But you don't know what their reasons were to vote FOR. Alot of Labour can see the government in decline and they can get into power via an election. The reasons and motivations are too many and confused. Many probably voted because they fear a No deal, some voted because they want a no deal, and some voted because they want to remain. Anna Soubry and 117 other Tories voted against as did many Labour MPs. You cant say that because they voted the same means they have the same reasons
I won't post up too much more because I have posted a lot but this caught my eye. John O Sullivan was an advisor to Margaret Thatcher and this tweet sort of echoes what Vin and I were/are arguing discussing earlier. Oliver Kamm playing the part of Vin talking about warning leavers of consequences and John O Sullivan echoing what I say........albeit from a much more credible position and much more eloquent wording. "And most people know it" being the key sentence:
Predicting the financial future is a very difficult task But the very basic core of any economy is transactions (the exchange of money/credit for something of value) - therefore anything which makes transactions more difficult to carry out, will negatively impact the economy. Almost every respected economist has said brexit is a bad thing. But no, Dave the racist UKIP voter obviously knows more than all of the greatest financial minds
It’s also worth remembering that this was the also largest rebellion by Tory MP’s EVER. 118 Tory backbenchers voted against their government.
The question is - did they do it because they are remainers? Or do they think a better leave deal is out there?
There is a substantial difference between "economic forecasting is tricky and imprecise" and "every scenario you can dream up is equally likely".
With the exception of withdrawing Article 50, the only way we will get what you ask for would be to elect a Labour Government.
Don't know who this Dave is you refer to. I was referring you to 2 highly educated minds on opposite side of the debate with quite in depth knowledge in political circles indeed one at the top. I wouldn't say John O Sullivan is a man on the street "Blurdy EU" type nor Oliver Kamm an activist "Fashist scum" type. I have uncovered a few other tweets that are quite interesting while I was reading that thread of theirs (it continued after I posted that one) but I promised not to post too much so I'll save them for future ammunition
Also factor in that government payroll is vast in this era compared to those previous records. This defeat could have been much much larger if the payroll was the size it was 10,20,50 years ago!!!
I don't look at it as "every scenario you can dream up...." at all. I do however take with a pinch of salt constant projections / forecasts that are presented as fact and we are told will happen by those with a vested interest from people who continually project stuff for those vested interests and continually have to revise and find reasons why it is still do with Brexit or is despite Brexit. If those projections had turned out to be true then we would not be having these arguments. And if Germany's growth booms to 1.7% for 2018/19 while the UK sloths along at 1.3%..........as predicted confidently by all then I'll happily concede they knew what they were on about.......such as "European commission says UK will join Italy at foot of growth league even with a soft Brexit" peddled out with gusto by remain supporters like the Guardian. Or I suppose I will have to concede that the reversal was down to us getting to the Semis and the hot hot sunny heatwave while Germany got knocked out early and a rain cloud hungover Germany throughout the heatwave. https://www.theguardian.com/busines...ext-year-european-commission-forecasts-brexit I'm not saying everything is possible. Just that continually forecasting doom that doesn't happen and saying "next time, next time" to the point that it takes so long for any semblance of forecasts being correct to happen people will say they are making 10 bets and then saying they are great gamblers when 1 of them comes in. p.s. The EU forecast on the US is interesting 2.9%, 2.6%, 1.9%............Hmmm Could these forecasts also be suffering because they don;t take into allowance that we stopped QE in 2015 (bar a splash in June '16) whereas the EU is only just ending? Could that have been skewing real growth figures over that period?
You're assuming that this is a thing that is happening. This is part of the problem. Yes, exogenous forces can shift forecasts. That does not devalue the very concept of economic forecasting. Yes, forecasting comes with sometimes substantial error bars. No, this does not mean that a very pessimistic forecast has every chance to become a very optimistic result. Rather, it means that your confidence intervals are somewhat large, meaning that a moderately pessimistic forecast may have as much as a 10-20% chance of producing an optimistic result, and a very pessimistic forecast may have a 10-20% chance of producing a moderately pessimistic result. Brexit is going to be economically damaging. There is absolutely zero reason to believe otherwise; it will be a massive hindrance to trade while providing not even the slightest short-term benefit, and even most of the proposed long-term benefits are largely fluff.
I voted to Remain as I could never see the logic of voting for something that jeopardised jobs in the UK. However, I think the Brexit debate has really shown the EU up to be really undemocratic and with hardened principles which ensure that it will always look after the interest of businesses and is appalling with dealing with social issues. If there was a vote again, I feel that I would still vote for remain but with much less confidence because I do not think it works in it's current form even though the idea is noble. For me there is a far bigger issue than Brexit. The defeat inflicted upon May this evening needs to be replicated in the nonconfidence vote. If you are an MP who objects to the deal that ha been put on the table, you are obliged to vote down this government . If you don't this makes you a hypocrite. This govt seriously needs to be put out of it's misery. The no confidence vote needs to succeed so that a socialist government can be put in place to deliver what has been denied to the working people for the best part of 40 years. What a Jeremy Corbyn government will deliver is social equality and increased public ownership and I feel that delivering this far outweighs the issue of Brexit. Delivering social justice and equality is far more important that belonging to a capitalist boy's club. So, for me, Brexit is a side issue. I just feel that we have within our grasp the opportunity to make some profound changes to this country. Kick May out and let's reverse the errors of the last forty years. The other issue I feel is really important is that Blue Labour got blamed for the financial crisis but the Tories have no produced a constitutional crisis that is unparalleled, Whatever happens, a Conservative government can never be allowed to govern this country again. I am just wondering if it is not time for the idea of keeping them out of office permanently and ensuring that they are never elected again.
These are 2 different things. Voting against the WA deal is vastly different to risking a Corbyn win in a GE (even if you are confident of a win, which they aren't) It is as much a vote of confidence in a Corbyn led government as it is a vote of confidence in a Tory government (May led or not.) The former is "Nope, you will have to come up with something else." The latter is "We've had enough, let them f*** things up." I think you will find tomorrow that a large amount of labour will swing in behind the "2nd referendum" cause now and try and force Corbyn's hand in making a 2nd referendum a real Labour policy..........at which point a GE becomes much more palatable for Tories because then Labour leavers will have no confusion anymore.........and May promised she would not lead the party into the next GE.
I agree that there is a minuscule chance of May being defeated tomorrow, but in a way Labour have to lose a NCV before Corbyn will be pressurised into to supporting a referendum. That’s the order of priority in the composite motion passed at Conference. We’ll see I suppose, but Labour stand a much bigger chance of winning if a second referendum is in the manifesto. I know you don’t believe opinion polls, and I have my doubts, but a recent one said that 60% of people wanted a second vote on Brexit.
