Oh, just remembered, everyone is a fool apart from THM… I need to remember that when reading his comments.

If the cap fits kelvin….your choice

I was very clear about the comment being general and not specific (to Brexshit/anything else/anyone)

But to be specific on this vote. THe stances of both parties is/was clear (albeit inconsistent) and not that far apart. It would have been foolish not to check and understand this before voting – but hey, that’s an individual’s perogative. And if people want to vote on the basis of some misconceived tactic that is also up to them.

A stance that is inconsistent cannot be clear in any meaningful sense, because the inconsistencies can be resolved in a variety of ways. It seems plausible to me that labour would (if in govt) resolve the inconsistencies in a way that is less damaging to workers than the Tories.

But to be specific on this vote. THe stances of both parties is/was clear (albeit inconsistent) and not that far apart. It would have been foolish not to check and understand this before voting – but hey, that’s an individual’s perogative. And if people want to vote on the basis of some misconceived tactic that is also up to them.

So who do you vote for in this specific case. If both parties plan on Brexit but one is clear on a hard brexit and one on a brexit where jobs will be protected? With details like screw the NHS or talk of not doing so? More tuition fees or scrapping them?

Yes you could vote LD or Green but the likelyhood of them being in power with enough clout to stop Brexit?

Least worst option.

Wouldn’t you just vote based on principles you hold no matter the chance of success?

If you look at the principles behind each parties support of leaving the EU they are based on very different ideologies. The EU is built around the idea of a free market, goods, labour, capital etc.The right wing of the Tories believe this is not free enough and want to leave the EU to make it even more free and deregulated basically complete laissez-faire neo-liberalism. The left wing of the Labour party believe it is too free a market and want more regulation, state control over spending, basically more of a planned economy as they see the EU is already too neo-liberalist.

The centrists Cameron/Blairites are very happy with the way things are thank you very much. Just enough deregulation for the bankers without resulting to a complete free for all.

The interesting part is how each party has came to the position it’s in. The Tories have kowtowed to a populist movement in the form of UKIP and the power it’s support has given the right wingers and Labour has embraced a populist movement in the form of Momentum and the literal power it has given it’s left wingers (mainly due to Ed Milliband’s party leader electoral reforms)

Back to the original point. If you’re not going to vote for a party that represents your principles on the EU (assuming that’s a remain point of view and as such LDs or Greens), should you not vote for a party that best represents your point of view on leaving the EU?

Or to try for a hung parliament.

So who do you vote for in this specific case.

Very hard

If both parties plan on Brexit but one is clear on a hard brexit

Sorry, that’s BS – both parties are after a bespoke deal

and one on a brexit where jobs will be protected?

Ditto – once you get beyond the rhetoric

With details like screw the NHS or talk of not doing so? More tuition fees or scrapping them?

I am in favour of tuition fees so that makes it harder still. Which party campaigned to “screw the NHS” BTW, I missed that?

This talk of elections, especially the oft touted fact that 80odd percent of us voted for had Brexit at the election is meaningless.

The campaign fronted by Gina Miller,Best For Britain helped us to see which candidate supported Leave or Remain and to vote tactically. In addition, a Leave supporting millionaire has been trying to ensure that Leave supporting candidates were fielded across the board here.

Fact is, we were told during the campaign that a Leave vote didn’t mean leaving the Single Market, nor did it mean crashing out of the entire trading bloc with no deal in place.

really, i know the independent is unlikley to find much favour with you THM, but the article is pretty clear, as I have been over the past few weeks. in my case, the incumbent MP ( labour ) was one who took a contrary stance to that of the lab leadership and was one of few MPs who did ask some pretty searching questions of government during the A50 debacle. i was pleased to vote for him, in spite of the leadership’s position, not only because he’s a good MP who reflects his constituent’s views, but also because i did not want to split the vote, and run the risk of allowing a tory in. I would have voted that way irrespective of the individual MP’s behaviour, if it meant denying May her landslide. which it did. 🙂

Well yes and no

People got unnecessarily confused about the single market. Of course, we are leaving it in the sense that we are giving up membership. The on-going debate is how to continue to have access to it. Therein lies the rub of it. Neither side’s position is consistent re how this is to be achieved – hence the debate is NOT about doing any crashing, it is about how and where we compromise. The rest is simply noise, much of which is created deliberately to misinform the great British public. It is succeeding clearly,,,,

Worth bearing in mind that a number of Labour MPs who were prominent figures in the Leave campaign increased their already considerable majorities in the election, Graham Stringer, Kelvin Hopkins and Kate Hoey.

In the shop I see that the papers are frothing about the eu ruining our holidays with queues at the airport.
They don’t seem to realise that those queues are the queues of freedom.Everyone in that queue belongs to a sovereign nation.
They don’t have endure the shackles of eu oppression anymore.
Our queues set us free.
3 more cheers for nigel.

I voted Labour in a seat which went from Tory to Labour. The Labour candidate is not pro-Brexit. My vote was not a vote for leaving the EU.

Even if the candidate had been pro-Brexit, my vote would not have been for leaving the EU, as I was voting against May, so as not to give her the crushing majourity she had asked for to strengthen her hand in negotiations on leaving. She now has a weaker hand.

My hope is that the deal (or no deal) in place as we leave will go to a further referendum for a ‘take the deal or stay in the EU?’ question, when people will be able to see what it is they are actually voting for.

and a weaker hand benefits no one and ironically makes no deal more likely – be careful what you wish for

Let’s take the hypothetical issue where we have a deal, we then have another vote and the electorate says “no thanks”. What happens then. Do we say to our European partners, “sorry nos Amis, this is a tad embarrassing as our fine folk have decided to reject the deal that we have just spent all this time negotiating. All that time and effort wasted, I’m afraid. So here’s the deal, lets just forget about it, shall we?”

In response: “tant pis, get lost and stop wasting anymore of our time.”

Or words to that effect.

Unless you happen to think that a weak hand makes it far more likely that the whole process collapses and A50 is revoked.

Could do, alternatively we are out on our backsides and relying on WTO. I have no idea.

Unless you happen to think that a weak hand makes it far more likely that the whole process collapses and A50 is revoked.

Precisely, this.

No one has been able to give me a single coherent positive reason for us exiting the EU. Does that mean I should just suck it up and get on with it? Heck no.

Although you and some others refer to crashing out as “WTO” that doesn’t begin to cover the necessary. Irish border, functioning of our nuclear industry, flights to Europe, banks assorting rights and many other things are not part of WTO. “We can survive with WTO tariffs” doesn’t begin to cover it.

So just a small @€500milliin relocation bill we have to pay as we lose the EMA.

Plus the Tories are suggesting we have to remploy the staff anyway to duplicate its function post Brexit ££££££££

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-latest-news-european-medicines-agency-move-london-eu-cost-bill-520-million-nhs-europe-a7873226.html !

No deal was always just fantasy talk for the hard of thinking, sadly it was lapped up by many brexies that think Brexit is just a simple case of signing a document getting a blue passport and carrying on to our glorious future ruling the waves once more!

Unless you happen to think that a weak hand makes it far more likely that the whole process collapses and A50 is revoked.

Exactly. I don’t want us to leave and have not accepted that we are leaving.

Please provide a quote of anybody in the EU suggesting they want us to get lost – I can provide several from those who wield the real power suggesting that us remaining part of the EU is still a realistic possibility.

this – anybody suggesting “no deal” as a realistic option is simply admitting that they have no comprehension of the situation. The Irish border issue on its own is significant enough – and a big reason why the EU negotiators won’t just tell us to piss off if we can’t agree a deal. Realpolitik will kick in (at some point even DD et al will work out this isn’t an option).

Aracer, may I introduce you to the concept of a hypothetical example?

In your hypothetical scenario the EU response would for reasons explained be an exasperated ‘okay stay members’, rather than the ‘faire chier’ you (without evidence) seem to think.

John, may I also introduce you to the concept of a hypothetical example

As I made clear, I have no idea what the final reaction would be.

You don’t know how the EU would react to the UK wanting to remain? They would let us remain. That is what they want.

I hope that is the case, but I am not sure of it. In that scenario, I would not rule out the idea that they say, ok you can stay but here are the terms

1. Remember Fatcha’s rebate, err……..
2. Etc, etc

We are burning up the goodwill. If they didn’t need us as much/more than/less than we need them it would be a lot worse too

If you’re saying we’ve messed up you’ll get no argument from me. Just there are options for staying. You’ll remember Boris the Johnson’s original line was that a leave vote could precede a negotiation for staying on better terms. This rapidly changed to the simpler ‘let’s go’. But why not?

The EU would like us to stay, France and Germany in particular. We are a major budget contributor, we are a huge export market for the EU with a significant trade deficit and we are a major destination for immigration. When we leave they lose the money, potentially the tariff free access to our markets and fisheries and those economic migrants will go elsewhere, eg France and Germany.

Freedom of Movement will end in 2019. It seems likely to me there will be a generous visa system for the EU27 as part of any transition arrangement.

When we leave they lose the money, potentially the tariff free access to our markets

Well if Britian wants access to EU markets it is unlikely to be free. See Norway and Switezeralnd.

So the EU doesn’t lose the money and tariffs will be reciprocal so Britian has the same to lose if there are high traiffs (but more than any one of the 27).

Of course we messed up, we failed to convince enough people to vote to remain

Very, very limited options for staying and limited options for maintaining access. We are negotiating a position among this limited number.

Jambas. How much of “our money” do you think the EU will lose? Are you expecting zero future uk contribution?

Jamba reckons the Johnny Foreigner EU will pay us, because, well, we’re British aren’t we. Pip, pip.

(Anyone who takes that statement seriously by the way wants their head examining)

The EU would like us to stay, France and Germany in particular. We are a major budget contributor, we are a huge export market for the EU with a significant trade deficit and we are a major destination for immigration. When we leave they lose the money, potentially the tariff free access to our markets and fisheries and those economic migrants will go elsewhere, eg France and Germany.

It’s still they need us more than we need them eh? 😆

Brexit is the perfect example of a country doing something political despite the economic consequences

Please jambs could you explain why rEU wouldn’t be willing to do exactly the same?

Daily Mail: ‘We meant “tougher border controls” for others, not for people like us’

Kimbers, I would caution against pushing that line of thought too far, after all….

The euro is (possibly) the best global example of a whole region doing something (bad) political despite the disastrous econiomic consequences

Fortunately we were not stupid enough to join un, despite many proposing such folly…

Fortunately we were not stupid enough to join un, despite many proposing such folly…

Indeed, saved from the Tories by the economic nous of Gordon Brown….

Only the Tories?

What about tanned Tony and all the Lib Demmers

You continue slagging off the Euro and ingnoring the positive economic consequence, THM. I suggest countries would have been worse off without the Euro. It lead to an increase in trade and tourism, making travel easier than the disappearance of the frontiers. Here in SW France there was a hike in cross-border business with both sides winning.

There is no point of comparison just a change in trends which show benefits. Just how many countries would have gone under Iceland fashion is the wake of sub prime without the Euro we don’t know. What we do know is that that both the Euro and the countries that are members have survived without the chaos suffered by Venezuela, Germany 1920s or any other country in which the currency has become worthless.

Well you are entitled to your opinion however ill-judged – would love to debate but would take too much time to pick through the flawed analogies (VZ are you kidding???) and muddled economics, so will pass instead.

But I take my hat off to your ability to completed ignore the role that the flawed fixed exchange rate had in creating the excess build up of leverage across the periphery, the inflation of bubble economies and the inability to deal with the consequences in a coherent and sensible manner. Triffling details, I know.

There’s a very simple option – one which is likely to be on the table in early 2019…

Well always better to be positive, however fanciful. Let’s hope you are proved correct though.

For ed, from someone who has been at the coal face

Europe is at the mercy of a common currency that not only was unnecessary for European integration, but that is actually undermining the European Union itself

Yannis Varoufakis 2017

Quite.