[Politics] Brexit

[ManOfSussex]

I'm not sure if the rubbishing virtually everything our government says and does/going big on any negative news while ignoring the flaws on the EU side plus more positive data is just a tactic or a pathological desire to be proved right.

I'm not sure if the rubbishing virtually everything The EU says and does/going big on any positive news while ignoring the flaws on the UK Government side plus more negative data is just a tactic or just living in hope.

 

[Baldseagull]

These Remain analogies about what Brexit is about get even more ridiculous. Someone should do a montage of them: "Brexit is like rollerskating over a cliff into a plate of jelly. But it's not jelly, it's concrete. And the person roller-skating is thick. And racist."

Apparently, voter disenfranchisement is just attention-seeking.

Self harm because you feel disenfranchised is attention seeking, what else could it be?
You posted the guy up telling us Brexit was all about shaking the politicians to the core, and the current mess of Brexit is not an argument against but an argument for Brexit. No sunny uplands, just chaos, and apparently this was the point.
Personally I don't believe him, but it seems you want to have your cake and eat it, as you think he is correct, yet you also have been posting how Brexit is such a good idea for Britain and sunny uplands await us in the near future.

 

[Buzzer]

This Is where we disagree. During a general election the parties publish a manifesto and that is effectively a promise of what they will do. That is why Cameron called the referendum - manifesto commitment. If parties break their manifesto then generally it will either get killed in the commons or the lords. Sometimes by the media - see national insurance a few weeks ago.

The referendum was different. The whole campaign from both sides was based on guesses and lies. No one knows what they were voting for and anyone who says they did is completely deluded. 350 million for NHS? Gone. Massive reduction in immigration? Gone. Will we be in her single market? Looks like not but the only people who said this were on remain side! What about the areas that voted leave and then said "we still want all that money the EU used to give us? Did they know what they were voting for? On the remain side it was just as bad with guesses about what would happen immediately whereas that was never going to happen (apart from the rise in racist hate crime).

9 months on we still don't know what we will get. We are all aware of WTO rules but what does this mean? How many people know the ins and outs? You could probably fit them on a double decker bus! The there are loads of polls about what is better? A bad deal or no deal? What does this even mean? It is impossible to answer without knowing what a bad deal is and whether better than no deal. The media lap it up and whip the public into a frenzy. It is nuts.

If you believe that we had more information about what we were voting for on the referendum than in a general election then it is pointless us carrying on the discussion!

How is that any different from what happens at an election with Labour saying that Tory policies are wrong whilst only Labour policies will lead to prosperity and the Tories claiming the reverse? They each publish a manifesto, they then hire experts to make predictions of what the effect of the manifesto pledges will make and present it to the electorate. How is that any different in substance?

 

[Baldseagull]

In other words, the electorate should know its place and do as its told. Yes, that approach to politics is working so well at the moment.

In a general election, those that can't be bothered to think usually don't bother to vote, too many choices, so no harm done.

 

[Berty23]

How is that any different from what happens at an election with Labour saying that Tory policies are wrong whilst only Labour policies will lead to prosperity and the Tories claiming the reverse? They each publish a manifesto, they then hire experts to make predictions of what the effect of the manifesto pledges will make and present it to the electorate. How is that any different in substance?

Because then they actually do what they say they will do. If people don't like it then in five years they can change them I.e. You didn't deliver so you are out. The referendum in a permanent thing based on guesses and lies (both sides which shows why it was so daft). It is completely different.

 

[Buzzer]

Self harm because you feel disenfranchised is attention seeking, what else could it be?

Your analogy is utter rubbish except in revealing your Nanny knows best attitude. You need to turn it on its head to understand the point being made: A disenfranchised electorate is one that is already being harmed by the medicine that politicians are giving it. Because the medicine works for the politicians and their chums, they think it works for everyone but the electorate feels sicker and sicker. The electorate keep telling the politicians that the medicine is making them sick but the politicians don't listen and keep giving the medicine. So finally the electorate tells the politicians that they are fed up feeling sick and will not be taking that medicine anymore. They want to try another medicine and they also want the politicians to listen to them when they say how it is making them feel.

And that's me all done with this medicine analogy.

 

[Tooting Gull]

This Is where we disagree. During a general election the parties publish a manifesto and that is effectively a promise of what they will do. That is why Cameron called the referendum - manifesto commitment. If parties break their manifesto then generally it will either get killed in the commons or the lords. Sometimes by the media - see national insurance a few weeks ago.

The referendum was different. The whole campaign from both sides was based on guesses and lies. No one knows what they were voting for and anyone who says they did is completely deluded. 350 million for NHS? Gone. Massive reduction in immigration? Gone. Will we be in her single market? Looks like not but the only people who said this were on remain side! What about the areas that voted leave and then said "we still want all that money the EU used to give us? Did they know what they were voting for? On the remain side it was just as bad with guesses about what would happen immediately whereas that was never going to happen (apart from the rise in racist hate crime).

9 months on we still don't know what we will get. We are all aware of WTO rules but what does this mean? How many people know the ins and outs? You could probably fit them on a double decker bus! The there are loads of polls about what is better? A bad deal or no deal? What does this even mean? It is impossible to answer without knowing what a bad deal is and whether better than no deal. The media lap it up and whip the public into a frenzy. It is nuts.

If you believe that we had more information about what we were voting for on the referendum than in a general election then it is pointless us carrying on the discussion!

Yup, with you on that one. Extraordinary for anyone to claim this was a vote with the 'most' information. Arguably the complete opposite, and the only information that 'got through' was of a very prejudiced and agenda-driven sort. You have to also say, one of the biggest failings ever of the mainstream media to get to the real issues and provide balanced coverage. Clearly people didn't know exactly what they were voting for (as proven by what has emerged since) but if it was the result you wanted, you'll gloss over that.

 

[Buzzer]

Because then they actually do what they say they will do. If people don't like it then in five years they can change them I.e. You didn't deliver so you are out. The referendum in a permanent thing based on guesses and lies (both sides which shows why it was so daft). It is completely different.

Manifesto pledges are broken all the time and they are made on equally dodgy claims, guesses and lies. Predictions about tax income, repayment of debt, recruitment into specific industries, the cost of capital projects - they're all as iffy as the referendum claims.

 

[gordonchas]

The referendum was different. The whole campaign from both sides was based on guesses and lies. No one knows what they were voting for and anyone who says they did is completely deluded. 350 million for NHS? Gone. Massive reduction in immigration? Gone...

But none of that has "gone", has it?

At the next General Election the UK public can now vote for a party that does want to spend yet another huge additional tranche on the NHS, or severely curtail immigration, if those choices exists.

That will be up to them.

 

[Soulman]

Because then they actually do what they say they will do. If people don't like it then in five years they can change them I.e. You didn't deliver so you are out. The referendum in a permanent thing based on guesses and lies (both sides which shows why it was so daft). It is completely different.

" You didn't deliver so you are out. The referendum in a permanent thing".
I wonder how many that voted for the common market realised that they were duped into full EU commitment, 40 years it lasted, it could not be changed after 5 years either.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

I am fairly happy, Friday, nice full English at tea break, get stuck in, early get away, football tomorrow washed down with a few beers.

Same here. I'm missing the football tomorrow due to other commitments. But I'm off for my currywurst at lunch. A few beers in Brewdog then dinner at http://www.bandolsurmer.de/fr/accueil.html for a friends birthday. Tomorrow it's a Soulwax gig with a wicked afterparty to celebrate 25 years of Intro magazine with 2ManyDJs, Modeselektor, Peaches and Boys Noize. And it's going to be 22 degrees.

Don't be angry, be happy.

Have a good one.

 

[Berty23]

Manifesto pledges are broken all the time and they are made on equally dodgy claims, guesses and lies. Predictions about tax income, repayment of debt, recruitment into specific industries, the cost of capital projects - they're all as iffy as the referendum claims.

What happened when lib dems broke their pledge on tuition fees? They were virtually wiped out. Staggered that you can't see the difference between the two. They base their manifesto on their best guesses and are held accountable based on that. The leave campaign has said the 350 million won't happen and same with immigration. With the two leave campaigns they say "we never said that it was the other leave campaign". You couldn't make it up.

 

[Berty23]

" You didn't deliver so you are out. The referendum in a permanent thing".
I wonder how many that voted for the common market realised that they were duped into full EU commitment, 40 years it lasted, it could not be changed after 5 years either.

Agreed. Further examples of why referenda are a bizarre way to run a country. Good point, well made.

 

[Berty23]

But none of that has "gone", has it?

At the next General Election the UK public can now vote for a party that does want to spend yet another huge additional tranche on the NHS, or severely curtail immigration, if those choices exists.

That will be up to them.

Lol. They were rowing back on 350 million day after. Have you noticed that Boris and Gove have done no media this week? Have you wondered why?

 

[JC Footy Genius]

Maybe I live in a very rarified virtual world but my experience is that most of us have moved through shock, depression and the real anger has only just started .

We always suspected that those managing this in government were mediocre, cynical opportunists but the performance this week has shown that they possess no moral compass and minimal amounts of actual tactical awareness or basic competence.

As they move from being self-proclaimed rebels to the new ‘establishment’ the leave supporters have displayed a total absence of any vision for the future and a total absence of the mental bandwidth needed to process the complexity of the process they have initiated. You see nothing but clichés, generalisations and a desperate search for a combative headline to mask the mess they have created.

We are angry that these people have gambled our children’s future; that many still treat this like a game and that the reputation of this country is plummeting.

Not rarified or virtual but probably a bit of an echo chamber.

I suspect the only way the government would rise in your estimation was if it started to prioritise the wishes of the 48% over the 52%.

The PM has set out a positive vision for our future on numerous occasions. Which was either ignored or dismissed with scornful derision. If only the wise souls of the NSC gloomerati were in charge.

Wallowing in negativity and anger isn't very healthy for mind and body.

 

[Baldseagull]

Your analogy is utter rubbish except in revealing your Nanny knows best attitude. You need to turn it on its head to understand the point being made: A disenfranchised electorate is one that is already being harmed by the medicine that politicians are giving it. Because the medicine works for the politicians and their chums, they think it works for everyone but the electorate feels sicker and sicker. The electorate keep telling the politicians that the medicine is making them sick but the politicians don't listen and keep giving the medicine. So finally the electorate tells the politicians that they are fed up feeling sick and will not be taking that medicine anymore. They want to try another medicine and they also want the politicians to listen to them when they say how it is making them feel.

And that's me all done with this medicine analogy.

I didn't say anyone did not have a genuine reason for feeling disenfranchised, but the alternative they have reached for clearly says poison on the bottle.
Now I think this is daft, but your man thinks this is great, the current mess, he says, is a positive thing, it was the intention of the disenfranchised to create this mess.
I think that is bloody stupid, and I also think he is wrong, I think they bought into the sunny uplands fantasy.

 

[Buzzer]

What happened when lib dems broke their pledge on tuition fees? They were virtually wiped out. Staggered that you can't see the difference between the two. They base their manifesto on their best guesses and are held accountable based on that. The leave campaign has said the 350 million won't happen and same with immigration. With the two leave campaigns they say "we never said that it was the other leave campaign". You couldn't make it up.

And if Brexit goes tits up then the Tories will pay a very heavy price indeed. It's the same thing.

 

[gordonchas]

Lol. They were rowing back on 350 million day after. Have you noticed that Boris and Gove have done no media this week? Have you wondered why?

Yes, they were, but still many Remainers insist that that ludicrous pledge somehow turned the vote.

Leave voters encompassed the entire range of political opinion in the UK from revolutionary socialists to libertarians. There was no "manifesto" they could possibly enact.

However, a Leave vote has given any future UK government a whole lot more freedom to enact their policies than existed less than a year ago.

 

[Buzzer]

I didn't say anyone did not have a genuine reason for feeling disenfranchised, but the alternative they have reached for clearly says poison on the bottle.

No, no, no. Your analogy is still wrong. The label says 'poison' because the politician wrote those words on there. The same politician who wrote 'the best cure' on the medicine that was previously killing the electorate. The electorate does not trust the politician and for good reason. The politician has an appalling track record in giving different medicines to to the electorate that the politicians swear blind will make everyone feel better but has made the electorate sick.

It's almost as if the politicians aren't as expert in giving the right medicine as the politician would like to think they are. And all because they won't listen to how it makes the patient feel. And to stretch even further this already tenuous analogy, there are different politicians who think that the medicine labelled 'poison' is anything but.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

EU wants to give Spain a Veto over the terms on Gibraltar