Another new Brexit thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ric
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Chris in London said:
Well that can’t be right, can it? In your first reply you said you would choose neither to which I replied that I read that as meaning you would abstain. So that’s not telling you you have to choose one or the other, it is? It was only after I said that an abstention was one fewer leave vote that you changed to no deal.

Want to have another go?
Click to expand...
Why have you cropped the rest of my reply?
 
Chris in London said:
Not at all. Read the thread
Click to expand...
I have read it. You keep asking the same question and he keeps giving you the same answer.

He wouldn't campaign for no deal (i.e. support it) but he would vote for it if the only choice is that or remain.

I personally would choose remain over no deal any day of the week but it's pretty clear what his stance is whether you agree with it or not. You've made him (and now me) state it enough times!
 
Mëtal Bikër said:
Then why be surprised by my response, only to call it "contradictory"? I wouldn't "support" Utd vs Liverpool in a Champions League Final, but if someone like yourself told me I had to make a choice, knowing I wouldn't choose abstaining, why be surprised by my response, even if you found it "contradictory" to my opinion that I don't "support" either team? Sorry to bring "footbalisation" into it, but it appears the only way to make you understand.

Leaving the EU is what I support, no matter how it is carried out. In your binary choices, that leaves me with only one theoretical option, even if I don't "support" it.

I don't share your view about a binary choice. You are the one who believes there will be a binary choice. So long as a deal is possible, I will vote to leave the EU.
Click to expand...
Answer the question MB. who would you support, Utd v Pool.

I’d just give up watching football.
 
mancity2012_eamo said:
Answer the question MB. who would you support, Utd v Pool.

I’d just give up watching football.
Click to expand...
In that scenario, probably 'Pool, because I know how much it'd hurt the Rags. Then i'd hope Liverpoo would be banned for some irregularity.

#MBisnowaPoolfan
 
UK Govt charade in full swing tonight.

'We made big concessions and offered a workable deal but those nasty people in the EU said no. It's all their fault' Or words that effect.

Fuck off Johnson you gimp. We know what you're doing.
 
[
Dubai Blue said:
I have read it. You keep asking the same question and he keeps giving you the same answer.

He wouldn't campaign for no deal (i.e. support it) but he would vote for it if the only choice is that or remain.

I personally would choose remain over no deal any day of the week but it's pretty clear what his stance is whether you agree with it or not. You've made him (and now me) state it enough times!
Click to expand...

Plainly you haven’t, or not carefully enough. Nobody said anything about what he would campaign for.
 
Chris in London said:
[


Plainly you haven’t, or not carefully enough. Nobody said anything about what he would campaign for.
Click to expand...
You gave me a binary choice, one which I said I wouldn't support, and then claimed that in such a binary choice, my default position must be that i'd abstain.

When I said I wouldn't abstain and that in such a binary choice, I would choose one over the other, in that scenario. You then said I was contradicting myself.

I've given you a number of examples, you've refused to listen, and am beginning to think you're not capable of grasping the concept that making a choice doesn't always mean endorsing that choice.
 
Mëtal Bikër said:
Yes, I would choose to support neither.

No, I would not abstain from voting in a binary choice, if those were the only two choices available, I would vote for the one which satisfied the public mandate to leave the EU, which given one is not leaving and the other IS leaving, i'd choose the one that was.

Given in that scenario you presented, the "leave" option is to "leave without a deal", something I do not wish to conclude, support, champion or campaign for, you leave me with onyl one choice, remaining, something I also do not support, much less than the other singular choice you gave. Neither have I ever stated I would abstain if that binary choice were presented to me. YOU assumed that on your own.

From that, you've dragged it on, trying to imply i'm being contradictory for supporting one stance over the other, whilst previously stating I don't support either stance. I even gave you an analogy to show how such a stance is possible, yet you still refuse to accept it. Why?
Click to expand...

I haven’t implied anything, I’ve directly said you contradicted yourself because you did. If you don’t understand the difference between an implication and a direct assertion it’s probably no wonder that you are struggling to understand where you contradicted yourself.
 
Mëtal Bikër said:
But it takes out of context my reply that explains my reasonings.

Why would you do that?
Click to expand...

No it doesn’t, it responds to the point i wanted to respond to. Anyone interested in your full reasoning will either have already read it, or will have the opportunity of doing so.
 
Chris in London said:
I haven’t implied anything, I’ve directly said you contradicted yourself because you did. If you don’t understand the difference between an implication and a direct assertion it’s probably no wonder that you are struggling to understand where you contradicted yourself.
Click to expand...
Again, you don't understand the concept of making a choice and endorsing that choice.

If I had said "in that scenario, i'd choose remain", you'd have said I'd be contradicting myself, knowing my stance of wanting to leave the EU and then join the EFTA.
 
Chris in London said:
No it doesn’t, it responds to the point i wanted to respond to. Anyone interested in your full reasoning will either have already read it, or will have the opportunity of doing so.
Click to expand...
Believe me, they have, and been forced to see me repeat it ad infinitum because you refuse to accept/understand my position.

Approaching Page 5
 
Mëtal Bikër said:
Again, you don't understand the concept of making a choice and endorsing that choice.

If I had said "in that scenario, i'd choose remain", you'd have said I'd be contradicting myself, knowing my stance of wanting to leave the EU and then join the EFTA.
Click to expand...

So you would make a choice that you don’t endorse (in fact one you abhor) and you would prefer to do that than to abstain.

Is that it?
 
Chris in London said:
So you would make a choice that you don’t endorse (in fact one you abhor) and you would prefer to do that than to abstain.

Is that it?
Click to expand...
If I said i'd vote to remain, i'd still be making a a choice I wouldn't endorse and abhored, wouldn't I. So you'd still call me "contradictory", wouldn't you.

You gave me a binary option. Abstaining is not an acceptible choice as no deal still satisfies my stance of leaving the EU, doesn't it. It's not preferred, and I hope to avoid it, nor would I recommend that course of action, but in the BINARY choice you presented to me, i'd choose no deal over remaining.

You cannot choice abstaining in the BINARY choice you presented. Nor would I abstain in a binary choice, as i'd be pressed into making one, even if I didn't endorse either. It's the giant douche/turd sandwich paradigm.
 
Sorry to interrupt but the Newsnight exchanges between Boles, Lilley and Benn are poisonous stuff. The comparison between France/Corsica or Italy/Sicily making equivalent concessions to GB/NI is a telling point against those who claim there is no real attempt to get a deal. The accusation is squarely made by Maitliss to Benn that his backbench Act in August was timed to sabotage the very likely possibility of the EU re-opening the backstop legal text.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top