Another new Brexit thread

[Vic]

You've got to laugh, a tweet holding up the bindippers as a benchmark is beyond parody.
I'm sure someone will attempt it though ;)

Another one. Are you saying that Sun readers in Liverpool have less capacity for intelligent reasoning than Sun readers elsewhere? The whole point is that Sun readers everywhere have less powers of intelligent reasoning than most other people - that is why they read the Sun. So they are more likely to accept uncritically what they are fed by the paper. The paper was virulently anti-EU (not the Irish issue of course, that is pro-EU) so - the research suggests - when they voluntarily switched to the pro-EU Mirror they were more likely to vote remain.

I really should not need to explain this to anyone capable of intelligent reasoning.

 

[west didsblue]

I said;


Tax increases, 500,000 extra unemployed etc;
That's statements made by remain, I think you may have inadvertently misunderstood.

I did misunderstand your point.
However my point stands, Vote Leave effectively issued a manifesto stating what leave meant which the government have studiously ignored from the day after the referendum thanks to the ERG and DUP who have driven the agenda since then. Any predictions by Remain are irrelevant in this context as they were predictions not pledges. The equivalent manifesto pledge by Remain was to maintain the status quo, for which nothing more needed to be said.

 

[BobKowalski]

From the FT’s political correspondent

‘The opposition parties (and some pro-EU Tories) have concluded their meeting - they agreed a "joint legislative approach" to stop no-deal Brexit as plan A, with vote of no confidence only the last resort’

 

[Ancient Citizen]

Another one who doesn't recall....

The Leave campaign got the question changed. The original was "Should the Uk remain a member of the European Union? Yes or no."

"On a narrow and strict reading of the (final) question, it meant there was a small but clear majority for the whole of the UK to leave the EU, at some point, by some means, with the country also leaving or not leaving the single market, the customs union or Euratom, and with some kind of relationship with the EU to follow, or not." Then May (to satisfy whom? - not Remainers) added red lines about the UK taking control of its money, laws and borders, which meant that the UK could not be a member of the single market, the customs union, or Euratom, in effect making a nonsense of all the Vote Leave promises cited above.

Give Remainers what was promised, and it would probably have sailed through. It is Tory hardliners to blame for this - for the referendum, for the post-vote red lines, and for Remainers now trying to stop the whole farce.

Yawn.
Leaving the single market and customs union was spelled out, I'm not putting up the same old vids again.
'Yes or No' would also not be qualified by the wish list presented here, and leave or remain, yes or no, go or stay,
or other such cobblers is straw clutching.

 

[west didsblue]

Yawn.
Leaving the single market and customs union was spelled out, I'm not putting up the same old vids again.
'Yes or No' would also not be qualified by the wish list presented here, and leave or remain, yes or no, go or stay,
or other such cobblers is straw clutching.

Yawn.
Yes we will leave the single market but "There is a European free trade zone from Iceland to the Russian border and we will be part of it."
Not "we will try and be part of it" or "we might be part of it".
That wasn't a wish list, it was a campaign pledge.

 

[hgblue]

Why are you shocked? Did you imagine reversing 40 years of trade and foreign policy and plunging ourselves into negotiations with 27 other countries, all of whom would be keen to ensure that they were unaffected by the vote, was going to be straightforward? Did you think removing our rights as EU citizens would not be resisted or that people concerned for their livelihoods would not be vocal in opposing actions that threatened those livelihoods?

People have a right to protest, oppose and block policies proposed by a Govt that wins an election so I fail to see why the same wouldn’t happen on an advisory referendum that secured a narrow win and on the back of promises that three years later proved to be false.

If we had voted narrowly to Remain and a Leave dominated Parliament had taken us out anyway you would feel the same way?

 

[Ancient Citizen]

Another one. Are you saying that Sun readers in Liverpool have less capacity for intelligent reasoning than Sun readers elsewhere? The whole point is that Sun readers everywhere have less powers of intelligent reasoning than most other people - that is why they read the Sun. So they are more likely to accept uncritically what they are fed by the paper. The paper was virulently anti-EU (not the Irish issue of course, that is pro-EU) so - the research suggests - when they voluntarily switched to the pro-EU Mirror they were more likely to vote remain.

I really should not need to explain this to anyone capable of intelligent reasoning.

Yet more nonsense, and directed in the usual smug know all way that caused your side to lose the vote.
I know you'd prefer it if there were no conflicting views to your own ever allowed to be presented, and that people
should be forced to read what you tell them, but they don't, won't and never will.
The Dippers banter is simply that, one we all exploit on here without remorse or pity, but it's still, unless your a complete moron,
just that.

 

[Ancient Citizen]

Yawn.
Yes we will leave the single market but "There is a European free trade zone from Iceland to the Russian border and we will be part of it."
Not "we will try and be part of it" or "we might be part of it".
That wasn't a wish list, it was a campaign pledge.

Bless.

 

[west didsblue]

Bless.

Thank you vicar.

 

[Ancient Citizen]

I did misunderstand your point.
However my point stands, Vote Leave effectively issued a manifesto stating what leave meant which the government have studiously ignored from the day after the referendum thanks to the ERG and DUP who have driven the agenda since then. Any predictions by Remain are irrelevant in this context as they were predictions not pledges. The equivalent manifesto pledge by Remain was to maintain the status quo, for which nothing more needed to be said.

Corbyn pledged to honour the vote, parliament voted, around 495 of them, to implement article 50, which also
doesn't say only with a deal, we were pledged, in law to leave at the end of March, May used executive powers to stymie that.
Johnson could could do exactly the same thing, although not the thing you want, let's see what Jezza's cunning ruse brings.

 

[west didsblue]

Corbyn pledged to honour the vote, parliament voted, around 495 of them, to implement article 50, which also
doesn't say only with a deal, we were pledged, in law to leave at the end of March, May used executive powers to stymie that.
Johnson could could do exactly the same thing, although not the thing you want, let's see what Jezza's cunning ruse brings.

Not sure why you're answering a point not made.
Deliberately conflating a campaign pledge which contributed to the referendum vote with a Parliamentary vote that was presumably put through in good faith on the assumption that the government would work to achieving the campaign pledges is not really appropriate. But I suppose it muddies the waters so it'll do.

 

[Ancient Citizen]

Not sure why you're answering a point not made.
Deliberately conflating a campaign pledge which contributed to the referendum vote with a Parliamentary vote that was presumably put through in good faith on the assumption that the government would work to achieving the campaign pledges is not really appropriate. But I suppose it muddies the waters so it'll do.

Parliament, collectively, promised to honour the referendum.
The parliamentary vote after it, was taken in the full knowledge of article 50, which stated leave on 29 March.
It doesn't get clearer, or more appropriate than that.
We voted to leave, or to utilise the pedantry adopted by some, go, not stay, quit, depart.
Parliament supported that by invoking the article.

 

[Vic]

Yawn.
Yes we will leave the single market but "There is a European free trade zone from Iceland to the Russian border and we will be part of it."
Not "we will try and be part of it" or "we might be part of it".
That wasn't a wish list, it was a campaign pledge.

More than a pledge - a statement of fact that didn't even require a deal.

 

[Vic]

Yet more nonsense, and directed in the usual smug know all way that caused your side to lose the vote.
I know you'd prefer it if there were no conflicting views to your own ever allowed to be presented, and that people
should be forced to read what you tell them, but they don't, won't and never will.
The Dippers banter is simply that, one we all exploit on here without remorse or pity, but it's still, unless your a complete moron,
just that.

So my nonsense is being smug. Your nonsense is banter. OK.

 

[BobKowalski]

If we had voted narrowly to Remain and a Leave dominated Parliament had taken us out anyway you would feel the same way?

If a leave dominated Parliament/Govt was elected on the basis of a detailed route out of the EU and a clear idea of what the future relationship would be (close, diverged, Norway or Swiss based etc) and specific arrangements for NI then they would be at liberty to do so.

Just as the 2017 Parliament returned a hung Parliament and a majority against a no deal Brexit and is within its rights to block such an outcome.

 

[mat]

Which self serving **** will fuck this up?

 

[Vic]

Oh, I'm not so sure about that ;-)

We weren't one nation then. That was the sort of violence needed to create one nation....

Plus an early verdict on Brexit.

 

[Vic]

Yawn.
Leaving the single market and customs union was spelled out, I'm not putting up the same old vids again.
'Yes or No' would also not be qualified by the wish list presented here, and leave or remain, yes or no, go or stay,
or other such cobblers is straw clutching.

Spelled out by Remain. Dispelled as scaremongering by Leave.

 

[KS55]

Seems to me ppl ought to study Article 50. Is the withdrawal agreement legal?
Would a no deal exit be legal?
Note EU and UK cannot change the law, merely by agreeing to ignore it.

 

[BobKowalski]

Joint statement issued