General Election December, 2019 (U.K.)

suicide_circus

sid waddell wrote: »

It's a massive power grab and con job by the rich.

there is more than a little flavour of conspiracy theory from your post but if you are right, its an impressive stroke theyve pulled

markodaly

Danzy wrote: »

I suspect not.

Nor will Labour. So They will lock themselves to decade or two more in opposition.

This is not confined to Britain, all across Europe Left wing parties are falling in to electoral irrelevance where even a few years ago they were serious contenders for Govt.

This is not a call for Blairism.

The European left are stuck with the ghost of their Marxist/Leninism forefathers amidst the woke generation of today who think fighting for something means hectoring people on twitter.

Frankly, their image is awful and even though they may have good policies, they come across as weak, ineffectual, neutered and looking like the guy whos balls are in their wife's handbag. The average working-class guy is just turned off by them.

Working-class people simply don't trust the old social democrats of today, as they themselves are as much part of the elite as they claim to rail against. Immigration is an obvious swiss cheese problem for them as well as trade and free markets.

Simply the world has moved on and its not about left vs right anymore, its about nationalists vs globalists. Labour just doesn't know yet that they are in the globalist camp, as they still think its the 1970's.

Leroy42

It really is staggering (I note that I use that word quite a lot in terms of Brexit!) that there has been literally no discussion about what post-Brexit will actually look like.

No plans for new industries. No plans for new markets. No identification of benefits, or costs. No discussion about what training will be put in place to get Uk people the jobs that Eu citizens currently do. No discussion about insurance cover, mobile roaming, visas. Not even a defined plan for fisheries.

No economic assessments, no investment plans. Tories have already spent £6bn + put apparently foresee no more money being needed post Brexit. The lack of any discussions about the reality of the WA on the status of NI in terms of being part of UK trade is amazing.

I guess it partly down to Labour simply trying to avoid any talk about Brexit, and Tories more than happy to avoid any actual examination of the WA.

Professor Moriarty

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Excellent post.

No, it's not.

It's an elitist post that suggests that ordinary people are just sheep, who are told what to do by their "masters". That post is precisely why people opted to Brexit - a sneering attitude that dumb people don't know what direction they would like to take their country - and it's up to smarter people, such as that poster, who know "what's best for the stupid people/sheep".

suicide_circus wrote: »

there is more than a little flavour of conspiracy theory from your post but if you are right, its an impressive stroke theyve pulled

This; it's a post replete with conspiracy language and a belief that rich people have put together a concerted plan to enrich themselves at the expense of "the sheep".

That post is an emotional plea, not an evidence-based analysis.

CelticRambler

Deleted User wrote: »

It's an elitist post that suggests that ordinary people are just sheep, who are told what to do by their "masters". That post is precisely why people opted to Brexit - a sneering attitude that dumb people don't know what direction they would like to take their country ...

The problem (for you) is that we're still waiting for anyone from that demographic to explain what direction they'll take post-Brexit and why it's a good idea.

Your justification is "culture" and nationalism - exactly as sid waddell said - but even you can't describe or defend what you understand by either of those terms.

Cue response starting "under Corbyn ..."

CelticRambler

CelticRambler wrote: »

The problem (for you) is that we're still waiting for anyone from that demographic to explain what direction they'll take post-Brexit and why it's a good idea.

Your justification is "culture" and nationalism - exactly as sid waddell said - but even you can't describe or defend what you understand by either of those terms.

Cue response starting "under Corbyn ..."

Perhaps this is not the most appropriate place to answer that, but the reasons are clear:

• Return of sovereignty pooled to the EU, back to the UK.
• Full control of borders.
• Control of EU-based migration.
• Control of the UK's territorial waters / a return of our coastal communities.
• Cultural management.
• Control of monies previously handed to EU forces.

I'm not going to defend each, as I would rather focus on the General Election.

But when voters from all walks of life, not just the working class, opted to Brexit - it should do away with the thesis that it's the "sheep who were manipulated".

Under Corbyn, much of the above would be worsened.

sid waddell

What are the Tories offering the working class?

Like, how are they going to make their lives better?

What are they offering the young?

Anybody?

suicide_circus

sid waddell wrote: »

What are the Tories offering the working class?

Like, how are they going to make their lives better?

What are they offering the young?

Anybody?

Brexit

sid waddell

sid waddell wrote: »

What are the Tories offering the working class?

Like, how are they going to make their lives better?

What are they offering the young?

Anybody?

Why can't people just understand that Brexit is not about economics?

If anything, it was a minority reason.

Leroy42

Deleted User wrote: »

Perhaps this is not the most appropriate place to answer that, but the reasons are clear:

• Return of sovereignty pooled to the EU, back to the UK.
• Full control of borders.
• Control of EU-based migration.
• Control of the UK's territorial waters / a return of our coastal communities.
• Cultural management.
• Control of monies previously handed to EU forces.

I'm not going to defend each, as I would rather focus on the General Election.

But when voters from all walks of life, not just the working class, opted to Brexit - it should do away with the thesis that it's the "sheep who were manipulated".

Under Corbyn, much of the above would be worsened.

And you honestly believe that the average voter in the UK understand those points and the benefits and costs associated with them?

Control of our laws is the classic example. Which laws...don't know. So where did this idea come from that the EU controlled the laws? The politicians who used the EU as a scapegoat when they failed to deliver.

sid waddell

Deleted User wrote: »

Why can't people just understand that Brexit is not about economics?

If anything, it was a minority reason.

I pretty much said that in my previous post and now you're agreeing with me, after previously calling me a conspiracy theorist.

Neat.

Leroy42

Leroy42 wrote: »

And you honestly believe that the average voter in the UK understand those points and the benefits and costs associated with them?

Control of our laws is the classic example. Which laws...don't know. So where did this idea come from that the EU controlled the laws? The politicians who used the EU as a scapegoat when they failed to deliver.

Flagrant misrepresentation.

Nobody is arguing against EU laws.

We're arguing for the UK making its own laws.

Big difference.

As for your condescending comment that the "average voter" is too stupid to understand my previous post. Well, I'll just leave that hanging there.

sid waddell

suicide_circus wrote: »

Brexit

What does Brexit offer the working class and the young?

How is it going to improve their lives?

suicide_circus

sid waddell wrote: »

What does Brexit offer the working class and the young?

How is it going to improve their lives?

no idea but people seem to want to roll the dice on it

sid waddell

sid waddell wrote: »

I pretty much said that in my previous post and now you're agreeing with me, after previously calling me a conspiracy theorist.

Neat.

I don't think any fair analysis would demonstrate that your post and mine are ideologically synonymous.

sid waddell wrote: »

What does Brexit offer the working class and the young?

How is it going to improve their lives?

Focussing on economics - again.

I realise that my points will not register with you. You're committed to the economic arguments and not the non-economic ones which, in the end, determined the referendum result and why Prime Minister Johnson is going to receive a thumping majority in 2 weeks time.

prawnsambo

I always chuckle at fishing being given as a reason for brexit. An industry with less than 10k full time jobs, where well over half the fish caught are exported (because there is no demand for those fish in Britain) and the same amount is imported as is landed. And where two thirds of the catch is from Scottish waters. But the most striking aspect of fisheries is the quotas and how they are handled. Five families on the Sunday Times rich list control 29% of the quota and half of England's quota was sold to foreign interests. Half of NI's quota is held by one trawler.

More than half of the top 25 quota holders have directors, shareholders, or vessel partners who were convicted of offences in Scotland’s £63m “black fish” scam – a huge, sophisticated fraud that saw trawlermen and fish processors working together to evade quota limits and land 170,000 tonnes of undeclared herring and mackerel.

It's a very fishy business.

CelticRambler

Deleted User wrote: »

Perhaps this is not the most appropriate place to answer that, but the reasons are clear:

Inserts list of vague cultural and nationalism talking points that can only be defended on the basis of emotion over the course of 12 Brexit threads. :rolleyes:

me wrote:

Cue response starting "under Corbyn ..."

Deleted User wrote: »

Under Corbyn, much of the above would be worsened.

Yesssss - you can always count on a Johnson fanboy! :pac:

sid waddell

Deleted User wrote: »

Nobody is arguing against EU laws.

We're arguing for the UK making its own laws.

Arguing against those dastardly EU laws was one of the main reasons for Brexit, though of course nobody seemed to have a clue of the actual laws they were arguing against.

I think the supposed banning of prawn cocktail crisps was often cited as a fake example.

Britain will have less scope to make its own laws in key areas under Brexit. It will be at the mercy of international trade negotiators who will be swooping like vultures over a dead animal carcass.

It will become less independent, not more independent.

What does scenario that offer the working class and the young?

How will that make their lives better?

sid waddell

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't think any fair analysis would demonstrate that your post and mine are ideologically synonymous.



Focussing on economics - again.

I realise that my points will not register with you. You're committed to the economic arguments and not the non-economic ones which, in the end, determined the referendum result and why Prime Minister Johnson is going to receive a thumping majority in 2 weeks time.

On the previous page you said this.

Deleted User wrote: »

No, it's not.

That post is an emotional plea, not an evidence-based analysis.

Yet that's exactly what you're doing here.

How is Brexit going to make the lives of the working class and the young better?

How are the Tories going to do so?

You can either keep obfuscating or answer the question.

CelticRambler

prawnsambo wrote: »

Five families on the Sunday Times rich list control 29% of the quota and half of England's quota was sold to foreign interests.

Let's be a little bit more precise about this: half of England's quota was sold has been allocated to foreign interests by the Conservative government (arguing in favour of Brexit) every year since the referendum.

Let's get Brexit done (but maybe not the way the 17.4m think we mean - oh, look: Corbyn ... :rolleyes: )

robinph

Well, that's my vote completed and stuck in the letter box. Now just to cross my fingers and everything else and hope that the rest of the country doesn't insist on shooting themselves, and me, in the foot.

At least 2/3rds of my family will still have EU passports come February whatever happens, even if I don't.

bren2001

Deleted User wrote: »

Perhaps this is not the most appropriate place to answer that, but the reasons are clear:

• Return of sovereignty pooled to the EU, back to the UK.
• Full control of borders.
• Control of EU-based migration.
• Control of the UK's territorial waters / a return of our coastal communities.
• Cultural management.
• Control of monies previously handed to EU forces.

I'm not going to defend each, as I would rather focus on the General Election.

But when voters from all walks of life, not just the working class, opted to Brexit - it should do away with the thesis that it's the "sheep who were manipulated".

Under Corbyn, much of the above would be worsened.

A lot of what Brexit sets out to do with immigration laws can be achieved as a member of the EU. Britain never enforced the laws in their current framework e.g. you can deport EU citizens who have not found a job in 6 months. Why did the conservative party not just do that?

Secondly, if you want a trade agreement with the EU, you'll never guess what they will look to include? Free-movement of people. If you decide not to trade with the largest trading bloc in the world AND your neighbors, that's economic suicide.

Control of territorial waters? Brexit doesn't solve that in the slightest. The EU and UK must come to an agreement over what waters Britain can fish in. Then, the EU can control the price of the fish. Realistically, you can't sell the fish outside of EU for obvious reasons.

If you're referring to military control of the waters. There's nothing stopping you leaving ships out there. You's park up outside Gibraltar all the time.

Control of monies to the EU: That is an economics argument. I'll lay out the facts pretty plain and clear. You contribute a lot of money to the EU. You make even more back from the Single Market. If you think you can make more by signing other trade agreements, good luck. I cannot see that happening.

Every reason I've seen peddled out by the Conservative propaganda machine are just wrong. The reasons are racist, xenophobic, and based on a bus full of lies peddled out by Boris and co.

Under Corbyn, in your opinion, it would be worse. There's no objective fact to substantiate that which is something you call on every poster who you disagree with.

A Dub in Glasgo

New Scottish only poll out today (Ipsos-Mori)

SNP 44%
Conservatives 26%
Labour 16%
Liberal Democrats 11%
Greens 2%

Seat projection: SNP 48 (+13), Conservatives 6 (-7), Liberal Democrats 4 (n/c), Labour 1 (-6)

Should Scotland be an independent country?

Yes 50%
No 50%


https://twitter.com/Emily_IpsosMORI/status/1200029338139340801

ancapailldorcha

Deleted User wrote: »

Perhaps this is not the most appropriate place to answer that, but the reasons are clear:

• Return of sovereignty pooled to the EU, back to the UK.
• Full control of borders.
• Control of EU-based migration.
• Control of the UK's territorial waters / a return of our coastal communities.
• Cultural management.
• Control of monies previously handed to EU forces.

I'm not going to defend each, as I would rather focus on the General Election.

But when voters from all walks of life, not just the working class, opted to Brexit - it should do away with the thesis that it's the "sheep who were manipulated".

Under Corbyn, much of the above would be worsened.

Meaningless soundbytes.

We've had a decade of Conservative government.

Why have they allowed non-EU migration to rise so much if it's so important that migration be cut?
Why didn't they lobby the EU to make changes to the way fishing works in the EU if it's so important?

bren2001

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Meaningless soundbytes.

We've had a decade of Conservative government.

Why have they allowed non-EU migration to rise so much if it's so important that migration be cut?
Why didn't they lobby the EU to make changes to the way fishing works in the EU if it's so important?

Nigel Farage was a member of the European parliament fishing committee and attend one meeting in 42. He's advocating that the UK takes back control. He could have influenced policy from the inside but intentionally chose not to do so. Yet, he harks on about how wrong it is.

It's unicorn stuff listening to this man.

ancapailldorcha

bren2001 wrote: »

Nigel Farage was a member of the European parliament fishing committee and attend one meeting in 42. He's advocating that the UK takes back control. He could have influenced policy from the inside but intentionally chose not to do so. Yet, he harks on about how wrong it is.

It's unicorn stuff listening to this man.

I'm aware of this. However, there is a rich precedent for British Prime Ministers steering the EU in an Anglocentric direction when they deign to do so.

ancapailldorcha

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Meaningless soundbytes.

We've had a decade of Conservative government.

Why have they allowed non-EU migration to rise so much if it's so important that migration be cut?
Why didn't they lobby the EU to make changes to the way fishing works in the EU if it's so important?

Brexit is the means through which these objectives can and should be achieved.

Brexit and the Conservative Party are not the same thing.

If the CP do not take advantage of Brexit, that's a question for the CP and not for Brexit itself.

I share your condemnation of the CP in this regard. But that doesn't make it an effective argument against Brexit. It's just an argument against the trajectory the CP took over the past decade.

It seems, with Prime Minister Johnson, much of what we want to see will be implemented - starting with his Deal.

prawnsambo

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Seat projection: SNP 48 (+13), Conservatives 6 (-7), Liberal Democrats 4 (n/c), Labour 1 (-6)

Should Scotland be an independent country?

Yes 50%
No 50%

That's a more realistic looking seat prediction for the SNP than the one that YouGov gave last night.

prawnsambo

prawnsambo wrote: »

That's a more realistic looking seat prediction for the SNP than the one that YouGov gave last night.

Conservative Party far more popular in Scotland than the Labour Party.

Who'd have thought it?

Those predicting a total Conservative wipeout were flat-out wrong - as I stated in one of my posts several weeks ago.

As for 50:50 independence, that also backs up the argument I made that it's still split down the middle. If you were to believe posters here over the past few weeks, you'd think independence would be at 80+%.

Yet again, I turn out to be right - and many here turn out to be wrong.

ancapailldorcha

Deleted User wrote: »

Brexit is the means through which these objectives can and should be achieved.

Brexit and the Conservative Party are not the same thing.

If the CP do not take advantage of Brexit, that's a question for the CP and not for Brexit itself.

I share your condemnation of the CP in this regard. But that doesn't make it an effective argument against Brexit. It's just an argument against the trajectory the CP took over the past decade.

It seems, with Prime Minister Johnson, much of what we want to see will be implemented - starting with his Deal.

All we have to go on is recent precedent. The British government has always been in total control of immigration from outside the EU and they have allowed it to surpass migration from inside the EU despite non-EU migrants have to go through more hoops. Therefore it seems unlikely that any decline in EU migration will be down to any action the Tory party takes beyond making Britain a less desirable place to live.