nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Brexit discussion thread XI (Please read OP before posting)

Quin_Dub

This is the eleventh incarnation of our Brexit discussion thread,

Same warnings etc still apply:

As we are approaching the critical end of March October 2019 period, please bear the following in mind before posting:
Insults directed at popular figures are not acceptable in this forum
Please do not post memes, videos or comedy links here
Please do not be uncivil to other posters
Please use the report function to alert the mods when necessary

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Spanish Eyes

Theresa May was an idiot IMO.

She ranted about immigration but refused to observe the intra EU three month rule whereby you either support yourself independently or have a job (i.e. no pressure on State Supports).

All down to not knowing who came in really. The lack of immigration rules in UK is probably as bad as our own, but we are not looking for an Exit from EU are we?

ZX7R

Tell me how wrote: »

Ok, I would not be countering any post suggesting this individual is a moron.

https://twitter.com/ITVNewsPolitics/status/1176811495876943872

The eyes have it (the madness within)

That is one of the scariest ideas I've heard from a Tory yet

Imreoir2

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Clarke always sits in the same place anyhow. Don't know if that is because he is like the regular in the local...a fixture.
I'm not aware of May speaking since she fell on her sword.

He is the father of the house, as I understand it, senior members of the house have their own spot that everyone else respects. I remember hearing about a senior labour member who had a battle to keep his spot after the SNP swept the bords in Scotland the first time and they all choose to sit in his usual section of the benches.

Varta

Tell me how wrote: »

I understand your position but I think it is too simplistic while certainly being the case for some people. Some just want to see the establishment get a kicking and the thought of that smarmy pr*ck off the telly (whoever they might be) losing is enough for them to pledge their allegiance to the other side.

But, I am in the US at the moment and have had numerous conversations with people who both support Trump, and have extensive education, professional and life experiences which disqualifies them from being considered morons.
I still disagree with their logic, but they speak equally passionately about how manipulative the left is in demeaning the right and that they are sick of either being ignored or treated like idiots.

It's being point out to me that Fox News is the sole Network standing up to the liberal rhetoric of CNN, ABC, MSNBC etc. So, if you ask them to show you an example of 'state media' ignoring reality and trying to support a candidate, they are going to bring a clip from someone other than Fox to the table, and they will believe it as strongly as some of us look at Fox and think it is criminal what they do.

Unfortunately, you are wasting your breath. Far too many people in the UK and the US have nailed their colours to the mast and are not for changing. There are bad times ahead for both places.

ZX7R

Varta wrote: »

Unfortunately, you are wasting your breath. Far too many people in the UK and the US have nailed their colours to the mast and are not for changing. There are bad times ahead for both places.

At least in America worse case scenario is Trump gets in for a second term.
If Boris succeeds that is the end of Brittan.

Tell me how

Varta wrote: »

Unfortunately, you are wasting your breath. Far too many people in the UK and the US have nailed their colours to the mast and are not for changing. There are bad times ahead for both places.

That's why they are interesting to talk to. I'm not naive enough to arrive in to a country and tell them they are making a mess of things or convince them to change their views.

FrancieBrady

Gina Miller handing Cleverly his ass when he tried to lie about the prorogation on QT.

Strazdas

Shelga wrote: »

It is embarrassing, contrasting the level of stupidity shown by the QT audience, with the intelligence and calmness of Gina Miller. I don’t know how she keeps on doing it, day after day, in the face of such utter, complete ignorance and abuse.

The stupidity of the audience was quite shocking. Zero understanding of any of the issues, just repeating stuff parrot fashion they'd read in the right wing rags about '17 million voters' and 'democracy'.

maebee

@ITVNewsPolitics
'We should have a commitment to abolish the Supreme Court'

Tory MP Desmond Swayne tells ITV News the Supreme Court 'well overstepped the mark' in its prorogation judgement and says he wants rid of it

WTF? Abolish the Supreme Court? Doubt he'd be saying this if it hadn't been 11- nil.

Varta

Tell me how wrote: »

That's why they are interesting to talk to. I'm not naive enough to arrive in to a country and tell them they are making a mess of things or convince them to change their views.

I agree. This year I spent a few weeks staying with old friends in the US. I was shocked how every evening, and I really mean every evening, they would tune into TV channels that, to my mind, seemed to be devoted entirely to attacking Trump. Night after night they had their views confirmed as they tut tutted and pointed their fingers at the screen. It was like something from Orwells' 1984. I have no doubt that on the same street there were other people tuned into programmes kicking the Democrats. At first it was interesting to me, but I began to see them likes rats in a cage coming to the feeder at the same time every day. I find it worrying.

Strazdas

Varta wrote: »

I agree. This year I spent a few weeks staying with old friends in the US. I was shocked how every evening, and I really mean every evening, they would tune into TV channels that, to my mind, seemed to be devoted entirely to attacking Trump. Night after night they had their views confirmed as they tut tutted and pointed their fingers at the screen. It was like something from Orwells' 1984. I have no doubt that on the same street there were other people tuned into programmes kicking the Democrats. At first it was interesting to me, but I began to see them likes rats in a cage coming to the feeder at the same time every day. I find it worrying.

Though in fairness, Trump started the war with CNN and the main networks. He was calling them 'fake news' and 'liars' even before he was elected (such rhetoric may well have won the election for him). He was undoubtedly the instigator.

Imreoir2

Strazdas wrote: »

Though in fairness, Trump started the war with CNN and the main networks. He was calling them 'fake news' and 'liars' even before he was elected (such rhetoric may well have won the election for him). He was undoubtedly the instigator.

America was in deep trouble long before Trump came along. The media has mostly lined up as an extension of the main parties PR departments with very little middle ground remaining. The same, if still to a less extreme extent, is happening in the UK.

boggerman1

Tell me how wrote: »

Ok, I would not be countering any post suggesting this individual is a moron.

https://twitter.com/ITVNewsPolitics/status/1176811495876943872

The eyes have it (the madness within)

This taking back control business isn't much fun when it doesn't work for your way

bobbyss

Rjd2 wrote:

She was a backbencher at the time and wasn't it the day after Boris took charge?

Yes i think so. But parliament was in session. Can an MP/TD take the day off and go to the cricket? What about their job? Their duty?

VinLieger

bobbyss wrote: »

Yes i think so. But parliament was in session. Can an MP/TD take the day off and go to the cricket? What about their job? Their duty?

Not sure about the UK but the minimum attendance for the dail is 120 days of those it sits for, if you dont meet this you get your expenses docked slightly but nothing more. IMO the punishment should be far higher absent good reasons.

bobbyss

VinLieger wrote:

Not sure about the UK but the minimum attendance for the dail is 120 days of those it sits for, if you dont meet this you get your expenses docked slightly but nothing more. IMO the punishment should be far higher absent good reasons.

Yes. I think if you are absent from the Dail you might be on other duties meetings etc etc. But to be seen enjoyong the cricket (or whatever) id extraordinary. Can people take the day off work just like that?

Peregrinus

bobbyss wrote: »

Yes. I think if you are absent from the Dail you might be on other duties meetings etc etc. But to be seen enjoyong the cricket (or whatever) id extraordinary. Can people take the day off work just like that?

Well, most of us have a quota of days that we can take off work for whatever purposes we like, and not have to justify that to anyone.

MPs don't have a set quota of days, but also the lines around what is "work" are very blurred for them. If you meet an MP at a function, sporting chance that you're there on a frolic, but for him it's work. MPs need to network, they need to be seen, they need to support party events, community events in the constituency, yadda, yadda, yadda.

Not saying that attending a cricket match at Lords necessarily falls into this category, but if somebody is seen doing that on one occasion, there's nothing there to suggest slackness or abuse; as pointed out, any of us could take a day's leave to do such a thing, if minded to. Unless an MP is doing this on a fairly grand scale, I'm not seeing a problem.

[Deleted User]

bobbyss wrote: »

Yes. I think if you are absent from the Dail you might be on other duties meetings etc etc. But to be seen enjoyong the cricket (or whatever) id extraordinary. Can people take the day off work just like that?

Is this a joke? May was front and centre for absolutely ages working non-stop. She can't go for a day of cricket after the nightmare she went through?

Such moaning. Woman's crying at the pulpit but can't take a day off after she's not the PM.

prawnsambo

bobbyss wrote: »

Yes. I think if you are absent from the Dail you might be on other duties meetings etc etc. But to be seen enjoyong the cricket (or whatever) id extraordinary. Can people take the day off work just like that?

I'm not defending Theresa May, but in terms of hours worked, a PM will have been working pretty much every waking hour they are in office. And May probably more than most, given the period she was in office for.

That it was largely ineffective and that it is now evident that she didn't understand how the EU worked or worse still, that she thought she could get a new treaty somehow is by the by.

lawred2

People are entitled to leisure days. Hardly worth discussion.

Tell me how

bobbyss wrote: »

Yes. I think if you are absent from the Dail you might be on other duties meetings etc etc. But to be seen enjoyong the cricket (or whatever) id extraordinary. Can people take the day off work just like that?

Given what she had been through, I don't think anyone could have an issue with her staying away from HoC as she did for a period.

mrbrianj

lawred2 wrote: »

People are entitled to leisure days. Hardly worth discussion.

Yes, seems ok for UK politicians to lie on TV, but for a former PM to take a day off after stepping out of the mayhem is so wrong? just another distraction from what people should be talking about.

On a side point, great to see a MP getting pulled up on TV for peddling lies as facts - unfortunately it shows the unwillingness of the usual hosts to do this. At this stage they feel they can say anything at all, once they say it with conviction - doesn't matter if its the reality or not.

Peregrinus

Tell me how wrote: »

Given what she had been through, I don't think anyone could have an issue with her staying away from HoC as she did for a period.

It's generally considered good form for a recently-retired PM to keep a low profile, so as not to cast any shade on his/her successor. May hasn't spoken on any subject in Parliament since she resigned, and that would be typical (though she has attended and voted).

lawred2

mrbrianj wrote: »

Yes, seems ok for UK politicians to lie on TV, but for a former PM to take a day off after stepping out of the mayhem is so wrong? just another distraction from what people should be talking about.

On a side point, great to see a MP getting pulled up on TV for peddling lies as facts - unfortunately it shows the unwillingness of the usual hosts to do this. At this stage they feel they can say anything at all, once they say it with conviction - doesn't matter if its the reality or not.

where/who was this?

josip

Imreoir2 wrote: »

America was in deep trouble long before Trump came along. The media has mostly lined up as an extension of the main parties PR departments with very little middle ground remaining. The same, if still to a less extreme extent, is happening in the UK.

It was ever thus.
All the way back to the Victorian era, newspapers have been owned by very rich people who knew they had the most power in society to influence the public.
This, coupled with democracy, means that politicians are always beholden to the media outlets and will pay/reward handsomely for their message to be the one that people see/read.

There was a glimmer of hope when the internet arrived that people would now be able to access any piece of news or viewpoint they were interested in, independent of any editorial slant that the media magnates applied.
Alas, it was not to be. Google's, and later Facebook's, algorithms only show users advertisements/articles/posts that it thinks the users will be interested in, based on what they've already been accessing.
Confirmation bias is now as prevalent on the internet channels as in paper and TV media unfortunately.

mrbrianj

lawred2 wrote: »

where/who was this?

Clevery on BBCqt, not by the shows host - no surprise there, but by another guest Gina Miller.

lawred2

mrbrianj wrote: »

Clevery on BBCqt, not by the shows host - no surprise there, but by another guest Gina Miller.

wouldn't mind a watch... anyone got a link?

FrancieBrady

lawred2 wrote: »

where/who was this?

Might be referring to James Cleverly on Newsnight last night who tried to say that the first court had deemed prorogation legal. He was interrupted vociferously by Gina Miller who pointed out he was lying and that the court had not even discussed prorogation and had only deemed it 'justiciable' and referred it up to the Supreme Court.
He didn't correct himself, just changed tack.

Edit...apologies...it was on Question Time

prawnsambo

lawred2 wrote: »

wouldn't mind a watch... anyone got a link?

It's not often you see somebody taken to task like this on QT. Gina Miller is not somebody you try and spout nonsense in front of.

FrancieBrady

prawnsambo wrote: »

It's not often you see somebody taken to task like this on QT. Gina Miller is not somebody you try and spout nonsense in front of.

It's incredible the way he just pauses, gives a look as if she is just an annoying heckler and moves on.

She took on nearly whole audience later on, when they were trying to say she had a vested interest in thwarting Brexit. She pointed out again that she had been defending their rights and the laws of the UK and constitution (such as it is) for 30 years now, and listed some of the challenges she had made to government. She ended getting a round of applause.