RugbyRebels

Can kicked down road again- wtf were she/advisors thinking in racing to produce a 'document' and pi55ing everyone off. Its really difficult to see a way out of this given parliaments lack of ideas or commitment to anything, and we are heading to no deal unless there is a GE.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... are_btn_fb

A nationwide picture is emerging of EU citizens in the UK being denied their democratic right to vote in the European parliament elections because of administrative errors by local councils.
Reports are coming in from across the country of EU nationals turning up at polling booths and finding their names crossed out and being told by officials they are not eligible to vote.
Dozens have contacted the Guardian to say that the forms they had to sign to declare they were choosing to vote in this country had either turned up too late or not turned up at all...



So much for legal, free and fair elections huh

I've long said there's only one real area of voter fraud in this country, namely postal votes, but these days we ought to include those organising the elections as the other major point of fraud

Digby wrote:I've long said there's only one real area of voter fraud in this country, namely postal votes, but these days we ought to include those organising the elections as the other major point of fraud

I'd say that between overseas citizens not getting their forms, and domestic EU nationals not getting theirs either; the organisers are engaging in the only electoral fraud - though for this election I'll allow that siomple incompetence seems way more likely than conspiracy (2016 on the other hand...)

Postal voting is the only real option for election fraud, but even that wouldn't work on a large scale without the defrauded knowing about it (they'd basically have to sign the various signed bits of paperwork over to someone without sealing the envelopes). Otherwise I don't think it's any more suseptible than proxy voting - though I'm also pretty sure they could increase the security of postal voting further with reasonable ease

If you know anyone who's been turned away, the electoral commission has released the following:

So kick up Angus's, and demand to speak to the returning officer

Which Tyler wrote:

Digby wrote:I've long said there's only one real area of voter fraud in this country, namely postal votes, but these days we ought to include those organising the elections as the other major point of fraud

I'd say that between overseas citizens not getting their forms, and domestic EU nationals not getting theirs either; the organisers are engaging in the only electoral fraud - though for this election I'll allow that siomple incompetence seems way more likely than conspiracy (2016 on the other hand...)

Postal voting is the only real option for election fraud, but even that wouldn't work on a large scale without the defrauded knowing about it (they'd basically have to sign the various signed bits of paperwork over to someone without sealing the envelopes). Otherwise I don't think it's any more suseptible than proxy voting - though I'm also pretty sure they could increase the security of postal voting further with reasonable ease

Can confirm - didn't get the form either. I am more than happy skipping taking part in this pointless election though.

Which Tyler wrote:
Postal voting is the only real option for election fraud, but even that wouldn't work on a large scale without the defrauded knowing about it (they'd basically have to sign the various signed bits of paperwork over to someone without sealing the envelopes). Otherwise I don't think it's any more suseptible than proxy voting - though I'm also pretty sure they could increase the security of postal voting further with reasonable ease

Have a read about postal vote fraud in Leicester.

To be fair to the responsible councils, they haven’t had as much time as usual to get the logistics in place for this election.

Banquo wrote:Can kicked down road again- wtf were she/advisors thinking in racing to produce a 'document' and pi55ing everyone off. Its really difficult to see a way out of this given parliaments lack of ideas or commitment to anything, and we are heading to no deal unless there is a GE.

Racing?!?!! This was the fourth iteration over numerous months. If only we had an agreement that was a compromise.....or as you correctly call it a document to piss everyone off. It had something for virtually everyone but instead of everyone excepting it was a compromise to try and please all, they just focussed on what pissed them off. It pretty much handed control to parliament with provisions for a CU and second ref if they wanted. It ticked virtually every box that Labour have asked for - the above plus tying the UK to EU labour and environmental laws - yet surprise surprise party politics trump everything.
What a bunch of to55ers.

Zhivago wrote:

Which Tyler wrote:

Digby wrote:I've long said there's only one real area of voter fraud in this country, namely postal votes, but these days we ought to include those organising the elections as the other major point of fraud

I'd say that between overseas citizens not getting their forms, and domestic EU nationals not getting theirs either; the organisers are engaging in the only electoral fraud - though for this election I'll allow that siomple incompetence seems way more likely than conspiracy (2016 on the other hand...)

Postal voting is the only real option for election fraud, but even that wouldn't work on a large scale without the defrauded knowing about it (they'd basically have to sign the various signed bits of paperwork over to someone without sealing the envelopes). Otherwise I don't think it's any more suseptible than proxy voting - though I'm also pretty sure they could increase the security of postal voting further with reasonable ease

Can confirm - didn't get the form either. I am more than happy skipping taking part in this pointless election though.

Other than when I was working overseas, I’ve never not voted before.
I just can’t see the point in this, even registering a vote for a remainder party seems like a waste of time.

Mellsblue wrote:

Banquo wrote:Can kicked down road again- wtf were she/advisors thinking in racing to produce a 'document' and pi55ing everyone off. Its really difficult to see a way out of this given parliaments lack of ideas or commitment to anything, and we are heading to no deal unless there is a GE.

Racing?!?!! This was the fourth iteration over numerous months. If only we had an agreement that was a compromise.....or as you correctly call it a document to piss everyone off. It had something for virtually everyone but instead of everyone excepting it was a compromise to try and please all, they just focussed on what pissed them off. It pretty much handed control to parliament with provisions for a CU and second ref if they wanted. It ticked virtually every box that Labour have asked for - the above plus tying the UK to EU labour and environmental laws - yet surprise surprise party politics trump everything.
What a bunch of to55ers.

She splurged it out without sharing the fine details with the cabinet or anyone else- and it wasn't merely an iteration as you've just highlighted. She could have taken time and hawked it a around, dividing and conquering, but no. Misguided, again.

Banquo wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

Banquo wrote:Can kicked down road again- wtf were she/advisors thinking in racing to produce a 'document' and pi55ing everyone off. Its really difficult to see a way out of this given parliaments lack of ideas or commitment to anything, and we are heading to no deal unless there is a GE.

Racing?!?!! This was the fourth iteration over numerous months. If only we had an agreement that was a compromise.....or as you correctly call it a document to piss everyone off. It had something for virtually everyone but instead of everyone excepting it was a compromise to try and please all, they just focussed on what pissed them off. It pretty much handed control to parliament with provisions for a CU and second ref if they wanted. It ticked virtually every box that Labour have asked for - the above plus tying the UK to EU labour and environmental laws - yet surprise surprise party politics trump everything.
What a bunch of to55ers.

She splurged it out without sharing the fine details with the cabinet or anyone else- and it wasn't merely an iteration as you've just highlighted. She could have taken time and hawked it a around, dividing and conquering, but no. Misguided, again.

Oh, yeah. She’s botched the sales pitch yet again. Though, why should we be worried about a sales pitch? These are our elected officials who run our nation. Geniuses, the lot. It reacts to everything that has been asked for. I’m not running through it again but it gives every faction something they want. MPs should be able to see past a non-existent sales pitch and take it a face value, ie it’s a compromise. Well, it’s more a capitulation but get my point.

Mellsblue wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Mellsblue wrote: Racing?!?!! This was the fourth iteration over numerous months. If only we had an agreement that was a compromise.....or as you correctly call it a document to piss everyone off. It had something for virtually everyone but instead of everyone excepting it was a compromise to try and please all, they just focussed on what pissed them off. It pretty much handed control to parliament with provisions for a CU and second ref if they wanted. It ticked virtually every box that Labour have asked for - the above plus tying the UK to EU labour and environmental laws - yet surprise surprise party politics trump everything.
What a bunch of to55ers.

She splurged it out without sharing the fine details with the cabinet or anyone else- and it wasn't merely an iteration as you've just highlighted. She could have taken time and hawked it a around, dividing and conquering, but no. Misguided, again.

Oh, yeah. She’s botched the sales pitch yet again. Though, why should we be worried about a sales pitch? These are our elected officials who run our nation. Geniuses, the lot. It reacts to everything that has been asked for. I’m not running through it again but it gives every faction something they want. MPs should be able to see past a non-existent sales pitch and take it a face value, ie it’s a compromise. Well, it’s more a capitulation but get my point.

I get that it gives a load away, and actually in that context makes it a really daft treaty, but she utterly does not learn. Its politics not logic, and steamrollering again is not good politics....you have to at least take loyalists with you ffs. The old WA was a better bet, i do think some ERG might have cracked, along with some leave constituent labourites. Now she has screwed the pooch with at least half the tory mp's.

Banquo wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

Banquo wrote: She splurged it out without sharing the fine details with the cabinet or anyone else- and it wasn't merely an iteration as you've just highlighted. She could have taken time and hawked it a around, dividing and conquering, but no. Misguided, again.

Oh, yeah. She’s botched the sales pitch yet again. Though, why should we be worried about a sales pitch? These are our elected officials who run our nation. Geniuses, the lot. It reacts to everything that has been asked for. I’m not running through it again but it gives every faction something they want. MPs should be able to see past a non-existent sales pitch and take it a face value, ie it’s a compromise. Well, it’s more a capitulation but get my point.

I get that it gives a load away, and actually in that context makes it a really daft treaty, but she utterly does not learn. Its politics not logic, and steamrollering again is not good politics....you have to at least take loyalists with you ffs. The old WA was a better bet, i do think some ERG might have cracked, along with some leave constituent labourites. Now she has screwed the pooch with at least half the tory mp's.

Yep. It’s another f**k up. She was never suited to be leader and only became one because all her leadership rivals shot themselves in the foot one by one. She doesn’t learn from her lessons and her communication skills are dismal - great stories emerging about how she failed to tell anybody that Leadsom called to say she was resigning hence the initial public reaction from no10 that Leadsom’s resignation was a hostile act before having to row back.
BUT, people have been demanding she compromises, that she gives parliament more power. This wab does exactly that and still all sides shoot it down. What the f**k more do they want?
WAB 3 was defeated, she couldn’t bring it back. Not that it had a chance of winning a vote, regardless. It was only a few weeks ago you were telling me that the militant ERG numbers were in the late tens. What could she have done to persuade most of those and a few leaver Labs without losing a few off the Remain end of the ledger?
It’s a f**king mess and I’m starting to think we deserve a no deal Brexit. Luckily we’ve a bunch of clever clogs in parliament who will guide us through the choppy waters.
On the plus side, at least we can put to bed the notion that if only govt had compromised and given parliament greater say it all would’ve been, to stick with the boating theme, plain sailing.

Mellsblue wrote: On the plus side, at least we can put to bed the notion that if only govt had compromised and given parliament greater say it all would’ve been, to stick with the boating theme, plain sailing.

Now I get why you've been arguing with me, cause that does sound stupid. However, it's not the point I was trying to make - we should've had all this argument bollocks and tried to find a workable direction that parliament agreed on before going to the EU (preferably before triggering Article 50). Sure, we'd probably still be deadlocked, but at least we'd be deadlocked at the start of the process, rather than the end.

Puja

Puja wrote:

Mellsblue wrote: On the plus side, at least we can put to bed the notion that if only govt had compromised and given parliament greater say it all would’ve been, to stick with the boating theme, plain sailing.

Now I get why you've been arguing with me, cause that does sound stupid. However, it's not the point I was trying to make - we should've had all this argument bollocks and tried to find a workable direction that parliament agreed on before going to the EU (preferably before triggering Article 50). Sure, we'd probably still be deadlocked, but at least we'd be deadlocked at the start of the process, rather than the end.

Puja

I’m not sure spending years arguing before triggering Art 50 would’ve been sustainable, either domestically or on the continent. That's before you get to the issue that we could spend all that time negotiating only to be told on day one that it was a no go. Further, parliament have just rejected the idea that they should be the lead on the direction of negotiations. The official opposition have the chance to implement 90% of their policy on the matter - no single market, a customs union and safeguards on labour and environmental law - but have just moaned that it’s a rehash of WAB 2 and that May hasn’t moved, despite big concessions on parliamentary power, second ref and CU. She has thrown a large section of her party under a bus to give Lab a lot of what they want but it’s still a no, and a hostile no at that.

I think the idea that parliament would come to a consensus under its current make up is for the birds. They couldn't find one under the pressure of a deadline and they are now refusing to even take responsibility for the next stage of negotiations.

I get your despair at the inability of parliament to accomplish anything, but if we'd discovered that at the beginning, there would have been options other than the No Deal/No Brexit ones that we have now.

Mellsblue wrote:The official opposition have the chance to implement 90% of their policy on the matter - no single market, a customs union and safeguards on labour and environmental law - but have just moaned that it’s a rehash of WAB 2 and that May hasn’t moved, despite big concessions on parliamentary power, second ref and CU. She has thrown a large section of her party under a bus to give Lab a lot of what they want but it’s still a no, and a hostile no at that.

Technically true, but politically impossible. This is a Conservative deal, negotiated only be Conservatives, and publicised as the government's deal for a Conservative Brexit under Theresa May. Once that happened, it made it politically impossible for Labour to support it, no matter how it was amended. It could be 100% Labour policy and they would be wiped out in the next election for supporting the Tories.

The only way out of it was either to not have the stupid 2017 election in the first place, or to form a grand coalition after they'd lost it and give everyone ownership of the debacle. And the latter would've been unlikely for the reasons above. We are, and have always been, fucked.

Puja

Puja wrote:I get your despair at the inability of parliament to accomplish anything, but if we'd discovered that at the beginning, there would have been options other than the No Deal/No Brexit ones that we have now.

Mellsblue wrote:The official opposition have the chance to implement 90% of their policy on the matter - no single market, a customs union and safeguards on labour and environmental law - but have just moaned that it’s a rehash of WAB 2 and that May hasn’t moved, despite big concessions on parliamentary power, second ref and CU. She has thrown a large section of her party under a bus to give Lab a lot of what they want but it’s still a no, and a hostile no at that.

Technically true, but politically impossible. This is a Conservative deal, negotiated only be Conservatives, and publicised as the government's deal for a Conservative Brexit under Theresa May. Once that happened, it made it politically impossible for Labour to support it, no matter how it was amended. It could be 100% Labour policy and they would be wiped out in the next election for supporting the Tories.

The only way out of it was either to not have the stupid 2017 election in the first place, or to form a grand coalition after they'd lost it and give everyone ownership of the debacle. And the latter would've been unlikely for the reasons above. We are, and have always been, fucked.

Puja

What options would we have if parliament proved up front they couldn’t work to a solution?

If wab has always been unsupportable why did Lab go into talks with the wab as a basis, and why has Cable said the Lib Dems will support it on the proviso that there is a second ref? Also, why couldn’t parliament come to agreement during indicative votes if it was just the political framing of the wab that was the issue?

If Lab wanted to, they could’ve claimed a huge victory as wab 4 looks an awful lot closer to Lab Brexit policy than Con Brexit policy. They could’ve filled the airwaves and social media with the fact that they’d forced May to back down over parliamentary control, a CU and a second ref, and there is no way that May or the Cons could’ve argued otherwise. Yet they haven’t because their goal is for the govt to fall with a solution to Brexit as their second choice. It’s their stated policy.

The facts are that the we’ve tried a govt deal, that the EU have agreed to, indicative votes and cross party talks, and none have worked.

Mellsblue wrote:What options would we have if parliament proved up front they couldn’t work to a solution?

Another election, with Brexit being first and foremost as the criteria, rather than having situations like Soubry representing a leave area. Citizen's assemblies to work out what The Will of The People (TM) actuall... wait, I'm getting deja vu. Maybe we should leave this here.

Mellsblue wrote:If wab has always been unsupportable why did Lab go into talks with the wab as a basis, and why has Cable said the Lib Dems will support it on the proviso that there is a second ref? Also, why couldn’t parliament come to agreement during indicative votes if it was just the political framing of the wab that was the issue?

Because Labour are doing whatever will keep them electable and being seen to be willing to try and cooperate was popular. Actually propping up a decidedly Tory policy would not have been, so they got to have their cake and eat it by looking like they wanted to help, with no intention of actually doing so. Can only imagine the panic as May conceded on almost every negotiating point and nesrly forced them into running out of stumbling blocks!

Puja

Puja wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:What options would we have if parliament proved up front they couldn’t work to a solution?

Another election, with Brexit being first and foremost as the criteria, rather than having situations like Soubry representing a leave area. Citizen's assemblies to work out what The Will of The People (TM) actuall... wait, I'm getting deja vu. Maybe we should leave this here.

Mellsblue wrote:If wab has always been unsupportable why did Lab go into talks with the wab as a basis, and why has Cable said the Lib Dems will support it on the proviso that there is a second ref? Also, why couldn’t parliament come to agreement during indicative votes if it was just the political framing of the wab that was the issue?

Because Labour are doing whatever will keep them electable and being seen to be willing to try and cooperate was popular. Actually propping up a decidedly Tory policy would not have been, so they got to have their cake and eat it by looking like they wanted to help, with no intention of actually doing so. Can only imagine the panic as May conceded on almost every negotiating point and nesrly forced them into running out of stumbling blocks!

Puja

As you say, we’re just going over old ground. The one thing we can agree on is that the political system and those who inhabit it have let us down. Virtually nobody comes out of it well, from those who refused to accept the result of the referendum all the way through to those who seek a no deal Brexit.

However terrible she was (and she really, really was - almost certainly most incompetent PM of British history) At least her incompetence kept the rabid wing of her own party marginally in check, then next PM is more likely to enable them, and I don't see them calling a GE until after Halloween - slide out of the EU, blame everyone else for their own obstructionism, sell the country to Trump, and then sit back with a vastly inflated bank account and snipe from the sidelines.

A GE before halloween risks being kicked out of office almost immediately, and handing the deciding votes to remainers who will insist on applying democracy, and actually asking people what they want rather than just telling them.

Brilliant! Remainers listening to the people rather than telling them what to do. Exactly what they didn’t do after the referendum or the GE dominated by parties with Brexit manifestos.

If the Remainers wanted to avoid a Brexiteer PM they could’ve easily passed the WA.

Yes.
Remainers voted to invoke Article 50 in the first place.
Remainers wnt a referendum to hear the will of the people.

Leavers can't remember what happened on the campaign trail, and think that everyone voted for the hardest and hard brexits with no room for nuance.
Thank you for reminding me why I don't reply to you on this thread however. None so blind

I voted Remain and would do again, but will happily argue against those on the fringe at either end. Yes the avid Remainers mostly voted to trigger article 50 but have sought to frustrate it by almost every other deed.

Avid leavers are just as much to blame and I’ve said that many times. I’ll apportion blame where I think it is deserved regardless of whether they are on my side or not. I’ve criticised the leader of my party on here only today.

I may come across as a stringent Leaver on here as it’s a stringent Remainer echo chamber and I want some balance, but when the Leavers did come on here and say that the EU is bias against the UK I was happy to argue against that.

Finally, I won’t be called blind by someone happy to use hyperbole such as ‘sell the country to Trump’, and certainly won’t be called blind about politics by someone who doesn’t know the difference between resigning as a whip and resigning the whip.

Excellent twitter thread on May's demise and the challenges the next PM will face

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1131 ... 29440.html