Brexit

[albionmoonlight]

I admit to not having followed this as closely as I probably should have. But I do have one noob question about it.

What was the first Brexit referendum? The UK voted to Brexit. And, ever since then, Parliament has been trying to pass a law to make it happen. So what was the vote if it wasn't the law?

Here, if there is a referendum on the ballot, you tend to vote for a specific law to pass. You levy a .5 cent tax on soda in the county and the money goes to purchasing new textbooks for the public schools. The bit on the ballot may be a short summary, but if you look for it, somewhere you can find the actual language that you are voting to pass into law.

We don't vote for something like "There shall be improvements to the public schools" and then have the legislature and the school boards fight over how to make that happen.

So what was, exactly, the Brexit vote?

[cartman]

basically your example was how it was worded:

The question that appeared on ballot papers in the referendum under the Act was:

Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?

with the responses to the question to be (to be marked with a single (X)):

Remain a member of the European Union
Leave the European Union

[Tommer]

How likely do you think a second referendum is at this point? Very, right? That would be a disaster and the beginning of the end of democracy imo though.

[ISiddiqui]

Referenda are always a dumb way to do democracy though. I would imagine if there was a second referendum folks would just say well we weren't told the full story in the first one, etc (after all it's easy to say leave but entirely another to work out what that means and every group had a different idea of what that meant). And then they'll never do huge policy decision through referendum again (or at least put a 2/3 on it).

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by Tommer

How likely do you think a second referendum is at this point? Very, right? That would be a disaster and the beginning of the end of democracy imo though.

Fascinating first post.

[digamma]

The difficulty here is in the EU provisions, not necessarily the ballot (though of course there are issues there).

The EU termination/withdrawal provisions were started by the referendum.

That led to the UK government needing to provide official notice under the EU docs (Article 50 notification if I recall correctly).

This notification led to a 2 year period for the withdrawing nation to negotiate the terms of its exit with the other member nations.

The resulting terms of withdrawal must then be approved by the EU member nations and the withdrawing nation.

If there is no deal, there is a deadline for a hard exit. This is the pending March 29 deadline. Under the hard exit, the withdrawing nation leaves with no agreements regarding things like trade, immigration, validity of contracts, etc.

So, in reality, I think you can view the referendum as starting a process that no one has been through before and with which no one could really anticipate the consequences.

[Izulde]

Whole bunch of stuff gets rejected by narrow margins, followed by overwhelming approval of the motion to extend Article 50 to June 30th if May's deal is approved by March 20th. Otherwise, they'll seek a longer extension.

Up to the EU to approve either extension scenario, though.

[miami_fan]

Brexit: MPs vote by 412 to 202 to seek delay to EU departure - BBC News

[bhlloy]

That's not the really big news though, the big news is that Benn's amendment that would have put the deal in the hands of Parliament was defeated by 2 votes (as well as an amendment on a second vote being thoroughly defeated after Labour wouldn't back it)

Either of those passing would have been absolute disaster for the Government and probably the final death for this iteration of Brexit - now she at least has some momentum on her side, and the EU can probably use the threat of an extension past the EU elections to finally get her deal through the Commons. The motion to extend was always going to pass - this is the first good news that May has had in a long time.

[AlexB]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Referenda are always a dumb way to do democracy though. I would imagine if there was a second referendum folks would just say well we weren't told the full story in the first one, etc (after all it's easy to say leave but entirely another to work out what that means and every group had a different idea of what that meant). And then they'll never do huge policy decision through referendum again (or at least put a 2/3 on it).

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

That’s the problem in the whole process. Although more people overall wanted to Leave, with the different types of Brexit people have in mind, the largest and most coherent group are in fact Remainers.

[cuervo72]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

Fascinating first post.

Right?

(I'd love an IP check on "Tommer.")

[SirFozzie]

Brexit in a nutshell (part 1)

Throughout the ages:

Some people in UK (Group 1): We shouldn't be part of the European Union. Hell, Churchill didn't want to be part of a united Europe. That's good enough for me.

Others (Group 2): Well, the problem is that we're deeply embedded in europe-wide rules, and trade, and getting us out would require about a decade plus of renegotiating treaties, and they wouldn't want to give us a deal, considering they don't want others to follow us. So, there's not much we can do.

Group 1: Bullshit! We're Great Fucking Britain (and Northern Ireland). We saved the world in World War II. We can handle anything. So what if there's a bit of pain in the transition, we can handle anything that comes our way. I mean, with that kind of attitude, the Huns would be singing the Nazi Anthem in London today!

David Cameron (PM at the time): Look, Since you yobs won't kindly shut the hell up about this bullshit, and I don't want to keep hearing this, how about this? We hold a public vote. If Leave wins, we'll figure out how to get out of the EU. And WHEN you lose, maybe we'll get some peace and quiet from you.

Group 2: Sounds Reasonable. I mean, look at the alternative.
Group 1: If we win, everyone gets a pony, the Health Service gets a bajillion pounds bonus. it'll be great!
Group 2: Wait, that's not true at all..
Group 1: See? They oppose it. Which mean we MUST be telling the truth.

(vote happens, Leave wins 51.9% to 48.1%)

Cameron: Oh shit.
Group 2: Oh shit.
Group 1: Oh Shit.. I mean yay! we won.
Group 2 (to Cameron): So, I assume you had a plan to deal with what happened if they won, right?

Cameron: Nope, but just now, I came up with a brilliant plan.
Group 2: Great, what is it?
Cameron: Resigning.
Group 2: That's not a brilliant plan.
Cameron: It is for me. Means I don't have to deal with this. Good luck, you're going to be facing about a dozen Gordian knots.

[SirFozzie]

Group 1 (now firmly in control). Great! I'm sure that now that we've set a date for us leaving the EU, we have all the power. I mean, think of all the deals we can renegotiate. We can play off the small nations against the big ones and..
EU: Um excuse me..
Group 1: It's time we stuck a finger in the eye of the krauts and the frogs and the..
EU: Hold on a moment.
Group 1: Yup, nothing can go wrong with this plan..
EU: WAIT A SECOND
Group 1: Eh, what?
EU: First of all, you're dealing with the EU as a whole. And secondly, you can't pick and choose what EU rules you want to follow and which ones you don't. All in or All out.
Group 1: But that's not what we told our voters!
EU: I think the requisite phrase is "Sucks to be you."
Group 1: Ok, maybe this is going to take a bit more effort than we thought. But at least we have a deadline. We have to leave March 29th, 2019, and surely the EU will blink as we get closer. It may hurt us a lot more than it does them, but the EU always folds.
EU: You know, it's not a good strategy to admit that your strategy depends on us caving when you know it will hurt you more than it does us for no deal.
Group 1: See, that's the kind of defeatist thinking that means we won't get everything we want.
EU: (shakes head)

[SirFozzie]

(some time passes)

Leave (formerly known as group 1): well, it's not great, but I think we can agree to this.

EU: It's the least bad option.

Hardcore Leavers: Wait, we promised everyone that we'd take control of borders and trade and sticking it to the EU. This doesn't go nearly as far as we thought it would. HELL NO! NO DEAL CRASH OUT! WE'LL CUT OFF OUR NOSES TO SPITE OUR FACE.

EU: That's a bunch of cutting, have you looked in the mirror lately?

Hardcore Leavers: WHAT DID YOU SAY?

EU: Oh nothing (to the Leavers): They're your problem. We've stated our terms. The least bad option is our deal. The next least bad is watching you leave, and using you as an object lesson to anyone else who wants to leave.

Leave: You know, that Cameron strategy looks better and better all the time.

Hardcore Leavers: BURN IT DOWN! ANARCHY IN THE UK!

Leave: OH SHUT UP WILL YOU. Look, take the deal.

Hardcore Leavers: No.

Leave: Look, it's this deal or no deal. It would cripple our economy for decades to come.

Hardcore Leavers: You say that like it's a bad thing compared to sticking it to the EU

Remainers: Since this is so intractable, maybe we should go back to the public and ask them what we should want to do?

Leavers and Hardcore alike: NO SHUT UP! WE WON THE VOTE FAIR AND SQUARE. SURE, WE BROKE ELECTION LAWS AND LIED OUT OUR ASSES TO DO SO, BUT NO TAKE BACKS!

Leavers: Ok, now that we've taken care of the Remainers, let's have another vote. It's either this deal or we have to delay Brexit. We don't want that.

Hardcore Leavers: OPTION C! NONE OF THE ABOVE! RULE BRITANNIA AND FUCK THE EU!

Leavers: Good thing is that we're only a couple weeks away, and although we've asked twice, all we have to do is wait and they have to take the deal. Sooner or later, they will come to their senses.

(Speaker Of the House): Um.. there's a problem with that.

Leave: OH FOR FUCK'S SAKE WHAT NOW???

(Speaker of the House): we have precedent that you can't keep asking the same question until you get the answer you like.

Leave: WE OBJECT!

(Speaker) It's a 400+ year old precedent. What do you object to..

Leave: WE OBJECT BECAUSE IT"S HARMFUL TO OUR CASE!

(Speaker) Did you just use a scene from Liar Liar to complain about politics?

Leave: WE OBJECT!

(Everyone) OH FOR FUCK'S SAKE FIGURE THIS SHIT OUT, THE NO-DEAL CLIFF IS COMING, AND RIGHT NOW, ANY ONE OF THE EU27 LEADERS CAN DECIDE TO CUT THE BRAKE LINE AND SEND US FLYING OVER THE CLIFF.

Hardcore Leavers (some of them at least): WE WANT THEM TO CUT THE BRAKE LINES!

Everyone: SHUT THE FUCK UP!

[miami_fan]

EU27 responds to UK requests in a positive spirit and:
👉 agrees to Art. 50 extension until 22 May if Withdrawal Agreement approved next week
👉 if not agreed next week then extension until 12 April
👉 approves ‘Strasbourg Agreement’
👉 continues no-deal preparations

— Donald Tusk (@eucopresident) March 21, 2019

https://www.consilium.europa.eu/medi...lusions-en.pdf

3.The European Council agrees to an extension until 22 May 2019, provided the Withdrawal Agreement is approved by the House of Commons next week. If the Withdrawal Agreement is not approved by the House of Commons next week, the European Council agrees to an extension until 12 April 2019 and expects the United Kingdom to indicate a way forward before this date for consideration by the European Council.

4.The European Council reiterates that there can be no opening of the Withdrawal Agreement that was agreed between the Union and the United Kingdom in November 2018. Any unilateral commitment, statement or other act should be compatible with the letter and the spirit of the Withdrawal Agreement.

[Edward64]

I'm so confused. It sounds as if they need another referendum to once-and-for-all decide? Or has there been another one already?

I think there's enough out there now where a decision either way can't be said to be made out of ignorance and that it truly would be the will of the people.

I'm good if the Brits decide to stay-or-leave just as long as its an informed (as much as possible) choice.

[SirFozzie]

Basically, May has been playing "My Deal or No Deal", but Parliament has rejected it twice. The main problem is there's a majority to reject May's Deal, but there's no majority for an ACTUAL way forward (No Deal, Softer Brexit, Remain, etcetera)

May's tactic (and somewhat the EU) has been "This is the deal on offer. It's this or nothing", and she's been trying to run out the clock to make it literally THIS or nothing. She's refused to modify her stance, refused to countenance anything BUT her deal.

So Right now, the only thing that everyone in Parliament can agree on is that May sucks (her own party can't get rid of her because they tried once previously, and they can't try again for like a year, but they don't vote for no confidence because that would likely trigger a new election, and they prefer things as they are.

May tried to publicly pressure the MPs, trying to rile up the nation's Brexiteers, but it's backfired as May is now getting blamed for the threats people are making, and rather hardened the MP's stance that "Fuck no, we're not going to vote for your deal".

So, right now, here are the UK's options

1) May has said that she will bring the withdrawal agreement again to the Commons next week. If it goes through, a technical delay will be necessary because well, they can't put everything through Parliament in a week.

2) If it fails, then the UK has until the 12th of april to indicate how they're going to move forward (They will have to hold euro elections, for example). If they don't, then no-deal happens and the UK crashes and burns.

3) For all of the Parliament that wants the withdrawal agreement modified to suit their needs, this is "Fuck no, that ain't going to happen. Stop dreaming".

So options (in order of what I think is most likely to happen)

Long Delay: I consider this most likely, because no one really can figure out what would get through Parliament. Meaningful Vote 3 (Ie, the third attempt to pass May's deal) fails. Brexit continues for a year or so while everyone tries to untie this gordian knot. What the outcome would be afterwards is still unclear.

No Deal: There are enough hardcore Euroskeptics in Parliament that I honestly can't think of a deal that would get past the Euroskeptics AND the Remainers AND the Soft Brexiteers. The UK crashes out, and trade takes a major hit because all those trade agreements are no longer in force. (I think they have post-trade agreements with only two of the EU27 nations, and one if them is Lichenstein for god's sake). So trade no longer happens "normally", and all kinds of shenanigans are on the table.

Meaningful Vote 3 gets approved, and passes. This is a hail mary play by May, but it's really the only move they keep trying. In this case, the Withdrawal Agreement comes into effect, and trade between the rest of the EU and England goes through under its terms.

[bhlloy]

I think meaningful vote 3 is infinitely more likely than no deal. If there is one majority in parliament it’s recognition that no deal is absolutely disasterous to almost every constituency in the country. Once it becomes obvious that the EU isn’t fucking around and this really is the last chance to avoid no deal, it will get through.

There’s really no incentive for the EU to back a longer delay without a commitment to another vote that remain has a very good chance to win, which isn’t happening without Labour and a decent number of Tory remainers throwing their weight behind it, which will then result in a good number of them losing their seats. And as we all know the first rule of politicians is self preservation, I just can’t see that’s a remotely realistic option either.

[SirFozzie]

LONDON (REUTERS) - Deutsche Bank on Thursday hiked its expectation of a no-deal Brexit to 20 percent - the highest level ever - from 10 percent as the third attempt to get UK parliamentary approval for the nation's exit from the European Union looms.

"The risks of a last-minute accident have increased," said Oliver Harvey, head of Brexit research at the German bank, adding that "government strategy appears to be being made off the hoof".

Deutsche Bank's new call on a no-deal Brexit came after JP Morgan also upped its chances of an exit without a deal to 15 percent from 10 percent. The deadline for an agreement on Brexit is next Friday.

Deutsche Bank cut its estimated chances of UK Prime Minister May winning the next parliamentary vote on her Brexit deal to 25 percent, from 35 percent previously.

So, according to Deutsche Bank, these are the odds of what's about to happen.

??????? 55%
No Deal 20%
May Deal Passed 25%

edit: Link to story, and this came "yesterday", so the EU notice hadn't happened yet.

https://money.usnews.com/investing/n...it-probability

[miami_fan]

She gone?

Theresa May to resign before next phase of Brexit | Politics | The Guardian


Also MPs voted on eight different alternative options to the May deal and all of them failed to get a majority.

[JPhillips]

May's been a disaster, but I have so much more respect for her than all of the other Tory assholes that bitch and complain but refuse to do anything else.

[Izulde]

Originally Posted by miami_fan

She gone?

Theresa May to resign before next phase of Brexit | Politics | The Guardian


Also MPs voted on eight different alternative options to the May deal and all of them failed to get a majority.

Qualifier there of *if* the deal passes.

I kinda don't think it will. Parliament's fuckery will hose them and the EU is already prepared for no-deal.

[bronconick]

Loses again, this time by 58

[miami_fan]

I guess since the margin is getting smaller with each vote.

May hopes to hold fourth vote on Brexit deal | Politics | The Guardian

Theresa May hopes to bring her Brexit deal back to parliament again next week after it was rejected for a third time by MPs – and appears poised to trigger a general election if parliament fails to agree a way forward.

[AlexB]

The definition of insanity is....

[SirFozzie]

So far today in Brexit:

We've had a story that at least one member of one party brought up the idea of stealing Parliament's mace (the symbol of Parliament's authority, they can't hold official sessions without it) , to make sure the UK exited the EU without a deal on 3/29 (the plan was shelved when they couldn't figure out where the mace was stored overnight).

Then, we had a nude-in protest by climate change protestors, which lead to a lot of English jokes about getting to the bottom of Brexit, and the cheeky behavior of some folks.

Said protesters have now apparently superglued their hands to the screen to keep from being carried out by cops.

I swear, if you made a gonzo version of House of Cards, it wouldn't be half as crazy as Brexit.

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by SirFozzie

So far today in Brexit:

We've had a story that at least one member of one party brought up the idea of stealing Parliament's mace (the symbol of Parliament's authority, they can't hold official sessions without it) , to make sure the UK exited the EU without a deal on 3/29 (the plan was shelved when they couldn't figure out where the mace was stored overnight).

Then, we had a nude-in protest by climate change protestors, which lead to a lot of English jokes about getting to the bottom of Brexit, and the cheeky behavior of some folks.

Said protesters have now apparently superglued their hands to the screen to keep from being carried out by cops.

I swear, if you made a gonzo version of House of Cards, it wouldn't be half as crazy as Brexit.

FAKE NEWS!!!!

They were semi naked😛

[miami_fan]

So once again none of the alternative options passed tonight. May has called for a cabinet meeting tomorrow with a possibility of a swift general election. IF a general election is called and IF the Tories lose, is Labour still required to go through with Brexit?

EDIT: Assuming the UK receives another extension before April 12.

[JPhillips]

Am I wrong in my understanding that they aren't required to go through with Brexit? Isn't that part of the insanity of all of this?

[bhlloy]

/giphy dumpster fire

[Marc Vaughan]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Am I wrong in my understanding that they aren't required to go through with Brexit? Isn't that part of the insanity of all of this?

Yeah its not 'required' - this was an advisory referendum and not legally enforceable nor is there any reason a second referendum couldn't be undertaken ... apart from a strange illogical urge by the people in power to follow this path off the cliff, the issues with the original referendum (blatant lying and abuse of funds by the Leave campaign amongst other things) have barely registered ... its all very strange ... especially when you consider the size of the protests against Leaving which have been huge in comparison to the supportive counter protests which have been attempted.

(at the very least I'd like to see a second referendum)

[ISiddiqui]

The other part of the cluster, of course, is that Labour's leader, Jeremy Corbyn, isn't really that big of a Remainer anyways. It was rumored that he was a secret Leaver - and at the very least would be fine with Leaving but in a different deal. I think if they were a robust Remain party, dedicated to second referendum, maybe they'd have more support.

[ISiddiqui]

Oh joy, now May is saying she wants another extension and wanting to use that time to have some talks with Corbyn to see if they can get a deal done that way (though Labour has said they want a custom union membership as part of any deal - so the UK would just be another Switzerland or Norway):

May to ask for short Brexit extension and reaches out to Labour | Politics | The Guardian

[SirFozzie]

And the Euroskeptics/hardcore leavers are yelling MARXIST at Corbyn and BETRAYER at May. They ain't happy.

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Oh joy, now May is saying she wants another extension and wanting to use that time to have some talks with Corbyn to see if they can get a deal done that way (though Labour has said they want a custom union membership as part of any deal - so the UK would just be another Switzerland or Norway):

May to ask for short Brexit extension and reaches out to Labour | Politics | The Guardian

They are asking for a lot of this organization they are trying to leave, ain't they?

[miami_fan]

Dola,

It goes without saying that it is in the EU's interests to get a deal done as well.

[ISiddiqui]

I do think the EU would be tickled pink if Brexit ends up being "we'll be Norway" sort of thing.

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

I do think the EU would be tickled pink if Brexit ends up being "we'll be Norway" sort of thing.

This is what is so confusing to me. Is that the version of Brexit the 51.9% voted for or would just Brexit-ing be good? I don't know

[bronconick]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

I do think the EU would be tickled pink if Brexit ends up being "we'll be Norway" sort of thing.

Well, yeah. "Have to deal with EU rules with no representation to influence it."

The Brexiteers didn't think their cunning plan through.

[Izulde]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

I do think the EU would be tickled pink if Brexit ends up being "we'll be Norway" sort of thing.

Yep. There's no sense to even Brexiting then. Either hard Brexit or Remain should be the options. Everything else is just turning the UK into a de facto vassal state to the EU

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by miami_fan

This is what is so confusing to me. Is that the version of Brexit the 51.9% voted for or would just Brexit-ing be good? I don't know

Well, no one knows what the version of Brexit the 51.9% voted for. I'm sure a small but substantial part voted for hard-Brexit. A good amount probably voted for magical thinking idealistic Brexit where the EU would let them stay in the common market but allow for restrictions on free movement of people (all the while not thinking about what that really means). Some likely voted for a deal that would be in the middle of those two, but no one has really come up with that deal that would be amenable to those folks.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Izulde

Yep. There's no sense to even Brexiting then. Either hard Brexit or Remain should be the options. Everything else is just turning the UK into a de facto vassal state to the EU

Really there should have been a more choices, or a deal already written up for voting. Voting on the vague concept of Brexit without articulating what that means other than leaving led to this mess. Technically being a vassal state to the EU is Brexit after all.

[miami_fan]

EU27 has agreed an extension of Art. 50. I will now meet PM @theresa_may for the UK government's agreement. #Brexit

— Donald Tusk (@eucopresident) April 10, 2019

[Izulde]

Funniest part? It's reportedly until Halloween with a June review date because Macron dug his heels in, and now the rest of the EU is salty at France.

[Edward64]

So does this mean UK stays?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...=.408895ae7c8b

Brexit talks between Britain’s two main political parties collapsed in a heap of finger-pointing Friday, with opposition Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn saying the “weakness and instability” of Prime Minister Theresa May’s government had damaged negotiations.

With her own Conservative Party lawmakers openly demanding a timetable for her departure, not a day goes by without Britain’s political class guessing when May will leave office. Will it be next month? Or July? Or October?

May has promised to offer a date soon.

In the tragicomedy that is Brexit, the latest narrative casts a deeply unpopular, fatally wounded but principled prime minister doing all she can to get her unpopular Brexit deal passed in the House of Commons.

May said this week she will seek an unprecedented fourth vote on her withdrawal treaty — you read that number right — in early June. The first three attempts ended in failure.
:
:
For the past six weeks, May and Corbyn have engaged in cross-party talks in hopes of finding a compromise that could break the Brexit deadlock and win a vote in Parliament.

Many saw it as doomed from the start — and a cynical play for time by both sides.

On Friday, Corbyn pulled the plug.

Labour said that they were uncomfortable striking a deal with a Conservative leader who could be gone within weeks.

“The increasing weakness and instability of your government means there cannot be confidence in securing whatever might be agreed between us,” Corbyn wrote.

May’s position as prime minister is as precarious as it’s ever been. Her Conservative Party received a drubbing in local elections this month and is expected to do poorly in next week’s European Parliament elections, with the opinion polls suggesting that the Tories will get trounced by Nigel Farage’s upstart Brexit Party.

[ISiddiqui]

It more likely means hard Brexit as there will be no deal when the deadline comes (and how many more 'extensions' is the EU going to grant when there is no progress on anything).

[Izulde]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

It more likely means hard Brexit as there will be no deal when the deadline comes (and how many more 'extensions' is the EU going to grant when there is no progress on anything).

This. Revoking Article 50 is tantamount to political suicide for whichever government invokes it IMO.

[bhlloy]

So is a hard Brexit. You are absolutely infuriating 40% of the country who will never vote for you again, pick which side you want to piss off.

If it's a Tory government, then I can buy the argument that most of those 40% probably aren't voting for you anyway. But still, there are wealthy conservative areas of the country that are not anti-EU that they would be wiped out in almost overnight. Hell, look at how much of their home counties heartland are wealthy bankers or import/export types. And they've already destroyed their credibility with many of the hardest Brexit supporters, although somebody like Boris or Rees-Mogg would probably get a lot of that back.

It's kinda hilarious to me that the Lib Dems are the main benefactors of this. It's a beautiful circle of life after self destructing when they finally seemed ready to start becoming the third main party the first time. Thanks Nick Clegg.

[ISiddiqui]

Yes. Labour would be basically unaffected if they decided to do a second referendum or just Remain. Though Corbyn isn't really a Remainer anyways, which makes it a bit more difficult.

[bhlloy]

That's actually not the case (and if I've missed sarcasm there I apologize) - many of Labour's core working class areas (South Wales valleys, the north east) are virulently anti-EU and some of the areas that voted highly in favor of Brexit to begin with. It's very sad and ironic to me to see the area I grew up in that has been a massive net gainer from EU money with such an illogical position, but it is what it is.

The results of the recent local elections bear that out. The Tories took an absolute caneing but Labour really didn't benefit that much. Both parties are pretty screwed right now, and unless a palatable Brexit deal gets done (chances of that are less than 0%) it's going to be an absolutely chaotic general election.