Brexit...

[johnh]

12 hours ago, pete0 said:

What terrible people trying to stop our MPs from abusing power. 

If this situation happened in a third world country we'd have sent the troops over to intervene by now. 

That's why the EU are desperate for their own army.

[Palfy]

4 hours ago, Matt said:

He’s always been anti EU, which just emphasises your point I guess; gauges the wind and goes with it. 

The scary thing is that his buffoonery is an act. He’s a very clever tactician. 

He hasn’t always been anti EU, he saw that if he became anti EU he could make a name for himself. 

As you say he is very clever and and he made is way to the top by taking on the leaders of his own party, and if Cameron would have been a leaver you could say with certainty he would have remained a stayer. 

[Palfy]

13 hours ago, MikeO said:

Bemuses me in the extreme that anyone with a double figure IQ can't see Johnson's scandalous disregard for the country and the electorate; the man is in it for himself pure and simple. He jumped from being remain to being out purely because he decided it would give him personal public kudos in the Tory party never for a moment thinking leave would win. When they did he went into hiding because he thought, "Oh fuck what do I do now?"

Now as a chancer he's become an unelected PM (see his comments on Gordon Brown getting in under far more acceptable circumstances) and has forgotten his moral outrage and gone further by playing dictator. The man's a dangerous moron who will sell us out to Trump (an equally dangerous moron) the first chance he gets.

It used to be quite entertaining watching his buffoonery on Have I Got News For You, him in number ten is terrifying. 

How do we stop him rioting in the streets, Corbyn doesn’t fill me with the greatest confidence that he could unite all the parties and MPs against a no deal Brexit,  and unfortunately the most personable and forceful MPs seem to be on the Brexit side of the fence.

 

[MikeO]

52 minutes ago, Palfy said:

How do we stop him rioting in the streets, Corbyn doesn’t fill me with the greatest confidence that he could unite all the parties and MPs against a no deal Brexit,  and unfortunately the most personable and forceful MPs seem to be on the Brexit side of the fence.

What I find hilarious is the stream of Tory MP's blaming Labour/other opposition for the fact we're not out yet when in fact it was Boris and his cronies who stymied May's agreement. If it wasn't for the ERG we'd probably have come out in March.

[Matt]

4 hours ago, Palfy said:

He hasn’t always been anti EU, he saw that if he became anti EU he could make a name for himself. 

As you say he is very clever and and he made is way to the top by taking on the leaders of his own party, and if Cameron would have been a leaver you could say with certainty he would have remained a stayer. 

Yes, he was. He’s been telling lies about the EU since the 80s

but still, we can agree on him being a self serving fucktard

[pete0]

10 hours ago, RPG said:

A third world country would not have had a referendum in the first place.

I am not sure which MPs you are referring to, but those who agree with suspending Parliament are actually ensuring the democratic decision we made as a country in 2016 is finally actioned. It is the other MPs who would abuse their power if they could.

Something I was told recently by someone loosely connected to EU is that if the EU was applying to join its own organisation as an external candidate, it would fail its own acceptance criteria because of the way it is managed.

They're blocking it as they have every right to. We don't live in a democracy but please explain how blocking parliament to enforce a rigged vote is democratic? 

[Matt]

4 minutes ago, RPG said:

Where do you live? UK is a democracy.

Which vote was rigged?

Certainly the Remain side tried to rig it with project fear but the British public saw through it and still voted to Leave.

Ensuring that the outcome of a democratic referendum is actioned is laudable.

You may have missed this Rusty

On 28/08/2019 at 19:51, Matt said:

Yet again, the voice inside my head;

 

[pete0]

6 minutes ago, RPG said:

Where do you live? UK is a democracy.

Which vote was rigged?

Certainly the Remain side tried to rig it with project fear but the British public saw through it and still voted to Leave.

Ensuring that the outcome of a democratic referendum is actioned is laudable.

Liverpool. No it's not, just look at the appointment of Boris. 

Remain didn't put half as much manipulation in as leave not that that makes it okay either way. You ask the majority of non-racist leave voters what they voted for and it's a promise that will not be met. If you can't deliver on what you claimed then surely that invalidates the vote. 

It would be if it was from an informed public but the majority of the population did not know and was not told the ramifications. 

[MikeO]

33 minutes ago, RPG said:

Certainly the Remain side tried to rig it with project fear but the British public saw through it and still voted to Leave.

While the leave side were scrupulously honest. Good grief.

[MikeO]

3 minutes ago, RPG said:

No, they weren't, I agree. But to allege that it was rigged is to assert that one side fixed the result. They didn't. Both sides were as bad and the British public saw through it, just like they do at every election, andvoted for what they wanted.

I'm not suggesting it was rigged.

My memory might be a little rusty but I think the outcome was down to the remainers assuming they'd win and the leavers assuming they'd lose, the vote was decided by racists and xenophobes ultimately; they were in a minority but there were enough of them to swing it.

[MikeO]

3 minutes ago, RPG said:

I struggle to see how anyone who believes in democracy can have a problem with that.

I struggle to see how anyone who believes in democracy supports the undemocratically elected PM in place.

[pete0]

4 minutes ago, RPG said:

I think you do the British public a disservice. They did know exactly what they were voting for. It was spelt out time and time again, before the vote,  that it meant out of the Customs Union, out of the Common Fisheries Policy, out of everything.

It came as bit of a shock to Cameron that we voted Leave and, coward that he is, he did a runner. May was and always will be a Remainer. Now we have someone in charge whose opinion is far more aligned with that of the majority of the British electorate and he is delivering on the democratic outcome of the biggest democratic event in British history.

I struggle to see how anyone who believes in democracy can have a problem with that.

The media and social media manipulation rigged it. 

As for informed there's a big red bus that told everyone a big fat lie and none of the Brexit advocates mentioned a no deal scenario. 

People simply voted in or out without knowing the real consequences. Just look at the Welsh village were a load of people have now lost their jobs. I bet they will have changed their minds about brexit now and have learned a very cruel lesson. 

It's an outcome that is from the misinformed. If a crooked doctor told you you'd die if you never got your bollocks cut off but then a second less morally corrupted one took a look and said actually it'll be better off if they stayed in would you still commit to getting your bollocks cut off even though now you're more informed? 

[MikeO]

8 minutes ago, RPG said:

Well, we elect a Party to govern and the Party elects (and is at liberty to change) its leader. So I see no constitutional issue there at all.

Boris does, or did.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/personal-view/3640768/Browns-looking-for-a-Scottish-ally.html

Hypocrite of the highest order.

[MikeO]

3 minutes ago, RPG said:

Which means what - that it is ok for Labour to do it but not the tory party?

Labour went into that election with Brown as deputy PM and everybody knew that if Blair resigned/got ill/died Brown would step up, same as the VP in the US would.

Nobody voted for Johnson aside from a microscopic number of (largely) aging Tory members, there's no comparison.

[MikeO]

18 minutes ago, RPG said:

A lot more people (circa 100,000 more which was over 50% of the tory party electorate) voted for Johnson than for Juncker or his replacement so why is this system acceptable to you in EU (where you have far less voting rights than in UK) but not in UK itself?

50% of the Tory party membership, not the electorate, stick to the facts.

What's your view on his stance on Gordon Brown?

[pete0]

40 minutes ago, RPG said:

Well, in the end I guess it comes down to opinions. You can't categorically prove that yours is correct any more than I can categorically prove that it is wrong.

However, it was a very high turnout and that should have, statistically, ensured that the result accurately reflected the wishes of the country.

If the vote had been 52/48 in favour of Remain, Remainers would have been exalting the wonderful British democratic system which must be respected, so forgive me for a modicum of cynicism towards the Remain camp on this issue.

Opinions can be wrong. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-politics-44856992

How does a high turn out negate that the vote was based on the misinformation at the time. 

For me 52% isn't enough for drastic change. But the biggest issue is that the vote was skewed by lies. If its the will of the people at be afraid of another vote, with all the information about now surely you'd be more confident now people have a better understanding. 

[pete0]

12 minutes ago, RPG said:

I have to keep coming back to my original point that the British people are a bit smarter than you seem to want to give them credit for. I agree that there was misinformation on both sides but no more than we see in an average general election. The electorate filter and assess the credibility of what they hear and then vote. We then seem to accept the result of a general election even if we may not like it.

Perhaps we can try to do the same with the referendum as I really can't see it being stopped now.

Her Majesty has agreed to prorogue Parliament and I can't see any Court going against that.

Many come out and said they voted for the NHS bus. Many were influenced by the racist propaganda used by the infamous dictators of the past. It's influential and it tricked/persuaded people. 

[MikeO]

11 hours ago, RPG said:

What is your view on Von der Leyen's 'appointment' as next President of EU Commission? Technically it is a democratic election under the veneer of democracy that the EU tries to cloak itself with. But she got just over 300 votes and her name was the only one on the ballot paper. What are your thoughts on that?

That she was chosen under the rules of the organisation she now heads. There was only one question on the ballot paper but two possible answers so if that was, "Technically....a democratic election under the veneer of democracy..." how was the referendum ballot paper different?

[johnh]

1 hour ago, MikeO said:

That she was chosen under the rules of the organisation she now heads. There was only one question on the ballot paper but two possible answers so if that was, "Technically....a democratic election under the veneer of democracy..." how was the referendum ballot paper different?

Well, Mike. if you are equating the referendum with the EU election, that both must be democratic,  then it follows that any action to usurp the referendum must be undemocratic. Which we all know it is.

[holystove]

When the EU adopts more democratic practices and becomes more State-like, eurosceptics balk and say they only want a Common Market.  When the EU is run like an international organisation, and everything gets decided by the Member States, eurosceptics say it is not democratic enough.   

The debate has become silly as noone will convince anyone of anything anymore; choose your facts, twist them and make your case.   However, to his credit, Johnson has finally ended the debate which is more democratic, the EU or the UK.  It's not the one where a party-appointed leader can suspend Parliament to prevent it having a say on his interpretation of the "will of the people".  Ironically, behaviour like that is grounds for getting your voting rights suspended in the EU council.

[MikeO]

2 hours ago, RPG said:

And we voted Leave under the rules by which our country is run so, surely, you must support both outcomes or neither?

I don't have to "support" anything I don't like or agree with and neither does anyone. After general elections we don't all fall into line behind the winners, that's why we have an "opposition".

[MikeO]

3 hours ago, johnh said:

Well, Mike. if you are equating the referendum with the EU election, that both must be democratic,  then it follows that any action to usurp the referendum must be undemocratic. Which we all know it is.

I didn't say that both were democratic or undemocratic (that was RPG's inferrence), I said that both offered a binary choice-which they did.

[MikeO]

2 hours ago, RPG said:

Ok, delete 'support' and insert 'respect.'

Personally I find it difficult to respect serial liars and their head hypocrite.

https://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/list-of-brexit-lies

[Romey 1878]

What a complete and utter clusterfuck this is all round. I don’t think anyone, or either side, has covered themselves in glory. 

[MikeO]

5 minutes ago, Romey 1878 said:

What a complete and utter clusterfuck this is all round. I don’t think anyone, or either side, has covered themselves in glory. 

It is but that's what happens when our elected representatives abrogate their position and put a decision in the hands of people who have no idea of the consequences involved; Cameron to blame all day long.

[Chach]

On 28/08/2019 at 23:23, MikeO said:

We now have an unelected PM trying to bypass elected MP's 

 

On 29/08/2019 at 05:56, MikeO said:

Now as a chancer he's become an unelected PM

 

On 30/08/2019 at 03:57, MikeO said:

I struggle to see how anyone who believes in democracy supports the undemocratically elected PM in place.

This is just terrible reasoning mate and I say this as someone who pretty much shares every bias you have regarding Brexit and politics in general. There's so many good faith arguments you can make for a change of leadership, I don't think the Brown/Blair comparison stands up at all. We don't even have to go back very far in this thread to find you declaring that May was a disaster and she couldn't even form government in her own right after her GE. 

There was no option to vote for "leave with a good deal" so you have to take that vote as a "leave come what may". How can the parliament then legislate to stop that happening and then accuse others of being undemocratic?

I am going to advocate for the devil and offer up a alternative position for the decision to suspend parliament at such a critical time

Boris knows the Europeans are shitting their pants at the prospect of a no deal Brexit, the leaders of the opposition and minor parties are actively reassuring the Europeans that they will legislate to stop that happening, Boris is giving himself some time to bully the Europeans into making concessions that the parliament will vote for. [respond to this bit I'm just putting the next bit in for the lols]

Deep down you know this might work and now you are shitting your pants Boris is going to save the day and the imminent destruction of the Tory party you have dreamed of will be averted. 

[holystove]

4 hours ago, Chach said:

..

There was no option to vote for "leave with a good deal" so you have to take that vote as a "leave come what may". How can the parliament then legislate to stop that happening and then accuse others of being undemocratic?

..

I very much disagree with this.  Even Leave.EU, Farage's outfit, stated in their official plan (sadly now deleted from their website but still available elsewhere on the internet) the UK would leave the political institutions after 2 years, and the economic partnership only after 10.  There is noone, literally noone, that talked about no-deal during the campaign.  Raab tried to claim he did, but all factcheckers showed he didn't and even Gove called him out on it.  No-deal is the legal default, but based on the referendum result it cannot be the political (or economic) default.

 

4 hours ago, Chach said:

...

I am going to advocate for the devil and offer up a alternative position for the decision to suspend parliament at such a critical time

Boris knows the Europeans are shitting their pants at the prospect of a no deal Brexit, the leaders of the opposition and minor parties are actively reassuring the Europeans that they will legislate to stop that happening, Boris is giving himself some time to bully the Europeans into making concessions that the parliament will vote for. [respond to this bit I'm just putting the next bit in for the lols]

Deep down you now this might work and now you are shitting your pants Boris is going to save the day and the imminent destruction of the Tory party you have dreamed of will be averted. 

Britain's economy is far more exposed to Brexit risks than the rest of Europe. Maybe the Irish are shitting themselves but even they will not experience as much disruption as the UK; when you go east of Germany, Brexit barely registers.  The FT put it very clearly two days ago: "Brexiter's suggestions that the EU will capitulate because they dare not risk a no-deal rupture misunderstands the fundamental weakness of threats made with a gun pointed at your feet". 

[Chach]

35 minutes ago, holystove said:

I very much disagree with this.  Even Leave.EU, Farage's outfit, stated in their official plan (sadly now deleted from their website but still available elsewhere on the internet) the UK would leave the political institutions after 2 years, and the economic partnership only after 10.  There is noone, literally noone, that talked about no-deal during the campaign.  Raab tried to claim he did, but all factcheckers showed he didn't and even Gove called him out on it.  No-deal is the legal default, but based on the referendum result it cannot be the political (or economic) default.

You're addressing a different point, but why would Leave be warning of a no deal Brexit? Leave wanted to leave, that was Remain's job and the economic consequences of leaving were talked to death. 

Imagine a political campaign run by a leader on the basis of "we will create 100,000 new jobs and grow the economy" with a caveat added that they may create no jobs and no growth, its fanciful to expect politicians to offer up the worst case scenario, and you know what, lets just for once in the whole debate give the voters some agency.

If you were worried about what deal you were going to get you put an x next to remain.

[Chach]

37 minutes ago, holystove said:

Britain's economy is far more exposed to Brexit risks than the rest of Europe. Maybe the Irish are shitting themselves but even they will not experience as much disruption as the UK; when you go east of Germany, Brexit barely registers.  The FT put it very clearly two days ago: "Brexiter's suggestions that the EU will capitulate because they dare not risk a no-deal rupture misunderstands the fundamental weakness of threats made with a gun pointed at your feet". 

I still think it's very likely they prefer a deal, and the threat of no deal is the only real option to see where their pain threshold is.

Does anyone east of Germany have any political clout?

[Palfy]

59 minutes ago, Chach said:

I still think it's very likely they prefer a deal, and the threat of no deal is the only real option to see where their pain threshold is.

Does anyone east of Germany have any political clout?

But if we are not to stay in then it has to be a no deal. 

The thought of a half way house fills me with more dread than a no deal, stay or go and nothing in between because the in between will benefit the EU and hurt us.