Politics Thread (encompassing Brexit) - 21 June 2017 onwards

[Strokes]

52 minutes ago, MattP said:

Bloody hell.

 

If you are confused about my politics Rog/Moose/Bunk/Frank/Chandler how do you think I feel about you? 

 

5 personas that we know of, two left, two right and one a libertarian - least I'm consistent. 

Don’t forget Dodgy Bob.

[Fox Ulike]

14 hours ago, MattP said:

To be honest mate, from what you have written on here I don't think you really have a clue what Leave voters want, you haven't given that impression once that you do, don't worry about that, very few people seem to judging by what I read, even in the mainstream press good pro-EU writers like Philip Collins, Zoe Williams and David Aaronovich just don't get that it's about making decisions and accountability, it really isn't enough to just be told "they can do that anyway" and you be expected to take it.

 

As for strategy to achieve objectives, unfortunately it wasn't possible for the leave campaign to do that as they weren't in a government so rightly those guarantees would have been laughed at, a Remain supporter held the position of Prime Minister (David Cameron), Home Secretary (Theresa May before the Damascene conversion), Foreign Secretary (Phillip Hammond) and Chancellor (Gideon) - at the time we were assured by the leadership even in the event of a vote to leave they would be staying on to implement the decision.

 

In hindsight it's probably why this progression would have been taken better via a general election rather than a referendum (even though that seems completely impractical given the parties were split), we then could have produced a leave manifesto to go on, or Cameron could have been more responsible and set out policy for both outcomes, rather than gambling on fear keeping the masses in line.

 

So I said that people who voted Leave voted with their emotions. You tell me I don’t have a clue but then two paragraphs later you remind everyone how the Leave campaign came up with “project fear” to encourage people to vote Leave. 

 

Its like you're writing my posts for me. ?

Edited 17 February 2018 by Fox Ulike

[DJ Barry Hammond]

15 hours ago, MattP said:

 

As for strategy to achieve objectives, unfortunately it wasn't possible for the leave campaign to do that as they weren't in a government so rightly those guarantees would have been laughed at, a Remain supporter held the position of Prime Minister (David Cameron), Home Secretary (Theresa May before the Damascene conversion), Foreign Secretary (Phillip Hammond) and Chancellor (Gideon) - at the time we were assured by the leadership even in the event of a vote to leave they would be staying on to implement the decision.

 

In hindsight it's probably why this progression would have been taken better via a general election rather than a referendum (even though that seems completely impractical given the parties were split), we then could have produced a leave manifesto to go on, or Cameron could have been more responsible and set out policy for both outcomes, rather than gambling on fear keeping the masses in line.

 

To claim this, you have to ignore that infamous big red bus... call it an ambition rather than a policy if you like, that was still a future policy idea, so it was possible for Leave to set out a vision of what the future would be. 

 

That they didn’t was probably down to two things - recognising that providing too much detail could harm their chances and due to the difficulty on coming to a general consensus within themselves.

 

Then on the second point - the idea of deciding via an election is silly. But we did have one of those afterwards thanks to Theresa and maybe the message to take from that humbling is domestic issues are much more important to UK voters than Brexit alone?

[Strokes]

13 minutes ago, DJ Barry Hammond said:

 

To claim this, you have to ignore that infamous big red bus... call it an ambition rather than a policy if you like, that was still a future policy idea, so it was possible for Leave to set out a vision of what the future would be. 

 

That they didn’t was probably down to two things - recognising that providing too much detail could harm their chances and due to the difficulty on coming to a general consensus within themselves.

 

Then on the second point - the idea of deciding via an election is silly. But we did have one of those afterwards thanks to Theresa and maybe the message to take from that humbling is domestic issues are much more important to UK voters than Brexit alone?

I don’t want go over old ground but the bus was not displaying a policy, there were no manifestos. If people believed anything to be enacted on by campaign group containing people outside of power, that was at best naive and at worst stupid.

[Buce]

21 minutes ago, Strokes said:

I don’t want go over old ground but the bus was not displaying a policy, there were no manifestos. If people believed anything to be enacted on by campaign group containing people outside of power, that was at best naive and at worst stupid.

 

Which is what we've been saying all along.

 

Many leave voters voted on false premises.

[Innovindil]

20 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

Which is what we've been saying all along.

 

Many leave voters voted on false premises.

Really? Don't think I've seen it mentioned before. 

[Strokes]

18 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

Which is what we've been saying all along.

 

Many leave voters voted on false premises.

I don’t think so, it showed people didn’t want to give money to the EU that could be spent here.

[Rogstanley]

8 minutes ago, Strokes said:

I don’t think so, it showed people didn’t want to give money to the EU that could be spent here.

But you admit now that the idea of that actually being possible was naive and stupid?

[Strokes]

Just now, Rogstanley said:

But you admit now that the idea of that actually being possible was naive and stupid?

No, I didn’t say that. I said the idea it could be implemented by a campaign group was naive or stupid. Things like that get decided in general elections and that was in the summer last year.

[Claridge]

1 hour ago, Strokes said:

I don’t think so, it showed people didn’t want to give money to the EU that could be spent here.

Some of us want less money spent here as well,or spent better at least.

[Grebfromgrebland]

This is what brexit was really about forget what you're being told.

 

Brexiteers want to sell our country down the pan in the guise of taking back control which translates to taking control away from those who care about our people and giving it to those who just want to exploit us in the name of profit and these people know no boundaries when it comes to ethics or humanity.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/17/revealed-us-uk-rightwing-thinktanks-talks-to-ditch-eu-safety-checks

[Strokes]

2 minutes ago, Grebfromgrebland said:

This is what brexit was really about forget what you're being told.

 

Brexiteers want to sell our country down the pan in the guise of taking back control which translates to taking control away from those who care about our people and giving it to those who just want to exploit us in the name of profit and these people know no boundaries when it comes to ethics or humanity.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/17/revealed-us-uk-rightwing-thinktanks-talks-to-ditch-eu-safety-checks

Oh no, the Americans are coming.

[leicsmac]

5 minutes ago, Strokes said:

Oh no, the Americans are coming.

Exactly. It's not like we've not done deals with places with massively dodgy human rights records before... 

[Grebfromgrebland]

18 minutes ago, Strokes said:

Oh no, the Americans are coming.

If you're not afraid of the American influence you're either a multi millionaire, extremely stupid or extremely naive.

 

I think I know the answer.

 

 

[Strokes]

1 minute ago, Grebfromgrebland said:

If you're not afraid of the American influence you're either a multi millionaire, extremely stupid or extremely naive.

 

I think I know the answer.

 

 

Why should i be afraid of a trade deal with america? Would you have been afraid if ttip was signed off by the EU?

[Strokes]

17 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Exactly. It's not like we've not done deals with places with massively dodgy human rights records before... 

You hate it so much, you upped sticks and moved there

 

Edited 17 February 2018 by Strokes

[leicsmac]

1 minute ago, Strokes said:

You hate it so much, you upped sticks and moved there

 

I'm thankful to live in one of the saner corners of the place - sadly though, there aren't that many.

[Strokes]

1 minute ago, leicsmac said:

I'm thankful to live in one of the saner corners of the place - sadly though, there aren't that many.

Still, i think if you can avoid its evils in the periphery of the lions den. We should be ok on the other side of the Atlantic.

[leicsmac]

6 minutes ago, Strokes said:

Still, i think if you can avoid its evils in the periphery of the lions den. We should be ok on the other side of the Atlantic.

I dunno, just because the madness of this administration hasn't reached me yet (not gotten myself sick or injured yet and I'm a little inured thanks to genetic factors), doesn't mean it might not reach either me or the UK at some point.

[Strokes]

17 minutes ago, Grebfromgrebland said:

If you're not afraid of the American influence you're either a multi millionaire, extremely stupid or extremely naive.

 

I think I know the answer.

 

 

United States has free trade agreements in force with 20 countries. These are:

• Australia
• Bahrain
• Canada
• Chile
• Colombia
• Costa Rica
• Dominican Republic
• El Salvador
• Guatemala
• Honduras
• Israel
• Jordan
• Korea
• Mexico
• Morocco
• Nicaragua
• Oman
• Panama
• Peru
• Singapore

Which one of these do you think are negatively affected by the free trade deal with the USA?

I need to understand in as nuch detail as you can because im obviously quite naive and stupid.

[Strokes]

2 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

I dunno, just because the madness of this administration hasn't reached me yet (not gotten myself sick or injured yet and I'm a little inured thanks to genetic factors), doesn't mean it might not reach either me or the UK at some point.

But its not concerning you enough to move away yet?

[leicsmac]

2 minutes ago, Strokes said:

But its not concerning you enough to move away yet?

Can't, not yet, for personal reasons. But myself and the better half would like to at some point.

[Innovindil]

1 hour ago, Grebfromgrebland said:

This is what brexit was really about forget what you're being told.

 

Brexiteers want to sell our country down the pan in the guise of taking back control which translates to taking control away from those who care about our people and giving it to those who just want to exploit us in the name of profit and these people know no boundaries when it comes to ethics or humanity.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/17/revealed-us-uk-rightwing-thinktanks-talks-to-ditch-eu-safety-checks

“If consumers don’t want to buy products made to different standards to our own, they will see the US flag on the packet and not buy it,” she said.

 

Now we're getting somewhere. Gimme my cheap chicken! Yay! 

[Strokes]

6 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

“If consumers don’t want to buy products made to different standards to our own, they will see the US flag on the packet and not buy it,” she said.

 

Now we're getting somewhere. Gimme my cheap chicken! Yay! 

We are too stupid to be allowed free choice.

[Rogstanley]

In the current political climate it does unfortunately feel guaranteed that the ability to 'make our own laws' will be used primarily to further enrich the elite at the expense of the masses.

 

The standard response to that from brexiters is "but if we don't like what they're doing we can vote them out".

 

Two problems with that. Firstly, they're not going to advertise the fact that they're screwing us over. It will be done in stealthy ways that will be all but invisible to ordinary people. We know most brexiters, even those who claim EU law was one of the main reasons they voted leave, can't actually describe the function of a single EU law, so the idea they're suddenly going to become experts in law is laughable.

 

Secondly, if you can still vote Tory now after eight years of failure, there's pretty much nothing they can ever do that will stop you voting for them. Democracy is only worthwhile if you actually use it; it only serves as a check and balance against ruthless exploitation if the people in power genuinely fear losing votes. Right now the Tories don't. That's partly because of the weak opposition, but mainly because their followers are so blind and tribal that they know they can get away with just about anything.

Edited 17 February 2018 by Rogstanley