Posted: Sep 18, 2019 9:24 pm
Beatsong wrote:Ron, I'm curious why Labour "taking a position" as a party for Remain is so important to you. If I understand correctly you support the idea of a second referendum. Corbyn is intent on making sure that's between Remain and a form of Leave that would fuck the country as little as possible. That being so, you basically get what you want. Surely whether "Labour" as an institution express one view or other within that is only of symbolic importance? It's the people who will vote.
As I've been saying for a while, I think not having an easy to explain position on brexit in a GE simply about brexit won't encourage voters to vote Labour. Worse, when there are strong remain and strong leave options, I'm not sure who is going to vote for Labour with any enthusiasm. For a policy that looks like trying to win votes from both leave and remain by appearing to support both/neither.
What is the principle people would be voting for?
Beatsong wrote:And it's not like Labour defining themselves as pro-Remain is going to make anyone believe that Kate Hoey or Dennis Skinnner are anyway.
But nobody votes for a party based on the nutters/outliers in that party.
Beatsong wrote:Isn't Labour reserving the right to whatever position, or non-position, they consider politically best for them a reasonable price to pay for them giving you, practically speaking, pretty much the exact outcome you want?
Is that the selling point, the pitch, the USP to the voters? Labour reserving the right to whatever position or non-position they consider politically best for them? What does Labour believe? Propose that as a simple straightforward policy.
Me, I'd like a new referendum. I'd also like to cancel brexit tomorrow without a referendum. But I'm not in favour of it, as it's undemocratic. I'm not sure either option that I would *like* are reasonable.