Brexit Schmexit

[pink_triangle]

30 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Her ward is more like 10% leavers. what about the other 90%?

 

Anyway, should the 48% who voted remain not be represented then?

While some wards who voted leave are having their MP vote against their wishes. I absolutely think the 48% who voted remain have representation, but lets face it in the current labour PLP the proportion of Remain supporting labour MPs exceeds the proportion of remain supporting voters.  Remain supporting Labour voters are not lacking representation from the labour party.  

My view is minority opinion within a party should be accepted, rather than shot down. Corbyn was allowed to go on for years with views that were more popular with voters than within the PLP at the time. We should also remember that some things which are majority opinion now were once a minority view.  The labour party should be a broad church and attempts to homogenize it are in my view a mistake, it will also cost them votes. 

[zahidf]

10 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

While some wards who voted leave are having their MP vote against their wishes. I absolutely think the 48% who voted remain have representation, but lets face it in the current labour PLP the proportion of Remain supporting labour MPs exceeds the proportion of remain supporting voters.  Remain supporting Labour voters are not lacking representation from the labour party.  

My view is minority opinion within a party should be accepted, rather than shot down. Corbyn was allowed to go on for years with views that were more popular with voters than within the PLP at the time. We should also remember that some things which are majority opinion now were once a minority view.  The labour party should be a broad church and attempts to homogenize it are in my view a mistake, it will also cost them votes. 

I dont disgaree in general terms

 

In these terms, she went against the party whip on a close vote on a subject which her constitutents (broadly) disagree with her on. Her local party want to censure her and potentially deselect. If thats their choice, are you saying they shouldnt make it?

[sjseabass]

The broad church ends at the point where they would rather have a Tory government than a Labour one.

[Comfy Bean]

1 hour ago, theevilfridge said:

The broad church ends at the point where they would rather have a Tory government than a Labour one.

Agreed.

[feral chile]

18 hours ago, pink_triangle said:

Silly comparison, he never had the chance. 

You made the comparison.

So if your comparison isn't viable, will you please stop making it?

Especially when you yourself agree that it is not like for like?

[eFestivals]

3 hours ago, kaosmark2 said:

They're not represented by the Lib Dems based on Cable and Farron not bothering to turn up.

That was - apparently - a cock-up. 

And they're at least trying to give some leadership in the right direction, even if no one is really interested in them. 

 

[eFestivals]

2 hours ago, theevilfridge said:

The broad church ends at the point where they would rather have a Tory government than a Labour one.

and yet, for any pragmatic mind, good intentions aren't enough.

Labour has to also give belief in its ability to carry out its policies competently so that they don't make things worse instead of better.

And currently, they're failing with that to a large degree. The support is being buoyed up by the tories being so awful.

[sjseabass]

2 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

and yet, for any pragmatic mind, good intentions aren't enough.

Labour has to also give belief in its ability to carry out its policies competently so that they don't make things worse instead of better.

And currently, they're failing with that to a large degree. The support is being buoyed up by the tories being so awful.

This is in reference to Hoey etc, not the public. If they don’t want a Labour government they shouldn’t be Labour MPs.

[Comfy Bean]

1 hour ago, theevilfridge said:

This is in reference to Hoey etc, not the public. If they don’t want a Labour government they shouldn’t be Labour MPs.

Spot on. You made it crystal clear you were talking about the MPs.

[eFestivals]

1 hour ago, theevilfridge said:

This is in reference to Hoey etc, not the public. If they don’t want a Labour government they shouldn’t be Labour MPs.

how does a different opinion on brexit mean she doesn't want a Labour govt?

If that idea's followed thru on, about 30% of Labour voters don't want a Labour govt ... or perhaps the 70% of remainers don't want a Labour govt?

A different opinion on a single subject is that and only that.

(tho I'd be happy to see the back of Hoey all the same).

[sjseabass]

Just now, eFestivals said:

how does a different opinion on brexit mean she doesn't want a Labour govt?

If that idea's followed thru on, about 30% of Labour voters don't want a Labour govt ... or perhaps the 70% of remainers don't want a Labour govt?

A different opinion on a single subject is that and only that.

(tho I'd be happy to see the back of Hoey all the same).

Because if she and her 3 buddies had voted with the Labour whip last night the government would have fallen. She preferred to prop up May.

[eFestivals]

2 minutes ago, theevilfridge said:

Because if she and her 3 buddies had voted with the Labour whip last night the government would have fallen.

Nope, the vote was about brexit and not the govt.

Losing a vote doesn't topple govts, and it wouldn't have toppled May last night. No other tory wants the shitty shick to hold themselves.

[sjseabass]

18 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Nope, the vote was about brexit and not the govt.

Losing a vote doesn't topple govts, and it wouldn't have toppled May last night. No other tory wants the shitty shick to hold themselves.

So you propose she could have continued how exactly, with a central plank of her Brexit strategy in tatters?

https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1019291556157804547

Edited July 18, 2018 by theevilfridge

[pink_triangle]

5 hours ago, zahidf said:

I dont disgaree in general terms

 

In these terms, she went against the party whip on a close vote on a subject which her constitutents (broadly) disagree with her on. Her local party want to censure her and potentially deselect. If thats their choice, are you saying they shouldnt make it?

Im not in favour of deselections. The average labour member and the average labour voter are very different. I think deselections run the risk of replacing candidates that voters like, with candidates that the members want. I think particularly in marginal seats it could be electorally damaging. Her views were well known and she was voted back in. I personally think having some pro Brexit labour mps is not s terrible thing when they have (or need to win back)pro Brexit voters. 

[pink_triangle]

3 hours ago, feral chile said:

You made the comparison.

So if your comparison isn't viable, will you please stop making it?

Especially when you yourself agree that it is not like for like?

Admittedly it's a theoretical scenario, but does a single person on here think he would have supported Blair on a bill percieved to be pro Israel/anti Palestine if the whip said it would collapse through government. We all know he would have gone with his principles, just as Hoey has hers.

[sjseabass]

1 minute ago, pink_triangle said:

Admittedly it's a theoretical scenario, but does a single person on here think he would have supported Blair on a bill percieved to be pro Israel/anti Palestine if the whip said it would collapse through government. We all know he would have gone with his principles, just as Hoey has hers.

Nope, I agree he would have gone with his principles. And he should have also had the whip removed.

[pink_triangle]

2 hours ago, theevilfridge said:

This is in reference to Hoey etc, not the public. If they don’t want a Labour government they shouldn’t be Labour MPs.

Labour represent more than a Brexit position. Hoey regularly votes with labour (almost certainly more than the current leader did on the backbench). This was not a vote of no confidence as some try to make out.

[feral chile]

1 minute ago, pink_triangle said:

Admittedly it's a theoretical scenario, but does a single person on here think he would have supported Blair on a bill percieved to be pro Israel/anti Palestine if the whip said it would collapse through government. We all know he would have gone with his principles, just as Hoey has hers.

We'll never know. He'd have conflicting principles, I'd imagine. I hope he'd at least have gone with what he thought was best for the poor. And what was at stake.

Like I'd dump Plaid to keep out the Tories.

But you can't in all fairness use a comparison until it fails, then dump it halfway through because it's inappropriate.

There's no like for like situation here.

[pink_triangle]

37 minutes ago, theevilfridge said:

Because if she and her 3 buddies had voted with the Labour whip last night the government would have fallen. She preferred to prop up May.

That's not necessarily true. If the government thought they were going to lose they may have made some alterations to the bill to gain more support from torys. Also some Tory mps may have voted differently if they had known the labour 4 were  opposing the government.

If

[LJS]

8 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

Labour represent more than a Brexit position. Hoey regularly votes with labour (almost certainly more than the current leader did on the backbench). This was not a vote of no confidence as some try to make out.

N, but it was a vote that could have made a very precarious government even more precarious& increased the chances of an early general election.

[pink_triangle]

6 minutes ago, feral chile said:

We'll never know. He'd have conflicting principles, I'd imagine. I hope he'd at least have gone with what he thought was best for the poor. And what was at stake.

Like I'd dump Plaid to keep out the Tories.

But you can't in all fairness use a comparison until it fails, then dump it halfway through because it's inappropriate.

There's no like for like situation here.

What I don't think you understand is the few labour Mps who support Brexit don't think it will harm the poor. We may disagree, but a large chunk of labour voters agree with them.

[sjseabass]

2 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

That's not necessarily true. If the government thought they were going to lose they may have made some alterations to the bill to gain more support from torys. Also some Tory mps may have voted differently if they had known the labour 4 were  opposing the government.

If

Then they were in the perfect position to lie to the Tories and screw them over, weren't they?

[feral chile]

Just now, pink_triangle said:

What I don't think you understand is the few labour Mps who support Brexit don't think it will harm the poor. We may disagree, but a large chunk of labour voters agree with them.

Well I suspect I know what Corbyn thinks.

[pink_triangle]

1 minute ago, LJS said:

N, but it was a vote that could have made a very precarious government even more precarious& increased the chances of an early general election.

People are assuming because a chief whip (who's job is to scare) said something it must be true. My guess is that if the torys were heading for defeat they would have found a deal. Are you saying pro Brexit labour mps should never be able to vote with principle, as there will be loads of tight Brexit votes.

23 percent of labour voters support Brexit. About 2 percent of their mps vote in a pro Brexit manner. I don't think that's an unreasonable representation.

[pink_triangle]

11 minutes ago, theevilfridge said:

Then they were in the perfect position to lie to the Tories and screw them over, weren't they?

They don't have electronic voting where everyone presses a button, they divide into lobbies. People may notice.