EU referendum, brexit and the aftermath

I'd never claim that Corbyn gets an easy ride in the press. But Labour have been almost impressive in their mishandling of things.

See this story as a great e.g. of how to create a media talking piece to convince people that you'll move further left once in power:

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2019/sep/22/labour-delegates-vote-in-favour-of-abolishing-private-schools

I also don't see why it is such an issue that he stays neutral. In a lot of ways it makes sense.

Except that he's talking about trying to get a better withdrawal deal and a lot of people don't believe the EU has any more patience for agreeing that with him than they do with Bojo. That is to say, none. No-Deal or Revoke as the only options may be the polarisation of politics but at this late stage they may also be the only two choices left.

Except that he's talking about trying to get a better withdrawal deal and a lot of people don't believe the EU has any more patience for agreeing that with him than they do with Bojo.

The EU has previously said they will open up negotiations if May's red-lines are no longer a part of them. I've not seen anything change in this regard, and Corbyn's position explicitly removes the red lines. Additionally, the EU knowing that the outcome of these negotiations will be a referendum which would, ideally, put this to bed, would perhaps see the pragmatism of going along with the process.

I understand that a majority of Labour members back remain (while not a Labour member it's certainly my preference). But making that the official party position along with an official party position of trying to negotiate a different type of exit seems to be putting the cart before the horse. Perhaps most worryingly is that it would allow Brexiters to claim the negotiations were not held in good faith on the part of Labour and the EU. Neutrality seems to me to be the best position in this case, and ironically, perhaps one of Corbyn's qualities which make him best suited is his history as a Eurosceptic.

I've not seen anything change in this regard

There's been no change in the official position. That doesn't mean EU politicians and their electorates still have the patience to support it.

So full customs union and single market is now the position?

It's a bit of a "I wouldn't start from here", situation. But the point I'm trying to make is that if you had the oratory and PR credibility you could make the following case:

• "The ref was close. I am the leader of the country so will not come down on one side as God has sent me to unite the country."
  
  

Everything else follows from there;

• we need to get the best deal - therefore I will appoint the best people to get a good deal that protects x, y, z. Because I am neutral I can make sure that we wouldn't have the same situation as with Hamond, where the treasury were prevented from contingency planning.
  
• We will give the people the final say - as I am impartial I will not push through a deal without making sure you the people are ok with the final deal.
  

I don't think it's that important that Corbyn commits. I think what's important is the party has a consistent policy.

You get some MPs (I think Thornberry maybe) saying the intention is to support remain, Corbyn saying he'll remain neutral, etc.

It's just all a bit disjointed and doesn't make it look like a cohesive party. The mixed messages mean they piss everyone off.

we will see at the upcoming election how successful 'having a clear position on brexit' is for e.g. the conservatives. boris' strategy is very dangerous - in order to preserve the 2017 coalition (which didn't deliver a majority remember) he has to thread a needle. (fwiw, labour's position is perfectly understandable provided you have a reading comprehension above 2y.o., which I know is beyond most journalists.)

that's not what he is doing - he has tacked towards the leave side of his coalition and risks alienating any remain-leaning voters, particularly in LD/CON marginals. he better hope his strategists have run the numbers and think they can put on enough (well distributed!) votes to replace those he will lose

my own personal expectation is that the electoral valency of brexit will be less than those inside the twitter and WM bubble expect. while they need a position, I think most people have tuned it out and just want it to go away really. labour should have an electorally potent offering in their next manifesto for all those things most people are really concerned about (schools, hospitals, jobs etc.)

Assuming the EU have the patience and Labour could do a deal ... if the deal struck with EU isn’t popular in a referendum then we stay in the EU. That’s got to be the probable outcome - the Brexit vote would certainly be split (between the deal and not-voting because it’s not the isolationist unicorn poop offering Farage promised) and Remain would finally have some credibility as a political direction.

I can’t understand why staunch remain advocates have an issue with this. Unless (like Watson) career or personal politics are at play. The only argument I’ve heard is ‘electability’ ..... again (as if we don’t remember the 2017 GE).

Because fudge is death on the doorstep.

Then it becomes a technical exercise in messaging.

“We don’t want no-deal”

“We want the people to decide between a soft Brexit or no Brexit in a public vote.”

“Vote Labour because there’s life beyond the issue of Brexit”

: )

Assuming the EU have the patience and Labour could do a deal

Which is what so many people now don't believe.

... if the deal struck with EU isn’t popular in a referendum then we stay in the EU. That’s got to be the probable outcome

Nothing that's happened in the last 3 years justifies that belief, nor the idea that

Remain would finally have some credibility

.

I do not understand this idea of the Corbyn grand plan that is so cunning and will suddenly reveal itself. If it is beyond the journalists and probably most of the population maybe it is not so clever after all. The policy suggestion from the Labour conference at least seem like something made up on the train to Brighton and not from a party that should be ready for GE at a moments notice.

it's not that it will suddenly reveal itself - it's there in plain sight. the policy is very straightforward to understand but in any case here's a short explainer: https://twitter.com/AdamPolitics/status/1176193508580962304

easy to understand unless you are a very brain smart political journalist paid 300k p.a. to explain things, I guess. most journalists are either (i) very dumb or (ii) very disingenuous.

fundamentally, politics is about counting and there's no route to a labour majority (or conservative majority!) if they alienate one part of their coalition at the behest of the other.

Don't get the confusion about the labour position. Correct me if I'm wrong...

Vote Tory: Fuck the 48% we're leaving deal or no deal.
Vote Lib Dem: Fuck the 52%, we're cancelling the whole thing.
Vote Labour: PV - Choose between leaving with a deal (tbc, but likely very similar to the current WA) or vote to remain.

Vote Tory: Fuck the 48% we're leaving deal or no deal.

It's worth pointing out that this position advocates a permanent change because there is no way that we could rejoin the EU on the same terms that we're currently on, while this...

Vote Lib Dem: Fuck the 52%, we're cancelling the whole thing.

Doesn't preclude the possibility of another referendum in 5, 10, 20 (or whatever) years time.

Do you think the population of the uk would vote for a soft Brexit?

"It's worth pointing out that this position advocates a permanent change because there is no way that we could rejoin the EU on the same terms that we're currently on"

That's not certain is it?

"Doesn't preclude the possibility of another referendum in 5, 10, 20 (or whatever) years time."

Beat people hard enough with it and they might agree it's an olive branch?

Doesn't preclude the possibility of another referendum in 5, 10, 20 (or whatever) years time.

It almost guarantees it. What fun!

Beat people hard enough with it and they might agree it's an olive branch?

An olive branch is probably quite a lucky thing to encounter if you're in the process of flinging yourself off a cliff.

Labour Brexit: an olive branch in the eye as you fall off a cliff.

Labour Brexit: an olive branch in the eye as you fall off a cliff.

The point that I was originally making was about the Lib Dems position i.e., that if they revoke article 50 (which seems to me to be the least shit option right now), there's nothing to stop another referendum (hopefully done properly) in the future.

So if another better framed referendum is not enough, do the Lib Dems actually have a chance of winning the election?

I’ve always advocated Soft Remain. We spend the £100m on advertising that says Get Ready! (are you ready?) ((srsly u need to be ready m8)) on various forms of media. At midnight Oct 31 there’s a massive power cut and other pyrotechnics - but order is quickly restored with the announcement that it was an unexpected side effect of leaving. And we’ve left. Finally. Doesn’t that feel good?
But in reality, nothing changes, we remain in the EU and simply claim some ‘rapid and surprisingly easy negotiation’ of a deal when the fresh produce doesn’t run out. Up yours Delors!
Result: Leavers got their ‘event’ while the rest (who know that winning at leaving the EU is a bit more complicated than “we should just leave, end of”) get time to work out what the fuck we should do next.

^ this assumes Leavers will have absolutely NO WAY of knowing if we’ve left, one way or the other. Right?