Brexit discussion thread V - No Pic/GIF dumps please

Scoondal

I'd say 30% of Brits are die hard "world power / don't need these foreigners / rule the waves" types. Their opinion will always be correct. Then you have those who voted for Brexit but WILL NOT admit they were wrong. UK must save face. ( That boat has sailed ... We are already laughing at your vote / politics ). Then the remainers don't want a "deal" that leaves UK worse off. No one with a right mind in UK would support this stupid deal.

An Ciarraioch

Scoondal wrote: »

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Not all the 52% interpreted Leave as "trading on WTO terms", indeed, given the sizeable number of EFTA Brexiteers, along advocates of Turkey and Switzerland, "no dealers" are very much a minority.

Provide sources.

Nick Boles and Daniel Hannan both favour the EEA solution, as do the influential Norths, plus no deal loses every potential polling match-up:

https://mobile.twitter.com/EuropeElects/status/1070689905439854592

https://mobile.twitter.com/EuropeElects/status/1070690057244291072

https://mobile.twitter.com/EuropeElects/status/1070690541527023622

Headshot

What time is the vote Tuesday?

It will be riveting tv

Enzokk

https://twitter.com/aljwhite/status/1070747078576480257

Ok, so this is how Jacob Rees-Mogg does his business. I am not sure what the whole context of the clip is but JRM proclaims that the front bench and Theresa May made a "great mistake" by not guaranteeing the rights of EU citizens to stay in the UK right after the referendum.

The link in the second tweet from the 6th September this year has JRM stating that EU nationals will have no extra rights over other nationals from other countries. This is from the link in the tweet.

‘I do not believe there should be any special terms for EU migrants,’ he wrote to Labour peer Lord Adonis. ‘Once we have left the EU there will be no legal basis to treat them differently from migrants from non-EU countries.’

Thargor

Enzokk wrote: »

https://twitter.com/aljwhite/status/1070747078576480257

Ok, so this is how Jacob Rees-Mogg does his business. I am not sure what the whole context of the clip is but JRM proclaims that the front bench and Theresa May made a "great mistake" by not guaranteeing the rights of EU citizens to stay in the UK right after the referendum.

The link in the second tweet from the 6th September this year has JRM stating that EU nationals will have no extra rights over other nationals from other countries. This is from the link in the tweet.

Alastair Campbells face

Nody

Scoondal wrote: »

Provide sources.

How about from the horses's mouth so to speak of what the Brexiteers claimed during the campaign (and hence what people voted for when voting to leave)?

You know the part that does not mention leaving the single market, that talks about joining Norway/Switzerland etc. during the debate. You know; minor things like actual facts rather than 1984 style revision of history that the vote meant leaving everything connected to EU.

dr.fuzzenstein

Any Irish person who thinks that leave is a good idea is either batsh*t insane or trolling.

Scoondal

Nody wrote: »

How about from the horses's mouth so to speak of what the Brexiteers claimed during the campaign (and hence what people voted for?

You know the part that does not mention leaving the single market, that talks about joining Norway/Switzerland etc. during the debate. You know; minor things like actual facts rather than 1984 style revision of history.

I still think that it insulting to the UK electorate to tell them that they are wrong. It doesn't surprise me that they voted out because I have a low opinion of UK. But as per recent polls only 49% said "Britain" was wrong to leave EU.
And there you have it. Still 49%.
Do we really need idiots in EU ?

briany

Scoondal wrote: »

I still think that it insulting to the UK electorate to tell them that they are wrong. It doesn't surprise me that they voted out because I have a low opinion of UK. But as per recent polls only 49% said "Britain" was wrong to leave EU.
And there you have it. Still 49%.
Do we really need idiots in EU ?

It depends on how you tell them they're wrong. If you tell them so in a civil way, calmly providing facts and cases to support your argument, then it's not insulting. If it's still taken as an insult, then you're in a pretty dangerous place as society. We'd lose any sense of objective truth that we had and debates couldn't happen. Scientists would cling onto hypothesis they held, despite contrary evidence, because their feelings were hurt. It's not a way to go.

briany

A thought on Brexit - If you'd flipped the result of the referendum, would the 48 percent Leave vote have gotten on board with staying in the EU, or would they have continued to agitate?

Would Nigel Farage have accepted it as a decisive mandate?

Would Boris Johnson continued to run on a platform of Euro-scepticism, given the (ahem) overwhelming result?

Would mr. or mrs. Question Time "17.4 million people!" have popped EU flags onto the wing mirrors of their car?

Would any of them accepted a Remainer telling them, "Will of the people!"?

The answer is, no, of course not. That's why it's hilarious when they accuse Remainers of trying to scupper the Brexit process.

briany

briany wrote: »

A thought on Brexit - If you'd flipped the result of the referendum, would the 48 percent Leave vote have gotten on board with staying in the EU, or would they have continued to agitate?

Would Nigel Farage have accepted it as a decisive mandate?

Would Boris Johnson continued to run on a platform of Euro-scepticism, given the (ahem) overwhelming result?

Would mr. or mrs. Question Time "17.4 million people!" have popped EU flags onto the wing mirrors of their car?

Would any of them accepted a Remainer telling them, "Will of the people!"?

The answer is, no, of course not. That's why it's hilarious when they accuse Remainers of trying to scupper the Brexit process.

Farage famously said before the referendum about a remain victory:'In a 52-48 referendum this would be unfinished business by a long way. If the Remain campaign win two-thirds to one-third that ends it."

An Ciarraioch

Lucid Talk poll saying 62% in NI support remaining in SM and CU, even if GB doesn't (Evan Davis tweet - most details in paywalled Times article)!

https://mobile.twitter.com/AaronMcAllorum/status/1070821679671205888/photo/1

Shelga

If they do leave, and there’s another global economic crash where the likes of Italy and Greece are disproportionately affected, would the UK be more protected, as they won’t have to shell out to bail them out? Or Ireland, for that matter.

Were they always a bit more shielded from this anyway, by not being in the Eurozone? It seems like they have the best of everything at the moment and are absolutely mad to vote leave.

briany

Deleted User wrote: »

Farage famously said before the referendum about a remain victory:'In a 52-48 referendum this would be unfinished business by a long way. If the Remain campaign win two-thirds to one-third that ends it."

I seem to recall that point being brought up Julia Hartley Brewer on a recent QT, and she basically denied that he said it.

greenfield21

Shelga wrote: »

If they do leave, and there’s another global economic crash where the likes of Italy and Greece are disproportionately affected, would the UK be more protected, as they won’t have to shell out to bail them out? Or Ireland, for that matter.

Were they always a bit more shielded from this anyway, by not being in the Eurozone? It seems like they have the best of everything at the moment and are absolutely mad to vote leave.

I don't know what would happen after brexit but If a crash came now for the world economy would it not be good for brexiters. The people are fed up as it is and world economy is said to have peaked. Imagine what a recession would do. Just look what's going on in France.

Shelga

greenfield21 wrote: »

I don't know what would happen after brexit but If a crash came now for the world economy would it not be good for brexit. The people are fed up as it is and world economy is said to have peaked. Imagine what a recession would do. Just look what's going on in France.

I’m not saying it would be good, just asking the question, as I struggle to see even a tiny single advantage of this fiasco.

bilston

Could be interesting goings on in London on Sunday. Tommy Robinson is supposedly leading a "Brexit Betrayal" march. Counter demos are planned.

I haven't heard much about this on the BBC or Sky etc but there is fair bit on social media.

Charles Babbage

The Times of London has
A LucidTalk poll for The Times reveals that 65 per cent of Northern Ireland voters would welcome a Brexit that keeps the province “closely tied to the EU, inside the single market and the customs union”, while the rest of the UK has a more arms-length arrangement.

10000maniacs

Scoondal wrote: »

Leave means leave. Simply, no lies, no trickery, the votes were counted.
NEWS : UK voted to LEAVE EU.
Do you live in a cave ?

They may as well have voted for more Pyrenean ibex's. Your argument is grand if you can define Brexit.

Peregrinus

Shelga wrote: »

I’m not saying it would be good, just asking the question, as I struggle to see even a tiny single advantage of this fiasco.

There's basically no economic advantage to Brexit. All models of Brexit are economically harmful to the UK; the only dispute is by how much.

To value Brexit, you have to assign significance to non-economic factors like not being committed to "ever closer union", not having to afford freedom of movement to EU citizens, not being subject to the jurisdiction of the Court of Justice of the European Union.

Folkstonian

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Any Irish person who thinks that leave is a good idea is either batsh*t insane or trolling.

There we have it, then. The thread may as well be closed.

You are either pro-remain, or mentally unwell.

If this is the level that debate has slumped to, it’s probably time to call time on discussion.

Folkstonian

Peregrinus wrote: »

There's basically no economic advantage to Brexit. All models of Brexit are economically harmful to the UK; the only dispute is by how much.

To value Brexit, you have to assign significance to non-economic factors like not being committed to "ever closer union", not having to afford freedom of movement to EU citizens, not being subject to the jurisdiction of the Court of Justice of the European Union.

Agreed. It’s a simple matter of conviction.

Britain (but any EU member state really) has a binary choice to make going forward. To be more financially prosperous or to have more control over the traditional pillars of the nation state.

Voters just have to decide which is more important to them.

I really think people on both sides of the debate in Britain need to be more realistic, and more honest.

Peregrinus

Folkstonian wrote: »

Agreed. It’s a simple matter of conviction.

Britain (but any EU member state really) has a binary choice to make going forward. To be more financially prosperous or to have more control over the traditional pillars of the nation state.

Voters just have to decide which is more important to them.

I really think people on both sides of the debate in Britain need to be more realistic, and more honest.

Ah, but oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive etc etc.

The problem here is that Brexiters sold the idea of Brexit by representing it as having economic advantages - budgetary savings through not having to contribute to the EU, wonderful new trade deals with China, North Korea and countries yet to be discovered under the seas, etc, etc. Even with all that puffery, they just got it over the line in the referendum.

It's now very difficult for them to turn around and say, actually, no; none of that is going to happen. Quite the reverse, in fact. But there will be benefits; just intangible benefits which are quite different from the material benefits that you expected when you actually voted for this.

Instead, they try to do this indirectly by asserting that this is what the people were voting for all along - asserting that, although promised an economically advantageous Brexit, they voted for an economically damaging Brexit, motivated by other considerations to accept the economic damage as a price worth paying to secure the intangible but important blessings of sovereignty.

But, quite frankly, that's not true.

In a sense, both sides of this debate have the same problem. Leavers failed to build a case for the values of sovereignty, autonomy, etc; they sold Brexit on largely economic and material terms. But Remainers also mounted their case on economic and material arguments, equally failing to mount a values-based campaign that asserted the values and ideals behind the European project.

All of which makes it quite difficult to turn the discourse around now, and discuss the non-economic and non-material aspects of this question.

prawnsambo

Folkstonian wrote: »

There we have it, then. The thread may as well be closed.

You are either pro-remain, or mentally unwell.

If this is the level that debate has slumped to, it’s probably time to call time on discussion.

Did you miss the bit where he said "Irish person"?

murphaph

Folkstonian wrote: »

Agreed. It’s a simple matter of conviction.

Britain (but any EU member state really) has a binary choice to make going forward. To be more financially prosperous or to have more control over the traditional pillars of the nation state.

Voters just have to decide which is more important to them.

I really think people on both sides of the debate in Britain need to be more realistic, and more honest.

But this is NOT what the Leave campaign said the vote was about at all. They promised continued membership of the single market (more financially prosperous) AND to have more control over the traditional pillars of the nation state, not OR!

Huge difference. It was never an option, but it was sold to millions of voters as one. The Leave vote was won on lies.

VinLieger

Folkstonian wrote: »

If this is the level that debate has slumped to, it’s probably time to call time on discussion.

Ironic coming from the person accusing others that disagree with them of being mentally unwell

lawred2

Folkstonian wrote: »

There we have it, then. The thread may as well be closed.

You are either pro-remain, or mentally unwell.

If this is the level that debate has slumped to, it’s probably time to call time on discussion.

Maybe try to read the post before responding next time.

lawred2

Folkstonian wrote: »

Agreed. It’s a simple matter of conviction.

Britain (but any EU member state really) has a binary choice to make going forward. To be more financially prosperous or to have more control over the traditional pillars of the nation state.

Voters just have to decide which is more important to them.

I really think people on both sides of the debate in Britain need to be more realistic, and more honest.

But Brexit was sold on 350m per week AND control over those 'pillars'.. no binary choice there.

Did something go wrong or was it just a crock of sh:t?

Peregrinus

lawred2 wrote: »

But Brexit was sold on 350m per week AND control over those 'pillars'.. no binary choice there.

Did something go wrong or was it just a crock of sh:t?

It was a crock of sh:t. There was always a trade-off. Those behing the Leave campaign were either in denial about this, or they were cynically misleading others about it, or a bit of both.

lawred2

Peregrinus wrote: »

It was a crock of sh:t. There was always a trade-off. Those behing the Leave campaign were either in denial about this, or they were cynically misleading others about it, or a bit of both.

but sure we're always free to revise what the vote was about...