Brexit discussion thread V - No Pic/GIF dumps please

Wheres Me Jumper?

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Feel free to agitate for one - but we both know the reason there will not be a 2nd is because the result would be another crushing win for Yes, and it would be a waste of time.


The Brexiteers want to prevent a 2nd referendum because they would lose. They only fluked the 1st one because no-one thought they would win and it seemed a safe protest vote.

maybe they shouldn't allow those type of people to vote at all, or maybe their votes should be discounted depending on their level of education?

and the REMOANERS just want a 2nd cut at it, cos they LOST!

WomanSkirtFan8

Wheres Me Jumper? wrote: »

lest we forget many Brits still see Dunkirk as a military victory.

While also conveniently forgetting that in reality it was actually a tactical retreat from nazi-occupied France at the time.

First Up

Wheres Me Jumper? wrote: »

but Brexiters do not swallow your apocalyptic prediction?
as far as they are concerned this choo choo of yours heading to the promised land.

They remind me of some passengers on a cruise ship who commandeered a lifeboat because they objected to being required to turn up for dinner at 7pm instead of a time of their choosing.

Now in the lifeboat, they can't agree where to go and in any case none of them knows how to navigate. Plus they are running out of the food they stole from the buffet and are trying to radio the ship to ask for more. When the captain explains that the ship is now far way and keeping to its schedule, the lifeboat occupants accuse him of inhumanity and vindictiveness.

The captain invites them to eat the emergency rations in the lifeboat.

FreudianSlippers

Wheres Me Jumper? wrote: »

well as i said fair play to ya, but i didn't.
was i misinformed, misled, or uninformed, or lied to?

Uninformed perhaps. As for the rest, no - luckily we have fairly good and unbiased election literature in this country.

Our first vote against Nice resulted in treaty change and our first vote against Lisbon resulted in a much needed clarification.

I'm not suggesting that the electorate should be required to read the treaty prior to voting, but the government should not be (and luckily has not) been misleading so far in this country.

The opposition parties, however, have been - look at the minimum wage (etc.) arguments from Lisbon.

we could open up all those referendums again, and not just the EU ones?

No we really couldn't - there is really nothing analogous in Ireland to the Brexit referendum... particularly outside (read: Russian) interference.

don't know about you, but i really feel lied to regarding that whole Gay marraige fiasco.

Huh?

MrMusician18

Wheres Me Jumper? wrote: »

well as i said fair play to ya, but i didn't.
was i misinformed, misled, or uninformed, or lied to?

we could open up all those referendums again, and not just the EU ones? don't know about you, but i really feel lied to regarding that whole Gay marraige fiasco.

What gay marriage fiasco? Of all the referendums we've held here you've probably picked one of the most well understood, simple ones. Yes to allow SSM, no to prohibit it. It's the best kind of question to put to a public vote, not particularly nuanced and well understood.

Compare that to the treaties we have been asked to vote on, dense legal text that if you look hard enough you'll be able to find something to interpret as objectionable. That's of course if you look at all, with most voting placing their trust in the campaigners that appealed best to them emotionally.

Wheres Me Jumper?

WomanSkirtFan8 wrote: »

While also conveniently forgetting that in reality it was actually a tactical retreat from nazi-occupied France at the time.

indeed it was, and a huge tactical error by Hitler.

First Up

Wheres Me Jumper? wrote: »

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Feel free to agitate for one - but we both know the reason there will not be a 2nd is because the result would be another crushing win for Yes, and it would be a waste of time.


The Brexiteers want to prevent a 2nd referendum because they would lose. They only fluked the 1st one because no-one thought they would win and it seemed a safe protest vote.

maybe they shouldn't allow those type of people to vote at all, or maybe their votes should be discounted depending on their level of education?

Or maybe they should stick with representative democracy and elect people to take these complicated decisions.

Professor Moriarty

John Major telling it like it is in a speech last night:

“...a hard border, now or at the end of a long transition period or at any time would be disastrous. Peace isn’t secure, it never is and any new border would be a focus for the wild men on the fringes to reactivate old disputes and hatreds that should be laid to rest forever.”

Awesomeness

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Feel free to agitate for one - but we both know the reason there will not be a 2nd is because the result would be another crushing win for Yes, and it would be a waste of time.


The Brexiteers want to prevent a 2nd referendum because they would lose. They only fluked the 1st one because no-one thought they would win and it seemed a safe protest vote.

I believe remain would win a new referendum but to say the fluked the first one is not correct. You cant fluke a vote.

There were a number of factors, brexiteers peddling lies, people taking the result for granted etc. But to say it was fluked is to signify it is unlikely to happen again.

It will though if nothing changes. People need to exercise their right to vote. People need to educate themselves. People need to be called on their BS.

They may have cheated and lied but it was not by chance

seamus

Wheres Me Jumper? wrote: »

just when you thought the Brits couldn't look more silly, Treesa is doing the rounds of Euro capitals in a desperate bid to renegotiate the deal. has this woman no self-respect?

As we now know, there is no grand plan. No overarching strategy here, no pincer movement that the UK is going to reveal that will prove Brexit was a great idea and things will get better.

Given just how absolutely clueless the UK parliament proved themselves to be on the topic of Northern Ireland, it's fair to assume that they are even more clueless about the EU, about what it is, how it works, and why it does what it does.

May is on a tour of EU leaders because she genuinely believes that this is how she is going to get the deal amended.

It doesn't matter how many times it is explained. The UK parliament doesn't get it. It believes that it is negotiating individually with 27 countries, 25 of whom are subservient to Germany and France. She's in Germany today because she thinks Merkel is in charge of the EU.

It's actually that simple - they have a 16 year-old Daily Mail-reader level of comprehension of the EU.

Strazdas

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

John Major telling it like it is in a speech last night:

“...a hard border, now or at the end of a long transition period or at any time would be disastrous. Peace isn’t secure, it never is and any new border would be a focus for the wild men on the fringes to reactivate old disputes and hatreds that should be laid to rest forever.”

He has given a new speech in Dublin in the last hour or so saying the UK should immediately pull Article 50 and take things from there.

Sounds eminently sensible, but no doubt the Brexiteers and their press buddies would react with apoplectic rage.

LuckyLloyd

Wheres Me Jumper? wrote: »

well as i said fair play to ya, but i didn't.
was i misinformed, misled, or uninformed, or lied to?

we could open up all those referendums again, and not just the EU ones? don't know about you, but i really feel lied to regarding that whole Gay marraige fiasco.

For Nice, Marriage Equality or any other constitutional change you are asked to vote on as an Irish citizen you receive two key benefits denied the British people in 2016:

1) A clear unambiguous question of constitutional change backed up by a parliament able and willing to pass legislation to effect it
2) An impartial and well run referendum commission that effectively offers unbiased objective information on the question of constitutional change

The UK asked its people an open ended question with no parliamentary consensus or draft legislation in place to enact it. Sheer lunacy. There is now a deal on the table, or "reality". It seems perfectly acceptable to put it to the people again now that "Brexit" actually has a negotiated definition.

Folkstonian

seamus wrote: »

As we now know, there is no grand plan. No overarching strategy here, no pincer movement that the UK is going to reveal that will prove Brexit was a great idea and things will get better.

Given just how absolutely clueless the UK parliament proved themselves to be on the topic of Northern Ireland, it's fair to assume that they are even more clueless about the EU, about what it is, how it works, and why it does what it does.

May is on a tour of EU leaders because she genuinely believes that this is how she is going to get the deal amended.

It doesn't matter how many times it is explained. The UK parliament doesn't get it. It believes that it is negotiating individually with 27 countries, 25 of whom are subservient to Germany and France. She's in Germany today because she thinks Merkel is in charge of the EU.

It's actually that simple - they have a 16 year-old Daily Mail-reader level of comprehension of the EU.

Whilst I do think it’s wholly futile for Theresa May to be going back to the continent this late in the day, the EU doesn’t (for now, at least) build its own policies from the ground up. It relies on input and direction from the member states.

So while I think it’s pointless now, I don’t know why people scoff at any leader in theory trying to influence the EU’s position by speaking to individual heads of state and having them communicate their positions at the European Council

UsedToWait

Awesomeness wrote: »

I believe remain would win a new referendum but to say the fluked the first one is not correct. You cant fluke a vote.

There were a number of factors, brexiteers peddling lies, people taking the result for granted etc. But to say it was fluked is to signify it is unlikely to happen again.

It will though if nothing changes. People need to exercise their right to vote. People need to educate themselves. People need to be called on their BS.

They may have cheated and lied but it was not by chance

The main reason I'd be against a 2nd ref at this point is that neither the British government, nor the main opposition have dealt with the outside interference in the first one.

As usual, the excellent Carole Cadwalladr and others have interesting points as to why that may be -
The Tories don't want to expose how riddled they are with Russian money, while Labour are no cleaner (see Seamus Milne's links to Oleg Deripaska for instance)..

https://mobile.twitter.com/carolecadwalla/status/1066728629432958978

J Mysterio

Decent article in the Irish Times explaining what 'assurances' could be provided to May:

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/uk/what-can-the-eu-offer-may-to-save-her-brexit-deal-1.3727402?mode=amp

Wheres Me Jumper?

Awesomeness wrote: »

I believe remain would win a new referendum but to say the fluked the first one is not correct. You cant fluke a vote.

There were a number of factors, brexiteers peddling lies, people taking the result for granted etc. But to say it was fluked is to signify it is unlikely to happen again.

It will though if nothing changes. People need to exercise their right to vote. People need to educate themselves. People need to be called on their BS.

They may have cheated and lied but it was not by chance

i suppose Trump "fluked" his win as well.
it seems to me that some of these liberals cant just take a beatin'.
my 5 y/o daughter does exactly the same thing when she looses a game of cards. she changes the rules, cheats, bangs the table, and often storms out usually with her parting shot of "stupid game!" or "i dont like that game!" or "you're cheating Dad!".

but you expect better from these people who are so well informed.

LuckyLloyd

Folkstonian wrote: »

Whilst I do think it’s wholly futile for Theresa May to be going back to the continent this late in the day, the EU doesn’t (for now, at least) build its own policies from the ground up. It relies on input and direction from the member states.

So while I think it’s pointless now, I don’t know why people scoff at any leader in theory trying to influence the EU’s position by speaking to individual heads of state and having them communicate their positions at the European Council

I scoff at it because she tried this in the summer and it didn't work. The "divide and conquer" David Davies assumption of going to Berlin rather than Brussels is clearly dead in the water. It's nonsense, and so it is scoffed at - like we can increasingly scoff at the British political institutions paralysed at a moment of self inflicted national crisis.

Akrasia

When you say cheated, I hope you're referring to Aaron banks and his 8 million pounds of funding from illegal sources (probably Russian)

Or the blatant lies about NHS funding that they're still lying about

Or the lies about turkey and egypt joining the EU

Or the decades of propaganda stories in the UK press where they routinely made up lies about what the EU was doing to take away UK sovereignty....

Wheres Me Jumper?

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

I scoff at it because she tried this in the summer and it didn't work. The "divide and conquer" David Davies assumption of going to Berlin rather than Brussels is clearly dead in the water. It's nonsense, and so it is scoffed at - like we can increasingly scoff at the British political institutions paralysed at a moment of self inflicted national crisis.

i never thought i would say this, but this whole fiasco has reminded me just how well served we are by the majority of our politicians.

LuckyLloyd

Wheres Me Jumper? wrote: »

i suppose Trump "fluked" his win as well.
it seems to me that some of these liberals cant just take a beatin'.
my 5 y/o daughter does exactly the same thing when she looses a game of cards. she changes the rules, cheats, bangs the table, and often storms out usually with her parting shot of "stupid game!" or "i dont like that game!" or "you're cheating Dad!".

but you expect better from these people who are so well informed.

Trump and Brexit: the politics of anger and schadenfreude

Brexit needs to happen for no other reason than 'we won when you said we wouldn't / couldn't / shouldn't'

It's probably pointless debating this mindset unfortunately.

LuckyLloyd

Wheres Me Jumper? wrote: »

i never thought i would say this, but this whole fiasco has reminded me just how well served we are by the majority of our politicians.

That I completely agree with you on. The fact we have a minority government in Ireland presently and yet the opposition parties have facilitated its continuance in the national interest is quite extraordinary. But something I am massively grateful for.

Akrasia

Skelet0n wrote: »

This is one of the more bizarre view points of brexit.
It's not voting on the same thing again, it'd be voting on the deal that is on the table not some abstract concept.

You can't have too much democracy, the real reason this line is being touted is because they're afraid that they'll lose the vote without the help of Putin and the biting reality of brexit being self-imposed economic sanctions.

Some of the brexiteers, including Hannon have said that if there is a 2nd referendum that they'd call for a boycott of it.

They claim that this is as a protest about the undemocratic nature of a 2nd referendum. In fact, the boycott would be an undemocratic act designed to delegitimise an act of democracy because they know they would lose another vote. Refusing to participate means they are no longer interested in the democratic process and what is the next step for them to further their aims? Civil disobedience? Violence?

MrMusician18

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

That I completely agree with you on. The fact we have a minority government in Ireland presently and yet the opposition parties have facilitated its continuance in the national interest is quite extraordinary. But something I am massively grateful for.

Before we go all gooey on new politics as well as FF FG confidence and supply, the reason we've not had an election is because none of the parties have been able to build a lead that would significantly change the numbers in the Dail. Add in that the electorate wouldn't look kindly on an election before April as we need something better than a caretaker government at this time and we get the present day situation. The cynic in me sees that it is only fortuitous that the national interest has aligned with the interest of the parties.

I'd expect an election almost as soon as Brexit is resolved, or at least the time pressure taken away.

LuckyLloyd

MrMusician18 wrote: »

Before we go all gooey on new politics as well as FF FG confidence and supply, the reason we've not had an election is because none of the parties have been able to build a lead that would significantly change the numbers in the Dail. Add in that the electorate wouldn't look kindly on an election before April as we need something better than a caretaker government at this time and we get the present day situation. The cynic in me sees that it is only fortuitous that the national interest has aligned with the interest of the parties.

I'd expect an election almost as soon as Brexit is resolved, or at least the time pressure taken away.

I'll retain the gooey eyes, because we've managed to handle two massively contentious referendums the past few years in fine style and are acquitting ourselves exceptionally well on Brexit - including stellar work from the diplomatic core in Brussels to get this issue front and center in the negotiations in the first place. We're doing okay.

briany

Akrasia wrote: »

Some of the brexiteers, including Hannon have said that if there is a 2nd referendum that they'd call for a boycott of it.

They claim that this is as a protest about the undemocratic nature of a 2nd referendum. In fact, the boycott would be an undemocratic act designed to delegitimise an act of democracy because they know they would lose another vote. Refusing to participate means they are no longer interested in the democratic process and what is the next step for them to further their aims? Civil disobedience? Violence?

The boycott would only hold weight if Remain were on the ballot. If the 2nd ref ended up being between no deal and May's deal, they might as well vote because they'll be getting Brexit either way. It would just be a case of how hard a Brexit they want.

An Ciarraioch

Lord Ashcroft has conducted polling - 44% of Remainers claim to be clearer about the implications of Brexit, compared to 20% of Leavers (an equal percentage of the latter are actually less clear now):

https://mobile.twitter.com/LordAshcroft/status/1072402544394166277

Zubeneschamali

seamus wrote: »

May is on a tour of EU leaders because she genuinely believes that this is how she is going to get the deal amended.

I don't think she expects the tour to achieve anything, she is just play-acting for the eejits in Parliament. She wants to give MPs the impression that she has done everything possible.


It's like the Unions and Government negotiators sitting in a room eating ham sandwiches and drinking tea all night until 6 am, when they emerge blinking for the morning news cameras, letting on they were negotiating hard until the last minute.

Wheres Me Jumper?

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Trump and Brexit: the politics of anger and schadenfreude

Brexit needs to happen for no other reason than 'we won when you said we wouldn't / couldn't / shouldn't'

It's probably pointless debating this mindset unfortunately.

you're correct. there probably is no point in debating it. people either get it or they do not.
what's at stake is the very basis of democracy.
either a persons' vote counts or it does not. once you start playing around with this basic principle, then democracy is dead imo.

i would probably have voted remain, but if they started calling for a rerun, then i would vote leave. and there are many remain voters who feel the same way. see the difference between them and you is they respect people's vote.

Zubeneschamali

Wheres Me Jumper? wrote: »

it seems to me that some of these liberals cant just take a beatin'.

Are you calling me a Liberal?


Why?

An Ciarraioch

Wheres Me Jumper? wrote: »

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Trump and Brexit: the politics of anger and schadenfreude

Brexit needs to happen for no other reason than 'we won when you said we wouldn't / couldn't / shouldn't'

It's probably pointless debating this mindset unfortunately.

you're correct. there probably is no point in debating it. people either get it or they do not.
what's at stake is the very basis of democracy.
either a persons' vote counts or it does not. once you start playing around with this basic principle, then democracy is dead imo.

i would probably have voted remain, but if they started calling for a rerun, then i would vote leave. and there are many remain voters who feel the same way. see the difference between them and you is they respect people's vote.

Which is all well and good, but if the Leave advocates are still unable to agree after almost three years as to the trading basis upon which the UK should operate, they can only blame themselves if a second vote asks the people to choose between May's Brexit and Remain.