Brexit discussion thread IX (Please read OP before posting)

Peregrinus

Deleted User wrote: »

Ireland had a civil war in the last few decades? Or am I misreading that post?

The UK did.

Mr.Wemmick

Cal4567 wrote: »

Just my 5 cents worth.

I am in the UK for a number of months each year. When I am at home, and reading forums such as this, I sense there is a view that broadly is - 'the UK will see sense and revoke Article 50'. However, when I speak to friends and collegues in the UK, they are mostly adamant that the UK will leave, that now there is no going back. I don't even get a view that the UK will fall off a cliff and that is coming from Remainers I know and respect. They seem to accept the UK will suffer but don't think it will be too troublesome.

Also, during the referendum, even people I know who voted Remain, were very critcal of the EU. Really wanted to see a better deal for the UK in the EU. I struggled to locate anyone who had much to say anything positive about the EU.

I'm non commital either way myself but my perception is the UK will now leave and leave by 31 October.

mickoneill31 wrote: »

It depends on the demographic you're dealing with. In my bubble anybody I've spoken to thinks leaving the EU is lunacy. But the people I met are typically from the South.

I met one guy from Manchester a couple of week ago that was a Brexiter though. When I asked why it was "because the EU was deciding 60% of the UKs laws".When I asked where that came from he couldn't give any examples and it was what "he was told "

The UK is split. Leave or remain I think it's still shagged. The problem now isn't the EU its their government. And leave or remain they're going to continue to blame the EU for stuff they don't want to take responsibility for.

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

I am in the UK for 26 years and most folk I know feel absolutely betrayed with the leave campaign and would not hesitate to vote remain in any future referendum. This is what the leave side are scared stiff of

I also live in the UK most of the year and the Brexiteers are really coming across as clueless in that it's just a feeling they have, a need to leave without foundation or clear reason/ backed-up argument. It is fantasy.. and increasing numbers, where I live, now see this for what it is and would vote remain in a heartbeat.

Any new PM will be in the same situation as Theresa May in that GATT Art. 24 is waiting to bring their brexiteer talk crashing down, and funny how the hard facts are not included in their PM self-promoting talks. It's all rather fantastical, pure drama, with no practical or realistic input.

johnnyskeleton

Mr.Wemmick wrote: »

I also live in the UK most of the year and the Brexiteers are really coming across as clueless in that it's just a feeling they have, a need to leave without foundation or clear reason/ backed-up argument.

That is undoubtedly true but it seems to be happening the world over, where peoples feelings override facts. People in Ireland too have strong feelings about FG, SF etc that often doesnt allow them look at specific facts entirely objectively.

The difficulty is that something has gone majorly wrong in the UK that so many people "feel" that they need to leave the EU. Part of that is that they "feel" that the EU is ineffamably evil, they "feel" that their lives have gone wrong because of the EU and will be better when they leave, and also they don't "feel" it whenever the EU does something positive.

You cant argue facts against feelings, as James O Brien often says to his utter frustration, and in reality very few people are trying to make the brexiteers "feel" that the EU isnt the bad guy and has actually improved their lives and will do in the future.

Even if they crash out the economy shrinks and the city of London moves en bloc to Frankfurt, people wont feel that leaving the EU was a mistake and will most likely feel that they can live without this part of the economy.

It is fantasy.. and increasing numbers, where I live, now see this for what it is and would vote remain in a heartbeat.

I'd like to believe that is true of the whole UK, but the large Brexit/UKIP vote vs the Lib Dems/Green/SNP vote in the EU elections suggests the opposite.

Peregrinus

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

. . . I'd like to believe that is true of the whole UK, but the large Brexit/UKIP vote vs the Lib Dems/Green/SNP vote in the EU elections suggests the opposite.

Gotta point out that the LD/Grn/SNP vote was in fact larger than the Brexit/UKIP vote.

But the real issue is that the two were fairly closely matched. The UK remains pretty much as divided on this question as it was 3 years ago. Even if - as I think is the case - the balance has tipped so that the Remainers are now slightly more numerous than the Leavers, that doesn't make for any more stable or settled an outcome.

The key here, obviously, is the 30% or so of the population who didn't vote for either of those two groups. They voted Labour or Tory (a) they are prepared to contemplate Brexit, but not necessarily on any terms; (b) they do not demand of a political party that it have a clear position on Brexit; and therefore (c) views on Brexit, one way or the other, are not their overriding political concern. They're the group that's most likely to be open to either persuasion to change their position on Brexit, or acquiescence in the victory of a position that isn't the one they hold.

Enzokk

It seems like the wheels are in motion for Boris Johnson to become PM. The Telegraph is pushing him to other MPs and to the membership as well.

https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/1138551562522046464

This reminds me of the polling before the last election and we know how that turned out as well.

As for where he stands on Brexit and the ERG, it seems like he has their backing at least according Beth Rigby,

https://twitter.com/BethRigby/status/1138467029906808838

https://twitter.com/BethRigby/status/1138470479294009344

Now that seems contradictory to me. How can you promise to go directly to a FTA and leave on the 31st October and claim not to pursue no-deal?

This tweet sum it up for me,

https://twitter.com/NinaDSchick/status/1138701595762417664

robinph

I could see the 50 Brexit predicted seats switching to dark blue in the event of a Boris as PM, but 150 Labour seats switching? Really?

20silkcut

Raab appears to pull most votes back from the brexit party for the Tories.

I would take Johnson over Raab. I think there might be some glimmer of pragmatism deep down in Johnson particularly when it comes to saving his own skin. Raab would without doubt drive off the cliff with his foot to the floor.

20silkcut

20silkcut wrote: »

Raab appears to pull most votes back from the brexit party for the Tories.

I would take Johnson over Raab. I think there might be some glimmer of pragmatism deep down in Johnson particularly when it comes to saving his own skin. Raab would without doubt drive off the cliff with his foot to the floor.

Johnson takes the most votes from the Brexit party - he wipes them out.
I can imagine that lots of marginal seats would swing to the conservatives if they picked up all the Brexit party/ UKIP votes and just some of the Labour Leaver votes.
The Lib Dems might take some remain votes from Labour giving an extra edge to the Tories in marginal areas.

20silkcut

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Johnson takes the most votes from the Brexit party - he wipes them out.
I can imagine that lots of marginal seats would swing to the conservatives if they picked up all the Brexit party/ UKIP votes and just some of the Labour Leaver votes.
The Lib Dems might take some remain votes from Labour giving an extra edge to the Tories in marginal areas.

Just going by the graphic on the previous page. The Brexit party has 50 seats under Johnson as pm and 24 seats with Raab as PM.

20silkcut

20silkcut wrote: »

Just going by the graphic on the previous page. The Brexit party has 50 seats under Johnson as pm and 24 seats with Raab as PM.

The 50 seats is the current voting intention.
Johnson is below that.

Sam Russell

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Only God knows where we would be without the EU and what state the north might be in given the complete intransigence of the British State towards it.

There was a letter in yesterday's Irish Times quoting a '70s RTE satirical programme 'Just Slagging'

Foreign Minister and Garrett returning from London following a meeting in Downing St:

'Garrett, I thought you said the Brits would give us Rockall'.

Garrett: 'I never said Rockall'

Some things never change.

ancapailldorcha

Dominic Grieve did an interview with the Remainiacs podcast last week. He mentioned that while right wing Tory voters might vote for the Brexit party, nobody seems to be talking about how moderates are likely to vote Lib Dem which is curious. Perhaps because the leadership contest seems to be dictated by catering to the whims of the tiny membership who seem to be more right wing than many Conservative voters.

Incidentally, the New Statesman has recently published an excellent article about the recent decision by the BBC to make over 75s pay the licence fee. Particularly:

Today’s 75-year-olds were born in 1943-4. Even at a time of total war, toddlers were not being conscripted, kitted up and sent to help out at D-day. To have seen combat during the war you’d need to have been born in 1927 or earlier, making you at least 91 today. And while there were a few younger boys who lied about their age in the hope of seeing action, that a) was unusual, and b) shifts the age bar to about 88 at the lowest.

What percentage of British people today are old enough to have served? The most recent figures I can find on the ONS website are from 2017, when the proportion of people aged 73 of over – old enough to have just had their free TV licences revoked – stood at 9.8 per cent. The proportion of people aged 88 or over, though – a fairly generous interpretation of “old enough to be a WW2 veteran” – stood at a much lower 1.4 per cent. The relentless march of time being what it is, in the two years since those stats were compiled, the share of the former group who are also included in the latter is going to have fallen even further.

This is relevant due to the channelling of some sort of quasi-Dunkirk/Blitz spirit from baby boomers who were born in the sixties and the seventies who experienced the war through television and film, not through surviving it.

20silkcut

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Johnson takes the most votes from the Brexit party - he wipes them out.
I can imagine that lots of marginal seats would swing to the conservatives if they picked up all the Brexit party/ UKIP votes and just some of the Labour Leaver votes.
The Lib Dems might take some remain votes from Labour giving an extra edge to the Tories in marginal areas.

Just going by the graphic on the previous page. The Brexit party has 50 seats under Johnson as pm and 24 seats with Raab as PM.

20silkcut

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Johnson takes the most votes from the Brexit party - he wipes them out.
I can imagine that lots of marginal seats would swing to the conservatives if they picked up all the Brexit party/ UKIP votes and just some of the Labour Leaver votes.
The Lib Dems might take some remain votes from Labour giving an extra edge to the Tories in marginal areas.

Just going by the graphic on the previous page. The Brexit party has 50 seats under Johnson as pm and 24 seats with Raab as PM.

20silkcut

[Deleted User] wrote: »

The 50 seats is the current voting intention.
Johnson is below that.

Correct I read it wrong.

Sam Russell

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

This is relevant due to the channelling of some sort of quasi-Dunkirk/Blitz spirit from baby boomers who were born in the sixties and the seventies who experienced the war through television and film, not through surviving it.

Baby boomers were born in the post war era - late forties and fifties. The were the ones involved in the sixties sexual liberation, and are currently over sixty and into seventy. They were fed on the British WW II films like 'The Great Escape', 'The Dam Busters', and 'The Battle of Britain'. These all involved the British soldier as the plucky hero showing the right spirit of the war time.

The ones born later were a different bunch altogether.

Hurrache

Johnson actually having some tough questions asked of him, his cronies of course boo'd Beth Rigby when she asked about the language he uses, such as calling veiled women Letterboxes.

He actually defends this by claiming that the ordinary people want to hear people talk like this and not be alienated by the political language they use. Jaysus.

ancapailldorcha

Sam Russell wrote: »

Baby boomers were born in the post war era - late forties and fifties. The were the ones involved in the sixties sexual liberation, and are currently over sixty and into seventy. They were fed on the British WW II films like 'The Great Escape', 'The Dam Busters', and 'The Battle of Britain'. These all involved the British soldier as the plucky hero showing the right spirit of the war time.

The ones born later were a different bunch altogether.

Thanks for the correction.

There is indeed an incredibly strong trope of the plucky underdog in British culture. What's remarkable is that somehow oligarchs, press barons, Etonians and privately educated city traders have managed to successfully employ this trope for their own ends.

traco

Hurrache wrote: »

Johnson actually having some tough questions asked of him, his cronies of course boo'd Beth Rigby when she asked about the language he uses, such as calling veiled women Letterboxes.

He actually defends this by claiming that the ordinary people want to hear people talk like this and not be alienated by the political language they use. Jaysus.

Just listened to it - he didn't answer a single question directly. UK politics is in some mess

devnull

Just listned to Boris talking and taking questions, he didn't bother to answer any, just went off-topic and deflected everything and didn't address any directly, completely pathetic.

Lots of soundbites, rhetoric and lots of phrases and empy words without anything to back them up once again, where have we seen this before I wonder?

They might have a new leader soon, but to coin a phrase of their old one, "Nothing has changed, Nothing has changed."

Hurrache

And prior to the Q&A he said he'd only take 6 questions, his advisers still keeping him on a tight rein. Nobody asks him about the alleged criminality in the Leave campaign, nor his claims of the NHS gaining £350 million a week on the side of the red bus.

10000maniacs

Sam Russell wrote: »

There was a letter in yesterday's Irish Times quoting a '70s RTE satirical programme 'Just Slagging'

Foreign Minister and Garrett returning from London following a meeting in Downing St:

'Garrett, I thought you said the Brits would give us Rockall'.

Garrett: 'I never said Rockall'

Some things never change.

This Rockall situation amazes me. Scotland is Ireland's friend when everything is hunky dory. But when any situation like this arises, the Union Jack card comes out very quickly in Edinburgh. A little bit too quickly for my liking in this situation.

RobMc59

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Thanks for the correction.

There is indeed an incredibly strong trope of the plucky underdog in British culture. What's remarkable is that somehow oligarchs, press barons, Etonians and privately educated city traders have managed to successfully employ this trope for their own ends.

It's always been like that-they're the ones who used to blow the whistle-"right lads,all over the top!".

EKRIUQ

I don't think the whole race for the new conservative leader has anything to do with Brexit, they are tasked with picking the best person to lead them into the next general election and who as leader will give them the best chance of saving their seat.

Boris seems to be very popular with a lot of the electorate so I can see most conservative MP's going with him.

Sam Russell

10000maniacs wrote: »

This Rockall situation amazes me. Scotland is Ireland's friend when everything is hunky dory. But when any situation like this arises, the Union Jack card comes out very quickly in Edinburgh. A little bit too quickly for my liking in this situation.

It sounds to me like a rogue minister did a solo run. It did not feature on the BBC News website, nor the Scotsman website, nor the Guardian, nor the Telegraph. In fact, totally ignored by the British media. It is almost like how a Healy-Rae announcement would be treated here by the media, but jumped on by the red tops in the UK.

It is a complete rubbish approach to Irish-Scottish relations at this particular time. Sturgeon attempting to quieten things, and is on the back foot as seemingly not prepared to disown the Rockall boulder but also not having raised it on her very recent trip to Dublin, it does sound hollow, and makes her look either out of control or duplicitous.

Not a good position for her to be. She needs every friend she can get and this does nothing to forward Scotland's interests. The whole thing comes across as very fishy.

Hurrache

It's getting daily coverage in the Times UK, both in the UK and Irish edition. It's bizarre all the same. Today it says that the Scottish patrol has left the Rockall waters, albeit the story reduced to the Scottish section.

And I see what you did there.

Laois_Man

I was actually irritated by Johnson's constant referring to sorting things out with their partners across the channel. He already seems to be oblivious to the fact that his biggest problem is in the opposite direction.

The last question was the only one of real substance on Brexit and he didn't even answer it. And I'm even more perplexed as to how Laura Kuenssberg has a job at the BBC. Awful question from a truly dreadful "journalist"!

devnull

Laois_Man wrote: »

The last question was the only one of real substance on Brexit and he didn't even answer it. And I'm even more perplexed as to how Laura Kuenssberg has a job at the BBC. Awful question from a truly dreadful "journalist"!

I didn't catch the last question fully, what was it?

boggerman1

Laois_Man wrote: »

I was actually irritated by Johnson's constant referring to sorting things out with their partners across the channel. He already seems to be oblivious to the fact that his biggest problem is in the opposite direction.

The last question was the only one of real substance on Brexit and he didn't even answer it. And I'm even more perplexed as to how Laura Kuenssberg has a job at the BBC. Awful question from a truly dreadful "journalist"!

Laura k and is it Kate Adler are two of a kind.both utterly useless.if things were bad with thr robotic May as PM get the popcorn ready when the blonde bimbo is PM

Hurrache

I have many issues with her, but the question I heard Kuenssberg ask today was reasonable, she asked about his inconsistencies in his stance on no deal.