Another new Brexit thread

[blueinsa]

I think there's quite a lot more to be honest:

The Remain parliament (I seem to remember something like 450 to 500 of the 650 MPs are Remainers) have sought to portray Johnson as the liar, the duplicitous one not following or honouring the democratic mandate (of Parliament). The public, would seem to be thinking otherwise. There's a lot of Remainers like me who have reached the point where we think we just have to get on with it now.

The narrative of the country has changed its mind has always and remains false.

Its why talk of a second ref is just that, talk and we now have remain parties hiding from a GE.

They know they wont win either.

 

[Ban-jani]

No, it voted against a particular manifestation of leave, and is yet to agree on a manifestation of leaving that it approves. It is now out of our hands whether we leave or not on 31/10. It certainly hasn’t ignored the result. Anything but.

What’s interesting is the way the emotive term ‘ignored’ has been hijacked when what people mean is in fact ‘not been completed.’ That isn’t a surprise coming from some posters for a variety of reasons, but from you it surprised me.

Exactly.

The vast majority of MPs have voted for at least one flavour of Brexit. Parliament hasn’t ignored the result of the 2016 ref at all, they have done the opposite, almost to a man.

This entire issue is around the vagueness of the question asked in 2016 and Northern Ireland.

If NI wasn’t apart of the UK, we’d have left ages ago and would have probably got a good deal in the process.

 

[Ancient Citizen]

I think there's quite a lot more to be honest:

The Remain parliament (I seem to remember something like 450 to 500 of the 650 MPs are Remainers) have sought to portray Johnson as the liar, the duplicitous one not following or honouring the democratic mandate (of Parliament). The public, would seem to be thinking otherwise. There's a lot of Remainers like me who have reached the point where we think we just have to get on with it now.

That's exactly what has, and is happening. The constant 'Johnson is a ****' attacks may play well with some, but current trends, like the graph above, suggest it's not working.
Parliament, imo, is now playing into his hands, the people want an end to this now, and if it doesn't come on 31 Oct, he won't be blamed, which is what Labour want. 'Parliament versus the People' is a powerful slogan, but if they're seen to, yet again, ignore their A50 promise, and try to ram this ridiculous Benn act down his neck in an attempted humiliation exercise, I think he'd win the forthcoming election.

 

[smudgedj]

Tick tock M. Barnier
Parliament has just booked itself a sitting on October 19th
Expect Mrs Merkel on the steps of Downing St soon.

Merkel is too busy on the phone to Trump as he’s about to twat her car industry with tariffs.

 

[Ban-jani]

The narrative of the country has changed its mind has always and remains false.

Its why talk of a second ref is just that, talk and we now have remain parties hiding from a GE.

They know they wont win either.

Remain will almost certainly win against either a no deal or a specific type of deal, in another referendum.

If it’s just remain vs leave again, which would be stupid as we’d still be in the same position at the end of it, it’d be very tight again.

 

[Ancient Citizen]

This 'we' you speak of - does it include you?

It certainly doesn't include me;)

 

[George Hannah]

Just for @blueinsa - we know how much he loves Twitter ;)

 

[Didsbury Dave]

Why did we not leave the EU in March?

Because the reality of leaving did not match the lies of the Leave campaign. That, there, is your unsurmountable problem.

 

[kevin horlocks wand]

Sorry I’m not quite following the point you’re making. Are you saying that when they did that they were ignoring the referendum result?

No I am saying the MPs themselves are not only ignoring the referendum result/ not respecting/ not implementing - choose whichever you want

They are also ignoring their own vote in the House of Commons which almost unanimously voted to trigger article 50 deal, OR NO DEAL

But apparently nobody voted for no deal they claim, except nearly every MP when they triggered article 50.

 

[Ancient Citizen]

Because the reality of leaving did not match the lies of the Leave campaign. That, there, is your unsurmountable problem.

No, we should have left, simple as.

 

[blueinsa]

Just for @blueinsa - we know how much he loves Twitter ;)

Jean-Claude.....what a character.

 

[blueparrot]

No, we should have left, simple as.

If you believe in a scorched earth policy , yes we should. Except not even Rees Mogg or Johnson really believe leaving without a deal would be sensible.

 

[blueinsa]

Because the reality of leaving did not match the lies of the Leave campaign. That, there, is your unsurmountable problem.

It was the official remain campaign (Government under Cameron and Osborne, both remainers) that said we would leave with no deal, no single market, no customs union and it was parliament that voted for and invoked A50 that stated quite clearly that we leave with no deal if a deal isn't agreed.

Oh the lies.....

No problem is insurmountable no matter how much you want it to be or make it out as.

 

[Ancient Citizen]

Just for @blueinsa - we know how much he loves Twitter ;)

The end of the United Kingdom according to the
permanently refreshed Juncker is something we'll be chuckling about when his wine cellar isn't getting replenished at our expense.

 

[blueinsa]

If you believe in a scorched earth policy , yes we should. Except not even Rees Mogg or Johnson really believe leaving without a deal would be sensible.

Scorched Earth.

Not heard that one lol.

 

[Chippy_boy]

That's exactly what has, and is happening. The constant 'Johnson is a ****' attacks may play well with some, but current trends, like the graph above, suggest it's not working.
Parliament, imo, is now playing into his hands, the people want an end to this now, and if it doesn't come on 31 Oct, he won't be blamed, which is what Labour want. 'Parliament versus the People' is a powerful slogan, but if they're seen to, yet again, ignore their A50 promise, and try to ram this ridiculous Benn act down his neck in an attempted humiliation exercise, I think he'd win the forthcoming election.

The only fly in the ointment is how many of hard line Leavers will vote for Farage. Otherwise I agree.

I'm surprised Johnson has been so quick to rule out a pact with the Brexit party to be honest. Maybe he figures doing so would alienate more moderate Tories. But he's not just downplayed the possiblility he's burned his bridges and categorically ruled it out. He may live to regret that decision if we go beyond October 31.

I still think there's a chance we will be out in 3 weeks with a deal however.

 

[George Hannah]

Because the reality of leaving did not match the lies of the Leave campaign. That, there, is your unsurmountable problem.

'Insurmountable' - as in your insurmountable disrespect for any point of view that's not your own.

 

[Chippy_boy]

No, it voted against a particular manifestation of leave, and is yet to agree on a manifestation of leaving that it approves. It is now out of our hands whether we leave or not on 31/10. It certainly hasn’t ignored the result. Anything but.

What’s interesting is the way the emotive term ‘ignored’ has been hijacked when what people mean is in fact ‘not been completed.’ That isn’t a surprise coming from some posters for a variety of reasons, but from you it surprised me.

No, I am sorry, when MPs voted against May's deal they did so knowing full well that the public had mandated that we leave, and that the A50 2-year process was enacted by parliament with a huge majority.

To vote against May's deal was to ignore the mandate.

ignore
/ɪɡˈnɔː/
Learn to pronounce
verb
refuse to take notice of or acknowledge; disregard intentionally.​

If you want to play with semantics and to say instead of "ignore" it was "chose to disregard" then you can try. But to most people, that means "ignore".

 

[Ban-jani]

Fair play to Nick Ferrari, I think Leave.EU don’t represent all leave voters and they’re obviously managed by the extreme element-

"I was a reluctant Leave voter. I did not wake up every morning wanting to stick it to Jean-Claude Juncker and Brussels. I just felt it was going in the wrong direction.

"But when I see the poster that was put out by Leave.EU in which they refer to Germans as Krauts and also manages to choose a picture of Angela Merkel almost giving the Hitler salute.

"Do you know what, it almost makes me embarrassed to have voted Leave.

"That is exactly the sentiment that I despise

 

[FlemishDuck]

I do indeed try to present my views in a falsifiable form but in order to sustain intelligent debate that does require refutations to be rational.

Can you explain youre ethical rational for such a most counterintuitive and onconventional aproach? I don't often hear people saying what boils down to "i talk shit so people can expose my shit".

This is precisely my point in the example you chose but I'm afraid the ejaculations of denial cited as countering my argument don't qualify as rational i.e. giving good reasons for what is believed.

What do you even mean by this. Which of my counterarguments do you consider wrong, given that i presented quite a number of them?

They simply illustrate the shortcomings I described.

You mean, youre so unrepresentative of youre own view that you won't even go into detail on an argument presented to you as fact and proving you wrong? Youre ownly comeback is "i, in my infinite wisdom, judge it wrong"?

As for misrepresenting or misunderstanding Orwell, in the absence of any identification of the 'message' that you have in mind I can only refer you back to his own words - yet again - and request the evidence for your claims.

To be frank, you have the burden of the proof in regards to youre own claim that:

The EU's overriding political objective is to create the archetypal totalitarian nightmare state that Orwell warned about with his dying breath.

It will not do to refer/deflect to the book as if "one should just try to get what youre pointing at". Having the burden of the proof means that YOU must be able to present an analysis of the book 1984 yourself and point to the various elements which to youre view prove it's relevance to the judgement you make regarding the EU. If you can't then it proves youre just full of shit and are too stubborn to admit youre wrong when rightfully scrutinised besides being so terribly intellectually dishonest to try to wrigle out of it with a lot of deflection and also being quite unrespectfull to the great pieces of literature provided by us by the Honerable Brit know to us all as George Orwell. True, it's really but a irrelevant post on some internet forum, but you couldn't be more wrong in more rediculous ways imho, it goes so far as to perceive that youre conciously trolling and therby being rude to people here and especially disrespectfull to Orwell's legacy.

You wanna really know what 1984 is in terms of country's George? Maybe you should look at China for a different example. Nothing presently says 1984 quite so much like having a great firewall, nationalised media and even a social credit system.