Scotland.
Understood. I know even less on this point (most of my 'knowledge' above is really 'opinion' albeit guided by source material, albeit albeit I'm aware that I might gravitate to sources that support my opinion. That is how this works, isn't it 😉 )
Split Scottish labour off from England and make it two parties in an alliance
Agreed.
Ain't gonna happen though.
This idea that rejoining the EU is not possible within the next decade/next 30 years/our lifetimes has become a common cry on this forum.
And given that the referendum was carried on a bed of lies, deception and untruths it is necessary to point out every **** up that arises from it so people don’t get fooled by the same gammons and vested interests next time
constantly misinterpreting this as glee is going to leave the UK mired in shite forever more.
The three main parties all have said that rejoin is off the table (for now) and yet >80% of voters voted for these three
Sure, but, as opposed to what? You said it yourself, they're the "main parties." Why would anyone vote for anything else unless their vote is to make a statement rather than actually count for anything. There's unlikely to be a sudden landslide which puts the Greens in government.
Inertia is a problem. Look how voting goes year on year, there are well-established "safe seats" and others which are regularly a hotly contested two-horse race. Why? We're creatures of habit, it's not unusual for someone to proclaim to be a lifelong Tory voter or a lifelong Labour voter and it'd take something cataclysmic to change that mindset.
How many people on this thread, on the brexit threads, on the many many other political threads have said something akin to "I could never vote for [party] because of [something that happened 10, 20, 30 years ago]"? Well then, you're part of the problem. The future is screwed if you're obsessing about a past we cannot change. I hate the Tories because of the damage they're doing right now, not because they abolished free milk in schools in the 1970s.
“I could never vote for [party] because of [something that happened 10, 20, 30 years ago]”?
Not sure if that was aimed at me, but that is absolutely not what I've been saying about the Lib-Dems.
What I've been saying is, this happened twice and they are showing no indications that they have learned their lessons and no indication that they will act any differently if they find themselves in coalition government again.
I even said if they changed tack and actually picked a cause to fight for (that I also felt passionate about) I would consider voting for them.
As it is, people shouldn't keep doing the same thing and expect a different outcome if there is no indications anything has changed.
I don't disagree with much of what you said. I guess the point is that EVEN Brexit while being a source of deep frustration to many and growing, was still not sufficiently cataclysmic a driver that people changed to a rejoin supporting party.
Like I say, i was dead against, and with every passing day i feel my decision was even more correct as yet more of the damage reveals. But I also pragmatically believe that we can't reverse that decision by wishing it away, we need above all to stop the boat from sinking, and THEN point it where we want it to go.
“I could never vote for [party] because of [something that happened 10, 20, 30 years ago]”?
Yep, I don't understand that either.
. I guess the point is that EVEN Brexit while being a source of deep frustration to many and growing, was still not sufficiently cataclysmic a driver that people changed to a rejoin supporting party.
they did in Scotland and IMO the local election results show a trend that way
this happened twice
Sorry - when was the other time?
it’s not unusual for someone to proclaim to be a lifelong Tory voter or a lifelong Labour voter and it’d take something cataclysmic to change that mindset.
Yes, but once someone does vote for another party, then the habit is broken.
Sorry – when was the other time?
Scotland, first Scottish Parliament.
The future is screwed if you’re obsessing about a past we cannot change. I hate the Tories because of the damage they’re doing right now, not because they abolished free milk in schools in the 1970s.
There is long term seismic damage they've done that is not as quite on the radar as Brexit - that could be reversed. But if no one is offering that solutions, I'm not sure what you're actually meant to do?
For me more than half the problem is we're stuck in this rut where right-wing solutions are all that is on offer.
Brexit muddies the waters because in or out of the EU you haven't got a party that wants to really fix things. Being back in the EU doesn't fix the damage of 13years (and beyond) of various Tory slap-stick economics.
For large chunks of the population, Brexit is no longer a top issue. Cost of living, NHS, education, immigration are regularly at the top of the issue links. Even those swathes of Brexit loving England which voted against Brexit. The effort required to build consensus within the EU to allow the UK to re-join would far be better spent on improving the our current situation. Re-joining the EU (and we should have never left in the first place) will take longer thana single parliament timeline, and as such could only ever be achieved with consensus amongst the main political parties. Good luck with that.
And with a change of topic, all parties suffer from trying to balance the demands of the different population groups across the UK. Take Labour, how does it balance the demands of London, the Midlands, the 'Red Wall', Scotland and Wales? Each of whom have different views. The Scottish nationalists claim that Scotland is different, when in fact they are just one group within the UK. The SNP (and other nationalist parties) claim that because of this Scotland is 'different' and the only solution is independence, when in fact the differences are very small.
Remember that more of the population voted against the Tories, than for them. Likewise more people voted against the SNP than for them - and looked what happened to the Scottish Parliament in a system designed to stop a single party taking control.
Trying to justify independence on the back of local elections, to which Scotland and Wales were not involved, is simply grasping at straws. Trying to work out the result of the GE based on that is just guesswork, clever guesswork agreed. Voters are not the single block - just because they voted one way locally, does not mean that they will vote the same way at GE. The same applies to Scotland. How much will the behaviour of the SNP in Edinburgh affect the next GE vote - no one really knows. Perhaps the only saving grace for the SNP is that next elections for the Scottish Parliament is not to 2026.
The SNP (and other nationalist parties) claim that because of this Scotland is ‘different’ and the only solution is independence, when in fact the differences are very small.
The differences were small. They've been growing since the Blair years and now they are simply too big to ignore.
Either England changes (or rather the political system in the UK changes) and the main parties stop simply chasing the votes of a few hundred thousand swing voters or the only choice for Scotland is independence.
The electoral system is the sickness that has led to all the other issues.
Are the Lib-Dems even offering voting reform anymore?
because of this Scotland is ‘different’ and the only solution is independence, when in fact the differences are very small.
Examples of why this is wrong. the brexit vote. Not a single area of Scotland voted for brexit and overall it was 2:1 remain
Or another. the highest UKIP reached in the polls here was 7%. In england 20+ %
Politically there is a growing divergence. Tories have not been the largest party in Scotland since the 50s
Pro independence parties got just about a majority of the vote ( hard to be exact because of the constituency and list vote)
SNP did not get a majority on a minority of the vote. They are one short of a majority
Trying to justify independence on the back of local elections, to which Scotland and Wales were not involved
Yup, it is hard to believe that Scotland didn't even get a vote in last week's local elections, judging by the way this thread has gone.
Every political thread seems to get hijacked into discussing Scotland, despite the fact that Scotland's population is three and a half million smaller than London's!
Next week Northern Ireland holds their local elections, no doubt we will be discussing Scotland again on this thread when the results are announced.
I hate the Tories because of the damage they’re doing right now, not because they abolished free milk in schools in the 1970s.
You can clealry do both - I hate the Tories for what they are doing right now AND what they did in the last 12 years AND what they did in the 80s and 90's. I have hated the Tories since around 1979 when I was 11 (an early starter!)
Not sure if that was aimed at me
For the avoidance of doubt, it wasn't aimed at anyone. It's a common stance both on STW and elsewhere and I'd be hard pressed to attribute it to anyone individually.
I genuinely don't get it. I'm increasingly of the mind that it's an excuse to justify a preformed opinion. "I don't like [this] and here's my reason."
There's not a politician - hell, there's not a human - alive who hasn't screwed up at some point. Thatcher deeply regretted the milk thing, which was a decision she inherited as Education Secretary and took the fall for. The LDs will be forever tainted by tuition fees, one bad decision in the middle of hundreds well over a decade ago. "You can't trust the LDs because this is what they'll do..." based on the actions of people nowhere near parliament today. Arguing "I could never vote Labour because of the Iraq War" - how many of that cabinet are still in the Commons, how relevant is it? Hell, even if Blair were still in power - he simply ****ed up. It happens, and when you're in a position of power than **** ups can be catastrophic. If it was one of Labour's core policies to go to war with the Middle East then there might be a point.
What's the quote, a democracy which rejects change ceases to be a democracy? Something like that.
based on the actions of people nowhere near parliament today
This is why they shouldn't have chosen Davey as leader. He made useful steps for greening of energy, but he was part of that coalition team. If they'd picked someone fresh they'd have been bouncing back faster and stronger, IMHO.
When looking at these election results, it's worth remembering that in the seats where it's pretty much Tories vs LibDem, the LibDems always perform better when voters in these areas aren't in a "stop Labour" mindset because they see Labour as being closer to the centre. It doesn't make much sense, but it's what happens. Voters more likely to swap their vote to LibDem, or to not vote at all. A more radical Labour offering helps the Tories against the LibDems greatly.
I'm still wondering how much of the local elections was tactical voting, get the Tories out, send a message etc.
And how much was honestly related to major national issues like Brexit vs local stuff like potholes and libraries etc?
Yes they're obviously linked although Tory tactics over the last few years have been to defund Labour areas then have the local Labour council take the hit on it, the idea being that people would vote Tory to fix it.
That's obviously not worked very well...
There's been some talk in Active Travel areas that the various people standing solely on anti-LTN, anti-CAZ issues (almost all Tories) have been annihilated and that's a mandate to push ahead with more. That's a fair point but I'm still curious how much of the vote was just "they're Tories, vote them out" and how much was "ooh, we like Low Traffic Neighbourhoods, we'll vote for the people that want them, not the ones that want to rip them out".
With the lib dems there is also Carmichael the liar who had no action taken against him for his lies. Again when your USP is honesty and integrity and you lose that its hard to come back
Despite that the lib dems did well in the local elections. They tend to do well as a protest vote in local elections but still a good result for them gaining so many seats
Greens did really well. Huge % gain despite ( I think?) being well to the left of labour overall
This is why they shouldn’t have chosen Davey as leader. He made useful steps for greening of energy, but he was part of that coalition team. If they’d picked someone fresh they’d have been bouncing back faster and stronger, IMHO.
I'm sure it's with good reason, but I do wonder why parties don't rebrand more often. If the LDs or [insert party here] are tainted, why not reboot with a new name, logo, marketing brand etc? Corporates do it all the time.
Are the Liberals, the Democrats, the Greens and various other parties not broadly aligned? Why not merge to create a new, progressive party? United we stand.
There’s not a politician – hell, there’s not a human – alive who hasn’t screwed up at some point. Thatcher deeply regretted the milk thing, which was a decision she inherited as Education Secretary and took the fall for. The LDs will be forever tainted by tuition fees, one bad decision in the middle of hundreds well over a decade ago.
Yeah, but I've explained so many times now I've lost count. It's not as simple as that.
The Lib-Dems have given no indication that anything has changed. They have given no indication they won't do exactly the same thing as soon as they are given a whiff of power.
Of all the small parties they are the only ones who have no core principle (other than Change, remember them?).
Therefore, if you vote for the Lib-Dems you have literally no idea which policies are going to be tossed and which are going to be kept (if any).
If you vote SNP you know their core principle is independence. If you vote Green you know their core principle is the environment. IF you vote Reform you know their core principle is racism.
The Lib-Dems are alone in that they are never going to be the largest party, let alone have a majority, and they have no core principle to guide them.
But sure, keep telling me my issue with them is something that happened 25 years ago if it makes you feel better.
, even if Blair were still in power – he simply ****ed up.
Blair has been consistently unrepentant so I don't think he would agree with you.
I take the point in specific terms, e.g. the Iraq war is hardly Starmer's fault, but I wouldn't entirely dismiss history as a guide to future performance.
But are we prepared to swap what happened 10 years for what is happening right here and now?
Because that's the choice in front. I live in a marginal constituency, not knife edge but close enough that it could be turned. Labour, Green, Reform, Indie..... none stand a chance. It's Yellow or Blue.
The Lib-Dems have given no indication that anything has changed.
What sort of indication would you accept? They're hardly headline news on a daily basis, Garage gets more airtime and column inches.
They have given no indication they won’t do exactly the same thing as soon as they are given a whiff of power.
Have they given any indication that they will? (And, what "same thing" are you referring to?)
But sure, keep telling me my issue with them is something that happened 25 years ago if it makes you feel better.
Nothing to do with me "feeling better," I just don't understand the thought process.
but I wouldn’t entirely dismiss history as a guide to future performance.
There has to be recognition that Iraq and the lessons of that conflict has influenced foreign policy to a massive degree for both Labour and the Tories - See the Syria conflict vote in 2013 for instance
Blair has been consistently unrepentant so I don’t think he would agree with you.
I take the point in specific terms, e.g. the Iraq war is hardly Starmer’s fault, but I wouldn’t entirely dismiss history as a guide to future performance.
Fair on both points.
I suppose the million dollar question here (and to the previous caller also) is, is it a problem born of party policies or from individual decisions? Does Labour do [objectionable thing] and the LDs do [other objectionable thing] because that's simply what they do as a party, or has it just been a few bad decisions?
What sort of indication would you accept?
A statement saying, 'This is our red line and it is a condition of any coalition government we enter.'
Instead, they can't even be bothered being pro-EU anymore. Do they even still want electoral system reform? I have literally no idea what is important to them as a party.
Other than getting some nice government jobs, of course.
Have they given any indication that they will? (And, what “same thing” are you referring to?)
Abandoning their red lines as soon as they are offered a sniff of power.
Maybe that's the new strategy. Commit to absolutely nothing and then your supporters can't be disappointed when you don't do what you say.
I just don’t understand the thought process.
I've explained several times now why the Lib-Dems are in a unique position in UK politics and why this is a bad thing. What don't you understand, exactly?
For large chunks of the population, Brexit is no longer a top issue. Cost of living, NHS, education, immigration are regularly at the top of the issue links.
I'm confused, I thought brexit was supposed to solve all of those issues.
Cost of living - we can make our own stuff rather than import it, buy British!
NHS - fewer "health tourists" taking advantage.
Education - same, ERASMUS+ taking up our valuable university spaces that our good honest British students pay through the nose for.
Immigration - we can send them all back where they came from. Maybe in a small boat.
It's almost as though we were lied to, isn't it. Who could've known.
Well there's obviously two things going on here - one is party principles, the other is individual actions by leaders and members. The two are related but separate.
I mean clearly the Green party would never kick off a huge programme of oil and gas exploration; but what would they do if faced with a persistent terrorist campaign? That depends on the situation, the intelligence available and the person in charge at the time.
What sort of indication would you accept?
A statement saying, ‘This is our red line and it is a condition of any coalition government we enter.’
...
Have they given any indication that they will? (And, what “same thing” are you referring to?)
Abandoning their red lines as soon as they are offered a sniff of power.
Ah. A dichotomy. I see your issue.
I’ve explained several times now why the Lib-Dems are in a unique position in UK politics and why this is a bad thing. What don’t you understand, exactly?
Perhaps I haven't been paying attention.
What makes them unique?
Other than getting some nice government jobs, of course.
I keep saying this and keep being ignored - this isn't how the party works, and any coalition/C&S/whatever deal will need to be ratified by the membership.
A lot has been learned since 2010, and there's no way they're going to do a national deal with the Tories again, even if it would get past the membership, which it won't - local politics are often slightly idiosyncratic, but even then I'd be surprised if many local LD parties in England were in any way keen to do a deal with the Tories.
As to what they stand for, there's a helpful guide on the website https://www.libdems.org.uk/values
Edited for clarity