Brexit!

[Wortho]

Just now, hackneyfox said:

You do realise that Will Self only made the comment to wind up Mark Francois?

 

All parrots are birds doesn’t mean that all birds are parrots.

You are a clever man 

[RobHawk]

1 hour ago, StanSP said:

Not all leave voters are racist but all racists voted leave. 

 

A great snippet by Will Self from an interview I can't find right now. 

Didn't he say that when interviewed on I think sky news when him and mark Francois had that weird stare off? 

[Alf Bentley]

1 hour ago, Wortho said:

But didn't the Labour Party say in their 2017 manifesto that would deliver as the public wanted and leave the EU. They have now changed their mind. Flip flopped again.

If Labour get a majority at the GE they will get a new deal with the EU. They will then recommend the electorate to reject their new deal in favour of remaining in the EU in another referendum 

You couldn't make this up.

 

The 2017 Labour manifesto said they would "accept the referendum result", "reject No Deal as a viable option", "scrap the Conservatives’ Brexit White Paper and replace it with fresh negotiating priorities that have a strong emphasis on retaining the benefits of the Single Market and the Customs Union".  That's what they sought to do in supporting CU/SM options during the indicative votes and in negotiating with May. But they didn't have the numbers to win votes and May wasn't budging on her priorities. They're now trying to block No Deal, as promised in their manifesto.

 

Labour as a party has NOT said it would recommend the electorate reject their hypothetical new deal. Particular Labour politicians have said they'd back Remain in such a scenario......but there's a difference between an individual and a political party!

Just because Ken Clarke or Jacob Rees-Mogg say they're going to do something, that doesn't make it Tory party policy. In practice, if that scenario ever arises, my guess is that Labour politicians would be free to support either side....just as Tory politicians were in 2016. Some, including Corbyn himself (as a longstanding Soft Brexiteer), might well support Labour's hypothetical new deal.

 

Labour has switched to supporting a second referendum, after failing to get the Soft Brexit deal advocated in their manifesto. But compare that to the "flip-flopping" by the Tories.....

The 2017 Tory manifesto said: "Theresa May's Conservatives will deliver the best possible deal for Britain as we leave the European Union delivered by a smooth, orderly Brexit" and "a deep and special partnership with the remaining 27 member states". That's quite a flip-flop there, from advocating a "deal", "a smooth, orderly Brexit" and "a deep and special partnership" to prioritising No Deal (as Amber Rudd pointed out), a chaotic exit and no partnership whatsoever - and threatening to trash national democracy and the rule of law to bring it about..... 

 

Of course, your post ignores Babylon's inconvenient point to which you were responding. Do you remember? He was highlighting the rubbish referendum debate (on both sides) and specifically posted a massive Vote Leave map, declaring that Turkey was joining the EU, with a massive arrow showing millions of Turks descending on the UK.

 

If you ever stop avoiding difficult questions and answer Babylon's point, perhaps you could let us know when Turkey will be joining the EU and when those millions of Turkish immigrants will descend on us?

 

While you're at it, maybe you could explain why, a few years ago, Boris Johnson said: "And when that great moment comes and the 2 halves of the Roman Empire, East and West, are at last reunited in an expanded European Union, the territory of Turkey will be rejoining a Union that certainly has pretensions to restore that grand old Roman unity"? 

 

 

 

[Wortho]

15 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

The 2017 Labour manifesto said they would "accept the referendum result", "reject No Deal as a viable option", "scrap the Conservatives’ Brexit White Paper and replace it with fresh negotiating priorities that have a strong emphasis on retaining the benefits of the Single Market and the Customs Union".  That's what they sought to do in supporting CU/SM options during the indicative votes and in negotiating with May. But they didn't have the numbers to win votes and May wasn't budging on her priorities. They're now trying to block No Deal, as promised in their manifesto.

 

Labour as a party has NOT said it would recommend the electorate reject their hypothetical new deal. Particular Labour politicians have said they'd back Remain in such a scenario......but there's a difference between an individual and a political party!

Just because Ken Clarke or Jacob Rees-Mogg say they're going to do something, that doesn't make it Tory party policy. In practice, if that scenario ever arises, my guess is that Labour politicians would be free to support either side....just as Tory politicians were in 2016. Some, including Corbyn himself (as a longstanding Soft Brexiteer), might well support Labour's hypothetical new deal.

 

Labour has switched to supporting a second referendum, after failing to get the Soft Brexit deal advocated in their manifesto. But compare that to the "flip-flopping" by the Tories.....

The 2017 Tory manifesto said: "Theresa May's Conservatives will deliver the best possible deal for Britain as we leave the European Union delivered by a smooth, orderly Brexit" and "a deep and special partnership with the remaining 27 member states". That's quite a flip-flop there, from advocating a "deal", "a smooth, orderly Brexit" and "a deep and special partnership" to prioritising No Deal (as Amber Rudd pointed out), a chaotic exit and no partnership whatsoever - and threatening to trash national democracy and the rule of law to bring it about..... 

 

Of course, your post ignores Babylon's inconvenient point to which you were responding. Do you remember? He was highlighting the rubbish referendum debate (on both sides) and specifically posted a massive Vote Leave map, declaring that Turkey was joining the EU, with a massive arrow showing millions of Turks descending on the UK.

 

If you ever stop avoiding difficult questions and answer Babylon's point, perhaps you could let us know when Turkey will be joining the EU and when those millions of Turkish immigrants will descend on us?

 

While you're at it, maybe you could explain why, a few years ago, Boris Johnson said: "And when that great moment comes and the 2 halves of the Roman Empire, East and West, are at last reunited in an expanded European Union, the territory of Turkey will be rejoining a Union that certainly has pretensions to restore that grand old Roman unity"? 

 

 

 

You have also conveniently forgotten Cameron and Osborne declaring that even after the referendum result the country would been in recession. Also, that 800,000 jobs would be lost, house prices would drop by a third and of course a plague of locusts. This would be an immediate outcome.

All these "experts" predicting a disaster after "crashing out", but what do they really know? These are probably the same "experts" who said that aeroplanes would fall out of sky when we went in to the year 2000. 

Judging by the posters on here most of them probably believed all of this and still do, I think they have been influenced by reading the Guardian/Mirror too much or just fools. 

[Alf Bentley]

2 minutes ago, Wortho said:

You have also conveniently forgotten Cameron and Osborne declaring that even after the referendum result the country would been in recession. Also, that 800,000 jobs would be lost, house prices would drop by a third and of course a plague of locusts. This would be an immediate outcome.

All these "experts" predicting a disaster after "crashing out", but what do they really know? These are probably the same "experts" who said that aeroplanes would fall out of sky when we went in to the year 2000. 

Judging by the posters on here most of them probably believed all of this and still do, I think they have been influenced by reading the Guardian/Mirror too much or just fools. 

 

My post responded to yours and repeated Babylon's point that you had chosen to ignore.

In reply, you've completely ignored my points, as you ignored Babylon's and have just indulged in distractions and "whataboutery".

 

That shows a lack of respect for honest debate, in my book.

 

So (unusually for me), I'll only bother with a short reply:

Yes, Cameron & Osborne were dishonest purveyors of bollocks, too. Economic forecasting is a very imprecise business, but experts still know more than non-experts, even if some forecasts prove inaccurate - or are misused.

Forecasts may or may not be accurate once Brexit - or No Deal - actually happens. But common sense suggests that making 50% of your trade much more difficult and/or expensive will have a major negative impact in multiple ways....

 

[simFox]

6 hours ago, FerrisBueller said:

You could argue that implementing the result of an advisory referendum that has since been proved to be fraudulent, is not very democratic. The problem is 'Leave' is such a broad term, it was never defined in what manner we would leave. It's all got a bit cult like where people are actively pursuing a no deal, against their own interests to make some point about democracy. 

 

We need another referendum, where the options are clear and the public are properly informed.

Remain

Leave with a deal (work out the deal before signing article 50)

Leave with no deal.

Remainers are so keen to split the leave vote. You can't even hold a second neverendum without blatantly rigging it. Are you really that stupid to think it will get past the fairness test.

[FerrisBueller]

1 minute ago, simFox said:

Remainers are so keen to split the leave vote. You can't even hold a second neverendum without blatantly rigging it. Are you really that stupid to think it will get past the fairness test.

Mate, what are you on about?

[simFox]

3 minutes ago, FerrisBueller said:

Mate, what are you on about?

We need another referendum, where the options are clear and the public are properly informed.

Remain = 48%

Leave with a deal (work out the deal before signing article 50) = 20%

Leave with no deal. = 32%

 

 

So on your referendum remain wins?

[Finnaldo]

Lads I think we need to stop entertaining the bloke who called Hitler a Social Democrat  

[FerrisBueller]

Just now, simFox said:

We need another referendum, where the options are clear and the public are properly informed.

Remain = 48%

Leave with a deal (work out the deal before signing article 50) = 20%

Leave with no deal. = 32%

 

 

So on your referendum remain wins?

It's not about splitting the vote, It's about holding a fair legal referendum, something the leave side failed last time.

It's just astounding that people can bleat on about 'Democracy' yet are perfectly happy to ignore the fact that electoral law was broken. If you can BUY your result, that's not democracy.

[WigstonWanderer]

27 minutes ago, simFox said:

We need another referendum, where the options are clear and the public are properly informed.

Remain = 48%

Leave with a deal (work out the deal before signing article 50) = 20%

Leave with no deal. = 32%

 

 

So on your referendum remain wins?

Single transferable vote would ensure a true majority outcome as acceptable as possible.

[StanSP]

56 minutes ago, Wortho said:

You have also conveniently forgotten Cameron and Osborne declaring that even after the referendum result the country would been in recession. Also, that 800,000 jobs would be lost, house prices would drop by a third and of course a plague of locusts. This would be an immediate outcome.

All these "experts" predicting a disaster after "crashing out", but what do they really know? These are probably the same "experts" who said that aeroplanes would fall out of sky when we went in to the year 2000. 

Judging by the posters on here most of them probably believed all of this and still do, I think they have been influenced by reading the Guardian/Mirror too much or just fools. 

The irony. As if you've not been brainwashed and influenced by the Telegraph or any other Tory-spun media that the sunlit uplands will miraculously show themselves once we are out of the EU. Funny how no-one ever recalled such a utopia or paradise before the referendum even took place. But suddenly now that we could leave the EU, they mysteriously exist. 

 

I'd much rather trust experts on the (quite clear) matter about the potential of what could happen in the event of a shitty no-deal Brexit than someone who isn't an expert and can only, at best, speculate without some kind of reasoning or factual explanations. 

 

I go back to a point I raised earlier on in this thread. The constant reasons given by doctors, nurses, scientists etc about how Brexit will negatively effect medical services and industry is enough for me to believe them. After all, they're not experts in the field they work in for no reason. 

[simFox]

1 hour ago, FerrisBueller said:

It's not about splitting the vote, It's about holding a fair legal referendum, something the leave side failed last time.

It's just astounding that people can bleat on about 'Democracy' yet are perfectly happy to ignore the fact that electoral law was broken. If you can BUY your result, that's not democracy.

Eh? You been drinking?

[FerrisBueller]

6 minutes ago, simFox said:

Eh? You been drinking?

Are you an ostrich?

[Claudiofox]

 A very British cock up 

 

CARRY ON BREXIT ! 

 

 

[Wortho]

2 hours ago, Finnaldo said:

Lads I think we need to stop entertaining the bloke who called Hitler a Social Democrat  

National socialist then.

I hope you're happy with your terrorist sympathising leaders. Good luck.

Edited 10 September 2019 by Wortho
Grammar

[Leicester_Loyal]

1 hour ago, StanSP said:

The irony. As if you've not been brainwashed and influenced by the Telegraph or any other Tory-spun media that the sunlit uplands will miraculously show themselves once we are out of the EU. Funny how no-one ever recalled such a utopia or paradise before the referendum even took place. But suddenly now that we could leave the EU, they mysteriously exist. 

 

I'd much rather trust experts on the (quite clear) matter about the potential of what could happen in the event of a shitty no-deal Brexit than someone who isn't an expert and can only, at best, speculate without some kind of reasoning or factual explanations. 

 

I go back to a point I raised earlier on in this thread. The constant reasons given by doctors, nurses, scientists etc about how Brexit will negatively effect medical services and industry is enough for me to believe them. After all, they're not experts in the field they work in for no reason. 

As someone with family members in those two fields, both were briefed that no deal wouldn't effect medical supplies. This could be specific to the places they work at, I'm not sure.

Edited 10 September 2019 by Leicester_Loyal

[FerrisBueller]

17 minutes ago, Wortho said:

National socialist then.

I hope you're happy with your terrorist sympathising leaders. Good luck.

As oppose to the tories, who arm actual terrorists...

[Wortho]

New jobs figures just out:

👷‍♀️ More than 300,000 new full-time jobs since last year

👨‍💻 More than 3 million new full-time jobs since 2010

👛 Average pay up 4% - the fastest rise since the Gordon Brown recession

📉 Unemployment at its lowest level in 45 years.

[Wortho]

1 minute ago, FerrisBueller said:

As oppose to the tories, who arm actual terrorists...

Of course Corbyn never met the IRA 🙄

[simFox]

1 hour ago, StanSP said:

The irony. As if you've not been brainwashed and influenced by the Telegraph or any other Tory-spun media that the sunlit uplands will miraculously show themselves once we are out of the EU. Funny how no-one ever recalled such a utopia or paradise before the referendum even took place. But suddenly now that we could leave the EU, they mysteriously exist. 

 

I'd much rather trust experts on the (quite clear) matter about the potential of what could happen in the event of a shitty no-deal Brexit than someone who isn't an expert and can only, at best, speculate without some kind of reasoning or factual explanations. 

 

I go back to a point I raised earlier on in this thread. The constant reasons given by doctors, nurses, scientists etc about how Brexit will negatively effect medical services and industry is enough for me to believe them. After all, they're not experts in the field they work in for no reason. 

It may come as a surprise, but doctors aren't experts at everything, particularly supply chains and logistics.

 

They should stick to administering medicine.

[FerrisBueller]

4 minutes ago, Wortho said:

Of course Corbyn never met the IRA 🙄

Not saying he didn't. Just highlighting that the Tories sell arms to Saudi Arabia, so essentially, they're all shites.

[StanSP]

4 minutes ago, simFox said:

They should stick to administering medicine

If the medicine is going to be there .

 

Also, I didn't say doctors are experts at everything. But who knows, perhaps some experts do have some knowledge of something beyond their professional working experience. Shock, I know. 

[Finnaldo]

46 minutes ago, Wortho said:

National socialist then.

I hope you're happy with your terrorist sympathising leaders. Good luck.

 

Don’t support Corbyn as Labour leader or his foreign policy but good effort at deflecting mate

Edited 10 September 2019 by Finnaldo

[Wortho]

18 minutes ago, FerrisBueller said:

Not saying he didn't. Just highlighting that the Tories sell arms to Saudi Arabia, so essentially, they're all shites.

I think honouring IRA murderers and attending ceremonies whilst our soldiers are being slaughtered is quite bad.