Brexit discussion thread XI (Please read OP before posting)

Itssoeasy · 24-10-2019 11:28PM

Christ almighty the audience seem to think the second referendum.

Akrasia · 24-10-2019 11:29PM

hotmail.com wrote: »

It seems that you want to pinpoint the loss of the referendum squarely on the illegal practices of the Leave side during the campaign.

My point as I've said already, that this is nonsense. There was a long standing anti European attitude in Britain.

Again given the tone of your post, you seem to think I'm defending the Leave side. I'm not. I'm trying to commentate and explain what happened.

Accusing me of having no moral compass is perhaps the most over dramatic post I've read on here. Can you please read my posts.

Not everyone on here is a partisan. I'm Irish and I didn't vote in the thing!

You don’t understand how election rigging works. You don’t have to win 100% of the vote, you just need to cheat just enough to influence the swing voters, the undecided, the people vulnerable to being influenced by lies or fearmongering.
In the case of the brexit vote, they needed to influence about 2% of the population and they did this with stolen social media, personal data used to bombard these people with targeted messages specifically designed to play up to their existing fears and biases.

Strazdas · 24-10-2019 11:31PM

Joe_ Public wrote: »

I have serious problem believing that. If corbyn did defy all indications and became pm, obviously with snp and others' help, they would be guaranteed a referendum. Surely they'd agree to negotiations, without red lines, on that basis. I didnt find Schulz all that convincing tbh, his opinion not necessarily reflected eu-wide.

It's not even certain Corbyn could get a WA through parliament. The Labour Leave MPs could rebel and vote the deal down.

Varta · 24-10-2019 11:32PM

devnull wrote: »

So just to confirm, you are saying that if someone cheated and broke the law and we punish them, then they are a bigger victim than the people who were cheated if we do nothing? That's quite frankly outrageous and just tells people to cheat and break the law, because nobody will stop you and you'll prosper.

It's one thing to try and influence someone, it's a completely different thing to break the law. If you cannot see the difference then honestly I don't know what else I can say to you, other than saying that I'm a law abiding person and I have respect for the law and that it something that a lot of people in the UK in the leave campaign could learn, as they've spent the last few years and even recent weeks and months basically thinking they can do what they like and the law and the rules don't apply to them .

It's times like this when I'm glad that we're in Ireland.

You are very naive if you think politics is clean and fair in Ireland... or anywhere. BTW your first paragraph makes no sense, either on its own or in response to my post. And my point stands: Do due diligence before you cast your vote.

Itssoeasy · 24-10-2019 11:33PM

Jesus christ I've not watched newsnight in a while but what I've heard from the audience I fear given there seems like a lot of young people seem to be agreeing with this mad brexit viewpoint.

Danzy · 24-10-2019 11:34PM

Enzokk wrote: »

It is also that there isn't a better deal out there apart from a permanent UK customs union. But maybe they cannot be put into the WA but will always have a place in the PD. In any case all Labour has ever wanted was the chance to negotiate a deal and lately they have said they will put the deal they can get up for a vote and will decide which one to back once they have seen the deal.

If the EU offers only the May or Johnson deal you suspect Labour would back remain as neither one will have much benefits for the country. Seems a fair policy for me, give the people a chance to decide if they want the deal that is on offer or remain. No-deal has been ruled out again and again and if Labour is in charge then it is off the table as well.

Your post is all the whys the EU do not want Corbyn to win.

AllForIt · 24-10-2019 11:34PM

Akrasia wrote: »

In the case of the brexit vote, they needed to influence about 2% of the population and they did this with stolen social media, personal data used to bombard these people with targeted messages specifically designed to play up to their existing fears and biases.

2%, is that all !

Varta · 24-10-2019 11:35PM

GM228 wrote: »

Those seeking the truth were given untruths by those who had the ability to easily pass what they liked as the truth, when you have great wealth and high profile faces backing you it's not hard to pass off what you say as the truth even to those who wish to dig deeper.

But you were wise enough to see through it. Yet you condescend to those who you believe were not 'wise' enough.

Varta · 24-10-2019 11:37PM

GM228 wrote: »

Remind me how old the EU is?

Why? It's irrelevant to what the poster said.

Itssoeasy · 24-10-2019 11:38PM

The U.K deserve everything they get. These people have believed the guff about Brexit

hotmail.com · 24-10-2019 11:38PM

Akrasia wrote: »

You don’t understand how election rigging works. You don’t have to win 100% of the vote, you just need to cheat just enough to influence the swing voters, the undecided, the people vulnerable to being influenced by lies or fearmongering.
In the case of the brexit vote, they needed to influence about 2% of the population and they did this with stolen social media, personal data used to bombard these people with targeted messages specifically designed to play up to their existing fears and biases.

Election rigging is something completely different.

I'm sorry but you just have to move on from this. It's a tired argument at this stage and kinda makes out the Leave voters to be idiots which they find offensive.

The Brits want out.. that's what they voted for.

Junkyard Tom · 24-10-2019 11:39PM

I think watching Question Time is like engaging in a mild form of self-harm at this stage.

Itssoeasy · 24-10-2019 11:40PM

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

I think watching Question Time is like engaging in a mild form of self-harm at this stage.

It wouldn't help if you were feeling ****e.

devnull · 24-10-2019 11:40PM

hotmail.com wrote: »

You haven't dealt with my point... the long standing anti European attitude in Britian.

Perhaps it's easier to explain things away by a 6 week campaign. It doesn't involve actual reading up and finding out about Britons attitude to Europe.

I know more about British attitudes to Brexit you can dream of because I have half of my family in the UK who are Brexiteers and I spent a good percentage of my time working in the UK as well with a mixture of leavers and remainers, so actually I do know exactly what i am talking about. My experience as to what Britons think is through day to day dealings with people face to face, I forget the last time I read a newspaper, because the British press is toxic.

I'm not saying that every single person in the UK was influenced by the campaign but a large number have been and if only 2% were influenced then it's swung the result and the fact remains that the win of the leave campaign who won and managed to drum up support was based on illegal activity, these are facts, however much of your opinion you try to give, these are still the only facts of the matter and your words are just opinion.

Nobody will know just how much that had an influence on, it could have been enough to sway the vote it might not have been. I don't know and neither do you, we are simply speculating and giving our opinion, however any cheating brings into question the integrity of the result and it's in my belief that if there is any serious doubt into the integrity of the result and how it was achieved then it should not be allowed to stand.

Do you think if a soccer team fielded a couple of players who were not eligible and won in the final of the League of Ireland Cup, that the result should stand because they won 2-0 and someone thinks they'd have won anyway as they were in better form and they believe the players were not key to the result, or do you think that the integrity of the contest had been broken so the result shouldn't stand?

Varta wrote: »

You are very naive if you think politics is clean and fair in Ireland... or anywhere. BTW your first paragraph makes no sense, either on its own or in response to my post. And my point stands: Do due diligence before you cast your vote.

I'll never condone law breaking or illegal behaviour, I'll never say that the end justifies the means.

Saying that law breaking is alright because the people that have been fooled by it should have known better is an extremely weak argument and is like saying anyone who is the victim of a law being broke or tricked by others doing so is to blame because of the fact that they didn't protect themselves properly, never been a fan of victim blaming myself.

Enzokk · 24-10-2019 11:40PM

Danzy wrote: »

Your post is all the whys the EU do not want Corbyn to win.

Please expand what you mean? I would have thought the EU would welcome a chance to remain or to get Brexit done, to borrow a phrase, by having the people decide on the deal or remain.

GM228 · 24-10-2019 11:41PM

Varta wrote: »

But you were wise enough to see through it. Yet you condescend to those who you believe were not 'wise' enough.

Many saw through it, many didn't, but where have I given the notion I look down on those who were not wise enough to see through it?

Varta wrote: »

Why? It's irrelevant to what the poster said.

It was more of a light hearted joke as I already stated, but where are these 100s of years of anti European feelings coming from, the leave side capitalized on Euroscepticism or Europhobia feelings which are a more modern and more specific phenomenon intrinsically linked to the EU.

William of Orange, Napolean, perhaps WW1 - surely those events are not considered to have created long lasting anti European feelings?

hotmail.com · 24-10-2019 11:43PM

devnull wrote: »

I know more about British attitudes to Brexit you can dream of because I have half of my family in the UK who are Brexiteers and I spent a good percentage of my time working in the UK as well with a mixture of leavers and remainers, so actually I do know exactly what i am talking about. My experience as to what Britons think is through day to day dealings with people face to face, I forget the last time I read a newspaper, because the British press is toxic.

I'm not saying that every single person in the UK was influenced by the campaign but a large number have been and the fact remains that the win of the leave campaign who won and managed to drum up support was based on illegal activity.

Nobody will know just how much that had an influence on, it could have been enough to sway the vote it might not have been. I don't know and neither do you, we are simply speculating and giving our opinion, however any cheating brings into question the integrity of the result and it's in my belief that if there is any serious doubt into the integrity of the result and how it was achieved then it should not be allowed to stand.

Do you think if a soccer team fielded a couple of players who were not eligible and won in the final of the League of Ireland Cup, that the result should stand because they won 2-0 and someone thinks they'd have won anyway as they were in better form or do you think that the integrity of the contest had been broken so the result shouldn't stand?

Well I'm glad you admit you don't know what influence the campaigning had.

Now if we can actually discuss real matters concerning Brexit without mentioning personal circumstances and weird analogies.

Strazdas · 24-10-2019 11:43PM

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

I think watching Question Time is like engaging in a mild form of self-harm at this stage.

They have an odd view of democracy. They seem to think it would be profoundly undemocratic for the people to overrule the people.

Joe_ Public · 24-10-2019 11:44PM

Strazdas wrote: »

It's not even certain Corbyn could get a WA through parliament. The Labour Leave MPs could rebel and vote the deal down.

Yeah, all depends i guess on what kind of balance there will be, as we are merely discussing a hypothetical situation in which corbyn has pulled off an unlikely triumph! Fair few of those lexiters are stepping down after this parliament anyway, some more probably lose their seats to be presumably replaced by new mps in other more pro-remain areas. Start of a parliament life anyway, dont see why any mp would feel pressure notto back it.

bilston · 24-10-2019 11:45PM

Headshot wrote: »

I think this will damage the DUP so much in the eyes of NI Voters, it could be such a huge set back that they'd never be in power for along time again

God I would be over the moon

Lucidtalk have a poll out on Sunday about attitudes towards this deal in NI. It will be interesting to see what Unionism thinks. I haven't much support for it at all amongst Unionists. But as ever it may be down to a loud minority. However when even neutral political commentators such as Jon Tongue describe it as an even bigger shift towards a United Ireland than the Anglo Irish Agreement then I suspect that most Unionists will take a fair bit of persuading that this deal.is a good thing which if that's the case will surely just boost the DUP vote.

But again let's wait and see.

Capt'n Midnight · 24-10-2019 11:49PM

hotmail.com wrote: »

This isn't true.

They viewed their neighbours with scorn for having them got involved in two world wars. If it weren't for their cultural cousins, America, Britain was screwed. It wasn't Europe that saved Britain in the wars, it was America.

The US and UK fought from Norway to France and Germany and Italy and North Africa and Greece and Crete.

But 90% of German Army casualties were on the Eastern Front. The Russians had a bigger population, more space. The were more flexible they moved all the factories. Having US supplies helped. The Germans didn't capture Moscow. Napoleon did and still lost.

Brexit is such a mess I don't even know which analogy to use.

- comparing the Germans vs Soviet Union to UK vs EU. Fritz Todt knew the war was lost in 1941 and tried to get Hitler to make peace. Pressing on split and impoverished Germany in 1945. Except there won't be any Marshall Aid for the UK.

- the Russians are powerful and pulling strings on Brexit.

- the UK didn't win a major WWII land battle without US assistance after El Alamein. The one way traffic of patents and technology from the UK during and after WII ( penicillin, jet engine, radar ) show just how one way the "special relationship" is.

FrancieBrady · 24-10-2019 11:50PM

bilston wrote: »

Lucidtalk have a poll out on Sunday about attitudes towards this deal in NI. It will be interesting to see what Unionism thinks. I haven't much support for it at all amongst Unionists. But as ever it may be down to a loud minority. However when even neutral political commentators such as Jon Tongue describe it as an even bigger shift towards a United Ireland than the Anglo Irish Agreement then I suspect that most Unionists will take a fair bit of persuading that this deal.is a good thing which if that's the case will surely just boost the DUP vote.

But again let's wait and see.

I think the DUP vote will hold or strengthen until the real effects of Brexit kick in. The 'siege' mentality will be ramped up. UUP seem to be making no effort to offer a credible alternative, probably petrified of being seen to undermine the Union...which is kinda why they fell from grace to begin with.

devnull · 24-10-2019 11:54PM

hotmail.com wrote: »

Well I'm glad you admit you don't know what influence the campaigning had.

Nobody knows for sure exactly what effect it had but any breach of integrity into a contest casts into doubt the integrity of the result, which I illustrated in the example that I gave in my last post. Just as I cannot say it certainly results in leave winning, you cannot say that it certainly didn't, at the end of the day both of us are just airing our opinions.

Still however the one proven fact is that the side that cheated and broke the law won and that casts doubt on the integrity of the result and that cannot be undone as to how much it effected the result we will never know for sure, but it did to some degree and therefore there will always be a doubt there.

Now if we can actually discuss real matters concerning Brexit without mentioning personal circumstances and weird analogies.

You are the one who stated that I needed to find out about British people's attitude to Europe and when I illustrate that I know about these things and back my point up using a coherent argument and reasons for it, you're essentially telling me off for merely responding to your point? That's not debate, it's deflection.

Varta · 25-10-2019 12:00AM

GM228 wrote: »

Many saw through it, many didn't, but where have I given the notion I look down on those who were not wise enough to see through it?

It was more of a light hearted joke as I already stated, but where are these 100s of years of anti European feelings coming from, the leave side capitalized on Euroscepticism or Europhobia feelings which are a more modern and more specific phenomenon intrinsically linked to the EU.

William of Orange, Napolean, perhaps WW1 - surely those events are not considered to have created long lasting anti European feelings?

Didn't get the joke. Fair enough. It's difficult to pinpoint where the ainti-euro feelings come from, perhaps because it's difficult to understand in 2019. However, feelings last a long time in a nation's psyche. The French and the English have a long history. But I think it probably comes down to empire and empire rivalry. The Europeans have mostly shaken off their feelings of imperialism, whereas the British have yet to come to terms with it and to some extent still seem to view the Europeans as rivals. I suppose the reasons are obscure but the attitudes are obvious.

25-10-2019 12:00AM

Iv got to admire this young lady brexiteers confidence on question time talking about Nissan and car manufacturing.

The business is fast moving JIT manufacturing and cut throat.

Edit: Kate Andrews of the IEA

Joe_ Public · 25-10-2019 12:03AM

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

The US and UK fought from Norway to France and Germany and Italy and North Africa and Greece and Crete.

But 90% of German Army casualties were on the Eastern Front. The Russians had a bigger population, more space. The were more flexible they moved all the factories. Having US supplies helped. The Germans didn't capture Moscow. Napoleon did and still lost.

Brexit is such a mess I don't even know which analogy to use.

- comparing the Germans vs Soviet Union to UK vs EU. Fritz Todt knew the war was lost in 1941 and tried to get Hitler to make peace. Pressing on split and impoverished Germany in 1945. Except there won't be any Marshall Aid for the UK.

- the Russians are powerful and pulling strings on Brexit.

- the UK didn't win a major WWII land battle without US assistance after El Alamein. The one way traffic of patents and technology from the UK during and after WII ( penicillin, jet engine, radar ) show just how one way the "special relationship" is.

It may or may not be relevant that the two most referenced military episodes in the context of brexit are Dunkirk and the dam busters, one that should have been a humiliating defeat (only germans curiously failed to turn the screw) and the other an overblowm operation that killed close to 20,000 civilians. I heard it said once that people who list the dam busters as their favourite film are very likely to be hard brexiteers while those who were actually in the dam busters, as in flew the mission, would - had they lived - be staunch remainers. Strong grain of truth in that i reckon.

Varta · 25-10-2019 12:05AM

Joe_ Public wrote: »

It may or may not be relevant that the two most referenced military episodes in the context of brexit are Dunkirk and the dam busters, one that should have been a humiliating defeat (only germans curiously failed to turn the screw) and the other an overblowm operation that killed close to 20,000 civilians. I heard it said once that people who list the dam busters as their favourite film are very likely to be hard brexiteers while those who were actually in the dam busters, as in flew the mission, would - had they lived - be staunch remainers. Strong grain of truth in that i reckon.

How can anyone know what way dead people would have voted?

Joe_ Public · 25-10-2019 12:13AM

Varta wrote: »

How can anyone know what way dead people would have voted?

Its just an extrapolation based on the pattern of war veterans who have been quite vocal in their opposition to brexit. A very common theme, for instance, at the 75th commemoration of the beach landings a few months back. I agree with it as a general point anyway, of course the specific truth or otherwise cant be known.

Junkyard Tom · 25-10-2019 12:24AM

Topgear on Dave wrote: »

Edit: Kate Andrews of the IEA

She's literally paid to disseminate pro-capitalist propaganda and nobody ever says it to her. It'd be interesting to know who in the BBC makes the decision to have her on and what their justification is considering that the BBC is supposed to be a public service.

Shelga · 25-10-2019 12:26AM

Topgear on Dave wrote: »

Iv got to admire this young lady brexiteers confidence on question time talking about Nissan and car manufacturing.

The business is fast moving JIT manufacturing and cut throat.

Edit: Kate Andrews of the IEA

Don’t you know that a dodgily-funded Tory mouthpiece knows more about running Nissan than the chairman of Nissan? That it was simply not all down to Brexit when he said they will have to pull out of the UK due to tariffs imposed by Brexit?

I don’t know why I watch it anymore either, I only find myself wishing bad things on the UK and that’s not a nice way to be. At this stage though, I will have less than zero sympathy if big car manufacturers pull out.

Brexit discussion thread XI (Please read OP before posting)

Comments