No he said it.
The UK could get a better deal outside the EU.
Keep on believing.
If you could answer this question that would be great, thanks
Again, same question to the likes of @anon7035031 and @balbec
Doesn’t mean it’s not cheap
What votes has Corbyn won?
A couple of local ones.
How has he got on in big ones?
2016 Ref: lost
2017 Gen: lost
2019 Euros: lost. Third place
So he is shit in polls and elections.
1 Like
You don’t seem to get how elections work.
1 Like
Can you not read?
Referendums in the whole of the UK don’t work well because they are not constitutional
And they especially don’t work where one of the choices is totally undefined
However - a referendum got the UK into this mess, so another one is the only way it can realistically be got out of it
This time the choices would be defined
It’s not an ideal situation by any means but it is better than any other scenario
I can read very well, which is why I know when somebody is desperately trying to avoid answering a simple question
It’s a Yes or No question
Do you want a unilateral revocation of Article 50?
There are only two possible answers
Backtrack.
There is nothing wrong with the Lib Dem position. It is honest and out there. If they get a majority, they will revoke.
Jeremy will negotiate a super duper deal. But may not campaign for it. He could well be neutral. We’ll see.
The russians usually win them buddy. Watch and learn
Yes.
I would know exactly what I would be voting for.
Others can campaign for or against that policy.
What is the problem?
You are voting for civil war, that’s the problem. Corbyn is the only one who wants to keep the peace
How?
It’s a policy.
You vote for the party or not. What’s the issue?
A more resposible voter wouldn’t have to ask. You would be enabling a likely deeper devide than already exists. You would literally be voting for trouble on the streets, riots. Dont worry though people who do accept responsibility, and there are many, tend to vote labour
Finally
That wasn’t so hard, was it
The main reason I would be against a unilateral revocation of Article 50 is because I do believe it would lead to a long term crisis of democracy in the UK with the emergence of full blown far right politics into the mainstream, with potentially devastating consequences
The narrative in the right-wing media for decades would be that Brexit had been “stolen”
I don’t want Brexit to happen, but I recognise that if it is to be avoided, it has to be done by the same mechanism that got the UK into this mess - because that is the only way it can be seen to be legitimate to the public at large - for the public that previously voted for Brexit to then reject it
Corbyn is the only major party leader who also recognises this
What Corbyn wants is a public vote between a softer version of Brexit than is currently on offer, and Remain
Offering a democratic vote to a (hopefully) Labour party in power as to whether to campaign for or campaign against a deal that he personally oversees, is exceptionally brave
He is prepared to risk being undermined by his own party if his own party feels it has to take a decision for the good of the country and society
To some extent, even if there was a referendum and a Corbyn-EU deal was rejected in favour of Remain, the narrative of Brexit being “stolen” would live on among the hardore crackpots, but a public vote to Remain would give crucial democratic legitimacy for remaining among the vast majority of the population
The alternative. ie. a public vote in favour of a defined, Corbyn-negotiated Brexit, would not be ideal in my eyes but would be more palatable than either May’s deal or particularly the crackpot No Deal being threatened currently
Corbyn is recognising that both sides of the divide have to be respected and understood, before a way out of the mess can be found
He offers a road map to Remain by legitimate means while also offering a better Brexit than currently on offer
That would be the public’s choice
And that would be the end of the matter
That is leadership, that is nuance, that is respecting all, and that is common sense
1 Like
The right wing fanatics sent to bed tonight with their milk in the bottle
It’s undemocratic. It disregards the will of the people. But at least they are willing to offer it as a policy.
They need to be up early in time to oppress the proletariat.
They need their morning fix of uncle Rupert. By lunchtime they’ll be back on message again.
There has been a lot of World War I stumbling into disaster type comparisons with the possible stumbling into No Deal scenarios over the last six months
A perhaps much more pertinent and even more frightening comparison is the long held sense of national grievance in Germany following World War I
If Brexit was seen to be “stolen” via unilateral revocation of Article 50, that frightening comparison comes firmly into view
The UK media is very right-wing, and that right-wing media is highly irresponsible
The likes of Yaxley-Lennon would suddenly find a large new market to tap into if Article 50 was just revoked
The genie would be out of the bottle
Most politicians and ordinary people do not want to grapple with this nightmarish scenario
But to not do so would be both irresponsible and historically ignorant
Britain is just about keeping this stuff under wraps as it is
The Lib Dems are ignoring history
This whole situation has to be handled very carefully and delicately - instead they’re just offering the other side of the “get on with it” No Deal crackpotism coin
And I think this is primarily with a view to electoral gain rather than from any real conviction in a policy - I think a lot of Lib Dems are at least privately very uncomfortable with it