Another new Brexit thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ric
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I thought you were employed to bombard this board with shite, trying to convince people that this government isn’t a fucking mess and won’t be responsible for fucking up the country for future generations?
Nope - that is not me, but I agree that there is some shite posted on here

If you had been paying attention to my posts you would have no doubt about the contempt that I have had for this government over the last 3 years and would not suggest that I defend them.

Also - there are quite a lot of posts that reflect that some Remainers continue to be abusive and utterly intolerant of Leavers having the right to hold their own opinions

We have gotten used to it and just acknowledge that it says a lot about the character of those posters - no point letting it bother you
 
Last edited:
It isn’t. When we go back to the EU following no deal, the same deal we have on the table now, will be on the table then. The difference being is we’ll have already trashed our economy and reputation with our neighbours.
I accept that is your opinion

Mine is that May's WA is so bad I would rather we revoke than accept that shit deal
 
I think you need to read this again because I stopped when I read the quote contained "My professional opinion is that". When you read it you realize that the conclusions are solely based upon moronic and prejudiced assumptions.

Let's face facts, there wasn't a pre-vote, there was only one vote and so one total measure of peoples voting intentions. It is therefore flawed or totally impossible to ascertain how people were going to vote prior to the referendum.

I can say that 70% were going to vote leave but then bottled it on the day. Even this Oxford professor couldn't prove me wrong because he has no second data set of pre-referendum voting intentions that says otherwise.

With this in mind, no-one can prove that even 1 vote was influenced by these ads because there is no like for like comparison. The only way to make that comparison is to assume, IE, make it up and in science that is where prejudice is allowed in and credibility collapses.

Only an idiot couldn't see the flaws and this kind of stuff just insults peoples intelligence.

No matter how many models you make, you still cannot assume that 2+2 might equal 5.
Whitewash and dismiss all you want, every leaver actually knows that the vote was as straight as a corkscrew. Fact was you 'won' though.
 
"The only question is the timing of the statement - it was a common view following the referendum - and that is the substantive point being made."

He was saying it was said before the referendum. "The PM, the leave campaign, in fact virtually everyone, said 'No deal is better than a bad deal,'". So please don't try and make out he meant "the leave campaign" was saying this after the campaign. There was no leave campaign after the referendum.

This is getting truly bizarre now.
The substantive point is that the clearly stated position of HMG is that with regard to the implementation of the will of the people has been that no deal is better than a bad deal

There has been no ambiguity and there is no scope for misinterpretation on this

The only mandate is to leave - the deal is a consequence of negotiations during the implementation

It is just a simple fact that AC was pointing out.
 
Last edited:
I accept that is your opinion

Mine is that May's WA is so bad I would rather we revoke than accept that shit deal

I understand people don’t like it, I don’t particularly but we will eventually leave the backstop and you’ll get what you want. We can do so without absolutely destroying ourselves and without remaining, which you also don’t want.
 
I understand people don’t like it, I don’t particularly but we will eventually leave the backstop and you’ll get what you want. We can do so without absolutely destroying ourselves and without remaining, which you also don’t want.
We will not be allowed to leave the backstop for many years during which it will be abused to cause significant damage to the UK’s interests
 
Last edited:
I accept that is your opinion

Mine is that May's WA is so bad I would rather we revoke than accept that shit deal

Given BoJo has abandoned all attempts to renegotiate and sees No Deal as his primary scenario - does that make you a remainer now?

If not do you even accept that there must be a point where we conclude that a good deal is not going to be an option and remain should be reconsidered if the only realistic brexit options now are going to be no deal or un-ending limbo/extension/political chaos?
 
Given BoJo has abandoned all attempts to renegotiate and sees No Deal as his primary scenario - does that make you a remainer now?

If not do you even accept that there must be a point where we conclude that a good deal is not going to be an option and remain should be reconsidered if the only realistic brexit options now are going to be no deal or un-ending limbo/extension/political chaos?

I don't think Boris can ever deliver no deal, he will just ensure it isn't his fault when he doesn't.

He is making sure that it will be the EU's fault for not removing the backstop or Tory/Labour/Parliament remainers fault for preventing no deal.

His current focus is posturing to win an election alongside TBP in the immediate aftermath of Brexit failure.

Labour don't stand a chance of challenging because the remain vote will be split apart by the Lib Dem's and their Brexit vote will obviously abandon them.
 
We will not be allowed to leave the backstop for many years during which it will be abused to cause significant damage to the UK’s interests

How can it cause significant damage? We’d be tied into a Customs Union with them but they couldn’t then use that to damage us. We’d be limited but that’s it.

The damage is going to come when we lose our trading partners.
 
I don't think Boris can ever deliver no deal, he will just ensure it isn't his fault when he doesn't.

He is making sure that it will be the EU's fault for not removing the backstop or Tory/Labour/Parliament remainers fault for preventing no deal.

His current focus is posturing to win an election alongside TBP in the immediate aftermath of Brexit failure.

Labour don't stand a chance of challenging because the remain vote will be split apart by the Lib Dem's and their Brexit vote will obviously abandon them.

Yeah it’s political theatre for a domestic audience.

Unfortunately the rest of Europe is watching and relations are going to take a hit no matter what. The indifference to Ireland or what happens there is going to leave a mark that doesn’t bode well for the future. Turbulent times ahead for dear old England alas.
 
The EU have called the bluff of Johnson’s no deal and are now telling us to get on with it, if we wish to.

They’re not reopening negotiations and it’s not worked.

I think everyone who said “no deal is a bargaining chip” now look like idiots. But many of us told you this. We knew no deal was worse for us than the EU27 and that the amount of damage to us will be far more significant than any other EU member state.

What a sorry situation we are in.
 
Absolutely incorrect - perhaps you should apologise for the aspersion?

The mandate arising from the referendum and following the campaigns was to Leave - that 'remains' the only valid mandate

AC is 100% correct to point out that May and so many others, when seeking to act on the implementation of the mandate sensibly emphasised that No-Deal is better than a bad deal.

The only question is the timing of the statement - it was a common view following the referendum - and that is the substantive point being made.

She was spot-on - rare for her - in that assessment and what has been brought forward is indeed a very bad deal for the UK and No-Deal would be less harmful

It is a simple truism
play that one out for me. In what way would a no deal be better for the UK than the May deal?
No deal = chaos for our importing and exporting businesses, decimation of certain industries (dairy farming), disruption to travel, playing Russian roulette with the Irish border, no clear way forward at all on new trade deals with the UK.
May's deal = level of continuity but with the real risk that future trade negotiations are heavily weighted in favour of the EU.

Of course neither come close to the benefits of remaining to be an influential member of the EU but I don't believe this assertion that no deal is better than a bad deal is factually correct unless I am missing something.
 
Former US Treasury Secretary Larry Summers on the “delusion” that Britain will get a favourable US trade deal-

Britain has no leverage. Britain is desperate. Britain is has nothing else. It needs an agreement very soon. When you have a desperate partner, that’s when you strike the hardest bargain.

Congratulations ladies and gentlemen, we’re now a non-entity.
 
When it first emerged that Dominic Cummings was going to be made Boris Johnson’s chief of staff in 10 Downing Street, it didn’t take long for one particular choice quote to re-emerge.

In an article earlier this year, Cummings said the European Research Group, of which around 80 Tory MPs are members, “should be treated like a metastasising tumour and excised from the UK body politic”.

Cummings ran Vote Leave, and during the referendum campaign said that senior figures in the ERG had been too busy “obsessing over the 8.10 slot on the Today programme” or “shooting, skiing or chasing girls to do any actual work”.

Remainers don’t like the ERG, and so these words, now spiked with the new reality that they’d been said by the No 10 chief of staff, caused no shortage of delight.


But Remainers might find they have a lot more in common with the ERG than they do with Cummings.

Fundamentally, the beef between Cummings and the Tory party’s veteran Eurosceptics was simple. They felt they had been at it for years, they knew how to do it, knew all the arguments about sovereignty. They wanted to rerun the old campaigns, about “Global Britain”, about “out, out and into the world”. Cummings was, not wholly unreasonably, aware that all these campaigns had failed, and so he demanded to do things his way. He got his way. He did things his way. He won.

But his way – and no one should be in any doubt about this at all – was a straightforward, amoral disgrace. Cummings’ way was to use social media and data analytics to relentlessly target voters who micro-profiling told them would be susceptible to what can only be described as racist messaging.

Cummings’ way was shadowy footprints, sneaking into Britain’s back door, under the straightforward lie of a headline: “Turkey is joining the EU.”

And it was even more cynical than that. Turkey is not joining the EU: the UK has a veto. But it was at the peak of the migrant crisis, in which Turkey played a crucial role. And Michael Gove, as a member of the Privy Council, knew that Turkey had a crucial security relationship with the UK, which meant that David Cameron was prevented from stating publicly that he would always veto Turkish accession to the EU.


The loathing between Cummings and the ERG leadership is mutual. Senior ERG figures, several of whom played key roles inside Vote Leave, will happily confide in private that they were utterly appalled when Vote Leave moved into the blatantly Islamophobic phase of its campaign.

Whether these tactics were necessary to win is a question that cannot be answered. They were used, and they did win.


And three years later, where are we? At the weekend, a police medic was filmed being attacked by a protester on a Tommy Robinson march. Robinson is in prison for seeking to collapse the trial of Muslim grooming gangs, for no greater reason than to boost his own profile.

Anyone who has even the vaguest social link to actual, working-class communities knows beyond doubt that Britain was radicalised by its EU referendum. Robinson and his ilk – the far right – have never had a recruiting sergeant like it. Cummings is far too clever not to know this, not to know the stunningly inevitable consequences of his actions. But he went ahead and did it all the same.
 
Given BoJo has abandoned all attempts to renegotiate and sees No Deal as his primary scenario - does that make you a remainer now?

If not do you even accept that there must be a point where we conclude that a good deal is not going to be an option and remain should be reconsidered if the only realistic brexit options now are going to be no deal or un-ending limbo/extension/political chaos?
Well - like most other Leave supporters I have accepted a while ago that the likelihood is that the UK will not 'meaningfully ' leave the EU - it is just the manner of how we will be stitched up than we are unsure of.

Even the recent changes at PM and cabinet do not provide a great deal of confidence.

So if we are not going to meaningfully Leave I would rather revoke that have a deal with the backstop in
 
I don't think Boris can ever deliver no deal, he will just ensure it isn't his fault when he doesn't.

He is making sure that it will be the EU's fault for not removing the backstop or Tory/Labour/Parliament remainers fault for preventing no deal.

His current focus is posturing to win an election alongside TBP in the immediate aftermath of Brexit failure.

Labour don't stand a chance of challenging because the remain vote will be split apart by the Lib Dem's and their Brexit vote will obviously abandon them.
I've been pointing this out for quite some time. To me the tactics of this seem obvious? I'm surprised more people haven't realised what Boris is up to.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top