FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > ‘Brexit has failed’
‘Brexit has failed’
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"According to Nigel Farage, I have found something that I agree with him about, he is blaming the tories (obviously) , I also agree with that . So, who should take the blame for this clusterfuck " 52% of the people who voted in the 2016 referendum? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"According to Nigel Farage, I have found something that I agree with him about, he is blaming the tories (obviously) , I also agree with that . So, who should take the blame for this clusterfuck 52% of the people who voted in the 2016 referendum?" They were obviously conned , should they take all the blame for being so naive ? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The 2016 referendum was do you want to stay in the EU or leave it. The leave vote won. In my view it is a success." Nigel Farage has publicly stated that ‘Brexit has failed ‘ . How has it been a success?  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The 2016 referendum was do you want to stay in the EU or leave it. The leave vote won. In my view it is a success. Nigel Farage has publicly stated that ‘Brexit has failed ‘ . How has it been a success? "For the reason stated. Here's what happened in 2016, we were asked a question. Should we leave the EU. For those who answered YES, we left. That's a success. They answered in that way and got their wish. Pretty sure that's what Shy said. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The 2016 referendum was do you want to stay in the EU or leave it. The leave vote won. In my view it is a success. Nigel Farage has publicly stated that ‘Brexit has failed ‘ . How has it been a success?
For the reason stated. Here's what happened in 2016, we were asked a question.
Should we leave the EU.
For those who answered YES, we left. That's a success.
They answered in that way and got their wish.
Pretty sure that's what Shy said."To be fair that is objectively true so I will partially revise my response... I blame David Cameron Why? There was no way the referendum should have been a single binary vote. It should have had a second vote activated if the majority voted leave to then vote on nature of future relationship. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The 2016 referendum was do you want to stay in the EU or leave it. The leave vote won. In my view it is a success. Nigel Farage has publicly stated that ‘Brexit has failed ‘ . How has it been a success?
For the reason stated. Here's what happened in 2016, we were asked a question.
Should we leave the EU.
For those who answered YES, we left. That's a success.
They answered in that way and got their wish.
Pretty sure that's what Shy said.
To be fair that is objectively true so I will partially revise my response...
I blame David Cameron
Why?
There was no way the referendum should have been a single binary vote. It should have had a second vote activated if the majority voted leave to then vote on nature of future relationship."Agree with the last statement. I don't Blame DC, he fucked off because he couldn't handle it. The blame for me squarely at the feet of the people following on from him | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Look backward to go forward. The question is what is the solution? Subsequent PMs and labour leaders are dancing around this, the cliche "Make Brexit work" is bundled around. Only the Lib-Dems have had the balls to say we would have another referendum. Kier, with all the political capital he has, is busy grasping at EU citizens voting, and Voting at 16. Brexit was an ideological experiment, and a costly one. We need pragmatic leadership, otherwise we are looking at decades of pain! "True, I can’t see the UK joining the EU for a long time though, | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The 2016 referendum was do you want to stay in the EU or leave it. The leave vote won. In my view it is a success. Nigel Farage has publicly stated that ‘Brexit has failed ‘ . How has it been a success? "The vote was to stay in the EU or leave the EU. How hard is that for you to understand? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The 2016 referendum was do you want to stay in the EU or leave it. The leave vote won. In my view it is a success. Nigel Farage has publicly stated that ‘Brexit has failed ‘ . How has it been a success?
The vote was to stay in the EU or leave the EU.
How hard is that for you to understand?"Is that all you have ? Brexit has been a ‘success’ because we have left the EU? Does that mean the tories have been a ‘success’ because they won the 2019 election ? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Look backward to go forward. The question is what is the solution? Subsequent PMs and labour leaders are dancing around this, the cliche "Make Brexit work" is bundled around. Only the Lib-Dems have had the balls to say we would have another referendum. Kier, with all the political capital he has, is busy grasping at EU citizens voting, and Voting at 16. Brexit was an ideological experiment, and a costly one. We need pragmatic leadership, otherwise we are looking at decades of pain! "Another referendum or not, the U.K. won’t be joining the EU again anytime soon - mainly because it is not just our decision as to whether we do or don’t. I would imagine that the EU would want to see much more stability in U.K. politics before even considering our Membership again. We cannot be an EU Member as long as the country is split like it is and our FPTP form of Government provides the winning Party that generally secures less than 50% of the vote with the right to act like an elected dictatorship. We need the current Brexit shit show to take its natural course and for ordinary people to see and feel the damage and cost. Only then will the orchestrators and propagandists of Brexit be hounded out of mainstream politics and the media. It will take quite a long time. In the meantime, we all have to put up with the ongoing drama and disappointment of what Nigel Farage described as “the failure”. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Look backward to go forward. The question is what is the solution? Subsequent PMs and labour leaders are dancing around this, the cliche "Make Brexit work" is bundled around. Only the Lib-Dems have had the balls to say we would have another referendum. Kier, with all the political capital he has, is busy grasping at EU citizens voting, and Voting at 16. Brexit was an ideological experiment, and a costly one. We need pragmatic leadership, otherwise we are looking at decades of pain!
Another referendum or not, the U.K. won’t be joining the EU again anytime soon - mainly because it is not just our decision as to whether we do or don’t.
I would imagine that the EU would want to see much more stability in U.K. politics before even considering our Membership again. We cannot be an EU Member as long as the country is split like it is and our FPTP form of Government provides the winning Party that generally secures less than 50% of the vote with the right to act like an elected dictatorship.
We need the current Brexit shit show to take its natural course and for ordinary people to see and feel the damage and cost. Only then will the orchestrators and propagandists of Brexit be hounded out of mainstream politics and the media.
It will take quite a long time. In the meantime, we all have to put up with the ongoing drama and disappointment of what Nigel Farage described as “the failure”."Based on the level of criticism from the likes of the UN on things like the Public Order Bill and Asylum Seeker/refugee handling, I suspect any application for the UK to join the EU would be viewed in a similar fashion to Turkey. Ironically! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The 2016 referendum was do you want to stay in the EU or leave it. The leave vote won. In my view it is a success. Nigel Farage has publicly stated that ‘Brexit has failed ‘ . How has it been a success?
The vote was to stay in the EU or leave the EU.
How hard is that for you to understand?
Is that all you have ? Brexit has been a ‘success’ because we have left the EU? Does that mean the tories have been a ‘success’ because they won the 2019 election ? "Still finding hard to understand what the referendum was then! Stay in the EU or leave the EU. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The 2016 referendum was do you want to stay in the EU or leave it. The leave vote won. In my view it is a success. Nigel Farage has publicly stated that ‘Brexit has failed ‘ . How has it been a success?
The vote was to stay in the EU or leave the EU.
How hard is that for you to understand?
Is that all you have ? Brexit has been a ‘success’ because we have left the EU? Does that mean the tories have been a ‘success’ because they won the 2019 election ?
Still finding hard to understand what the referendum was then!
Stay in the EU or leave the EU."Still finding it hard to explain why leaving the EU is a ‘success’? I will simplify this for you, why did you want the UK to leave the EU? Farage dates that people voted for Brexit to stop or drastically slow down immigration, | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit has deep roots. How about the notion that the trade bloc we thought we'd joined developed by stealth into a federalist super-state? " What is wrong with a federal ‘super state’ ? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit has deep roots. How about the notion that the trade bloc we thought we'd joined developed by stealth into a federalist super-state? " How about any notions based in reality instead of fantasy? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"According to Nigel Farage, I have found something that I agree with him about, he is blaming the tories (obviously) , I also agree with that . So, who should take the blame for this clusterfuck " I disagree. Brexit has mostly achieved its aims. Billionaires can still avoid paying tax - achieved. Disaster capitalists such as HTML can make millions shorting the pound - achieved. Reduced safety standards and food standards to allow US corporations to buy into the UK market - pending. To remove workers rights and environmental regulations - pending. It's going as planned. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit has deep roots. How about the notion that the trade bloc we thought we'd joined developed by stealth into a federalist super-state? What is wrong with a federal ‘super state’ ? " Nothing if the majority want it. Turns out they didn't. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit has deep roots. How about the notion that the trade bloc we thought we'd joined developed by stealth into a federalist super-state? How about any notions based in reality instead of fantasy?" If a super-state wasn't a reality, how come the EU needed a President, a parliament, overseas ambassadors, laws, courts, judges, a flag, no internal borders, an anthem?? If it looks like a dog and barks like a dog ....... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit has deep roots. How about the notion that the trade bloc we thought we'd joined developed by stealth into a federalist super-state? What is wrong with a federal ‘super state’ ? Nothing if the majority want it. Turns out they didn't." The majority were conned | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"According to Nigel Farage, I have found something that I agree with him about, he is blaming the tories (obviously) , I also agree with that . So, who should take the blame for this clusterfuck " It was a glorious success! It has confined the tory party to decades of decline | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit has deep roots. How about the notion that the trade bloc we thought we'd joined developed by stealth into a federalist super-state? How about any notions based in reality instead of fantasy? If a super-state wasn't a reality, how come the EU needed a President, a parliament, overseas ambassadors, laws, courts, judges, a flag, no internal borders, an anthem?? If it looks like a dog and barks like a dog ......." Ok, let’s pretend what you are saying is true , What is wrong with a ‘super state ‘ | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"According to Nigel Farage, I have found something that I agree with him about, he is blaming the tories (obviously) , I also agree with that . So, who should take the blame for this clusterfuck It was a glorious success! It has confined the tory party to decades of decline " True, but unfortunately it has fucked the country as well | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit has deep roots. How about the notion that the trade bloc we thought we'd joined developed by stealth into a federalist super-state? How about any notions based in reality instead of fantasy? If a super-state wasn't a reality, how come the EU needed a President, a parliament, overseas ambassadors, laws, courts, judges, a flag, no internal borders, an anthem?? If it looks like a dog and barks like a dog ....... Ok, let’s pretend what you are saying is true , What is wrong with a ‘super state ‘ " Pretend it's true? Are any of those claims false? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"According to Nigel Farage, I have found something that I agree with him about, he is blaming the tories (obviously) , I also agree with that . So, who should take the blame for this clusterfuck I disagree. Brexit has mostly achieved its aims. Billionaires can still avoid paying tax - achieved. Disaster capitalists such as HTML can make millions shorting the pound - achieved. Reduced safety standards and food standards to allow US corporations to buy into the UK market - pending. To remove workers rights and environmental regulations - pending. It's going as planned. " True , But Farage wanted Brexit to stop immigration, it hasn’t , | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit has deep roots. How about the notion that the trade bloc we thought we'd joined developed by stealth into a federalist super-state? What is wrong with a federal ‘super state’ ? Nothing if the majority want it. Turns out they didn't. The majority were conned "Well you would say that wouldn't you? Nobody was conned, it was probably the most informed and discussed vote in human history. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit has deep roots. How about the notion that the trade bloc we thought we'd joined developed by stealth into a federalist super-state? How about any notions based in reality instead of fantasy? If a super-state wasn't a reality, how come the EU needed a President, a parliament, overseas ambassadors, laws, courts, judges, a flag, no internal borders, an anthem?? If it looks like a dog and barks like a dog ....... Ok, let’s pretend what you are saying is true , What is wrong with a ‘super state ‘ " Hey, who's pretending here? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit has deep roots. How about the notion that the trade bloc we thought we'd joined developed by stealth into a federalist super-state? What is wrong with a federal ‘super state’ ? Nothing if the majority want it. Turns out they didn't. The majority were conned
Well you would say that wouldn't you? Nobody was conned, it was probably the most informed and discussed vote in human history. "‘Brexit has failed’ Nigel Farage | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit has deep roots. How about the notion that the trade bloc we thought we'd joined developed by stealth into a federalist super-state? How about any notions based in reality instead of fantasy? If a super-state wasn't a reality, how come the EU needed a President, a parliament, overseas ambassadors, laws, courts, judges, a flag, no internal borders, an anthem?? If it looks like a dog and barks like a dog ....... Ok, let’s pretend what you are saying is true , What is wrong with a ‘super state ‘ Hey, who's pretending here? " What is wrong with a super state ? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit has deep roots. How about the notion that the trade bloc we thought we'd joined developed by stealth into a federalist super-state? How about any notions based in reality instead of fantasy? If a super-state wasn't a reality, how come the EU needed a President, a parliament, overseas ambassadors, laws, courts, judges, a flag, no internal borders, an anthem?? If it looks like a dog and barks like a dog ....... Ok, let’s pretend what you are saying is true , What is wrong with a ‘super state ‘ Hey, who's pretending here? What is wrong with a super state ? " Well to start with accountability of it's leader. Remind me when you voted for Ursula von der Leyen. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit has deep roots. How about the notion that the trade bloc we thought we'd joined developed by stealth into a federalist super-state? How about any notions based in reality instead of fantasy? If a super-state wasn't a reality, how come the EU needed a President, a parliament, overseas ambassadors, laws, courts, judges, a flag, no internal borders, an anthem?? If it looks like a dog and barks like a dog ....... Ok, let’s pretend what you are saying is true , What is wrong with a ‘super state ‘ Hey, who's pretending here? What is wrong with a super state ? Well to start with accountability of its leader. Remind me when you voted for Ursula von der Leyen." I voted for my MEP, can you remind me when you voted for Sunak to be PM? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit has deep roots. How about the notion that the trade bloc we thought we'd joined developed by stealth into a federalist super-state? What is wrong with a federal ‘super state’ ? Nothing if the majority want it. Turns out they didn't. The majority were conned
Well you would say that wouldn't you? Nobody was conned, it was probably the most informed and discussed vote in human history. "Are you joking or serious? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit has deep roots. How about the notion that the trade bloc we thought we'd joined developed by stealth into a federalist super-state? What is wrong with a federal ‘super state’ ? Nothing if the majority want it. Turns out they didn't. The majority were conned
Well you would say that wouldn't you? Nobody was conned, it was probably the most informed and discussed vote in human history. "Aye, right. It was more like the biggest campaign if misinformation and outright lies and anyone who actually told the truth was shot down as bandying 'Project Fear'. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"According to Nigel Farage, I have found something that I agree with him about, he is blaming the tories (obviously) , I also agree with that . So, who should take the blame for this clusterfuck It was a glorious success! It has confined the tory party to decades of decline True, but unfortunately it has fucked the country as well " I'm not on board that brexit has "fucked the country". It wasn't a vote to not have a government at all, they still exist and have been 'running' the country (in to the ground). So I'd say a Severe lack of investment and unregulated capitalism has done that. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit has deep roots. How about the notion that the trade bloc we thought we'd joined developed by stealth into a federalist super-state? " When we left the EU, Britain had one of the best clauses and exemptions, negotiated, ironically by the late PM Thatcher, as a way to appease the right of her party. She knew, Britain's survival was linked to europe. The so called super state, federal to boot, I dont not see it, as Poland's example will show. This kind of paranoia is what the Farages, the Borises, the Bravermans spewed out... Tory populism is causing the country huge problems...I just wish Tory voters could wake up, and see this | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"According to Nigel Farage, I have found something that I agree with him about, he is blaming the tories (obviously) , I also agree with that . So, who should take the blame for this clusterfuck It was a glorious success! It has confined the tory party to decades of decline True, but unfortunately it has fucked the country as well I'm not on board that brexit has "fucked the country". It wasn't a vote to not have a government at all, they still exist and have been 'running' the country (in to the ground). So I'd say a Severe lack of investment and unregulated capitalism has done that. " So, what happens if the Tories get re-elected next year?? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit has deep roots. How about the notion that the trade bloc we thought we'd joined developed by stealth into a federalist super-state? What is wrong with a federal ‘super state’ ? Nothing if the majority want it. Turns out they didn't. The majority were conned
Well you would say that wouldn't you? Nobody was conned, it was probably the most informed and discussed vote in human history. "I would have laughed if people were not suffering as a result of this catastrophe. "Most informed in human history".... reminds me of Trump claiming the crowds at his inauguration were the largest in American history | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Its not a foregone conclusion that if we somehow had another referendum and voted to rejoin the EU that the EU would allow us back in. There would be too much risk from their perspective that we could hold another neverendum and vote to leave again. David Cameron totally abdicated responsibility and leadership by even putting the question to the public. He did this in order to win another term at the general election. thats where the rot started. I think it will be decades before we ever rejoin the EU." He misread the political climate... he thought there would be another coalition government, by adding it to the Tory manifesto, he could appease the right, at the same time knowing the Lib-Dems would never accept to hold a referendum on Europe. As we say, we are left with a torn condom, with most of the cum spilled out. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit has deep roots. How about the notion that the trade bloc we thought we'd joined developed by stealth into a federalist super-state? What is wrong with a federal ‘super state’ ? Nothing if the majority want it. Turns out they didn't. The majority were conned
Well you would say that wouldn't you? Nobody was conned, it was probably the most informed and discussed vote in human history.
Are you joking or serious?"Serious. Look, Brexit, and the lead-up to DC's referendum rattled on for years, decades even. Everybody knew the issues and voted accordingly. This stuff about being conned is a fallacy, and just an excuse. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit has deep roots. How about the notion that the trade bloc we thought we'd joined developed by stealth into a federalist super-state? What is wrong with a federal ‘super state’ ? Nothing if the majority want it. Turns out they didn't. The majority were conned
Well you would say that wouldn't you? Nobody was conned, it was probably the most informed and discussed vote in human history.
Are you joking or serious?
Serious. Look, Brexit, and the lead-up to DC's referendum rattled on for years, decades even. Everybody knew the issues and voted accordingly. This stuff about being conned is a fallacy, and just an excuse."So, people knew what they were voting for and knowingly voted for this clusterfuck ? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit has deep roots. How about the notion that the trade bloc we thought we'd joined developed by stealth into a federalist super-state? What is wrong with a federal ‘super state’ ? Nothing if the majority want it. Turns out they didn't. The majority were conned
Well you would say that wouldn't you? Nobody was conned, it was probably the most informed and discussed vote in human history.
Are you joking or serious?
Serious. Look, Brexit, and the lead-up to DC's referendum rattled on for years, decades even. Everybody knew the issues and voted accordingly. This stuff about being conned is a fallacy, and just an excuse."But that is the issues, not everybody knew the issues...I am glad we haven't yet talked about the economy, but we have to the accept, there is a reason why our economy is the worst performing in G7 economies, why our inflation is still double digits, whilst the rest of the G7 it is single digits and dropping. These are the deeper issues that were never mentioned. Not faulting the Brexiters, but the Remainers as well should have argued on the basics and the truth. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit has deep roots. How about the notion that the trade bloc we thought we'd joined developed by stealth into a federalist super-state? What is wrong with a federal ‘super state’ ? Nothing if the majority want it. Turns out they didn't. The majority were conned
Well you would say that wouldn't you? Nobody was conned, it was probably the most informed and discussed vote in human history.
Are you joking or serious?
Serious. Look, Brexit, and the lead-up to DC's referendum rattled on for years, decades even. Everybody knew the issues and voted accordingly. This stuff about being conned is a fallacy, and just an excuse."Never has there been a bigger campaign of misinformation in living memory. If misinformation is an "excuse" what would say is the reason for people voting against their own interests en masse? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit has deep roots. How about the notion that the trade bloc we thought we'd joined developed by stealth into a federalist super-state? What is wrong with a federal ‘super state’ ? Nothing if the majority want it. Turns out they didn't. The majority were conned
Well you would say that wouldn't you? Nobody was conned, it was probably the most informed and discussed vote in human history.
Are you joking or serious?
Serious. Look, Brexit, and the lead-up to DC's referendum rattled on for years, decades even. Everybody knew the issues and voted accordingly. This stuff about being conned is a fallacy, and just an excuse.
Never has there been a bigger campaign of misinformation in living memory.
If misinformation is an "excuse" what would say is the reason for people voting against their own interests en masse?"Tbh, I was going to give leave voters the benefit of doubt and was ‘hoping’ they were conned, however it looks like they were well informed and still stupid enough to vote for this, sad times  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Its not a foregone conclusion that if we somehow had another referendum and voted to rejoin the EU that the EU would allow us back in. There would be too much risk from their perspective that we could hold another neverendum and vote to leave again. David Cameron totally abdicated responsibility and leadership by even putting the question to the public. He did this in order to win another term at the general election. thats where the rot started. I think it will be decades before we ever rejoin the EU." Check out the news re Cameron and Murdoch very cosy arrangements. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit has deep roots. How about the notion that the trade bloc we thought we'd joined developed by stealth into a federalist super-state? What is wrong with a federal ‘super state’ ? Nothing if the majority want it. Turns out they didn't. The majority were conned
Well you would say that wouldn't you? Nobody was conned, it was probably the most informed and discussed vote in human history.
Are you joking or serious?
Serious. Look, Brexit, and the lead-up to DC's referendum rattled on for years, decades even. Everybody knew the issues and voted accordingly. This stuff about being conned is a fallacy, and just an excuse.
Never has there been a bigger campaign of misinformation in living memory.
If misinformation is an "excuse" what would say is the reason for people voting against their own interests en masse?"Well if you feel that's the case how come the sage and wise didn't prove it was all 'misinformation' and discredit the perpetrators at the time? You had your chance, no good having regrets now. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit has deep roots. How about the notion that the trade bloc we thought we'd joined developed by stealth into a federalist super-state? What is wrong with a federal ‘super state’ ? Nothing if the majority want it. Turns out they didn't. The majority were conned
Well you would say that wouldn't you? Nobody was conned, it was probably the most informed and discussed vote in human history.
Are you joking or serious?
Serious. Look, Brexit, and the lead-up to DC's referendum rattled on for years, decades even. Everybody knew the issues and voted accordingly. This stuff about being conned is a fallacy, and just an excuse.
So, people knew what they were voting for and knowingly voted for this clusterfuck ? "Yes they did, and accepted there would be short term pain. There were always two parts to Brexit 1) Political and 2) Economic. Were the political gains worth the short term economic pain? That's a fine call, but 52% thought it was - it's called democracy. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit has deep roots. How about the notion that the trade bloc we thought we'd joined developed by stealth into a federalist super-state? What is wrong with a federal ‘super state’ ? Nothing if the majority want it. Turns out they didn't. The majority were conned
Well you would say that wouldn't you? Nobody was conned, it was probably the most informed and discussed vote in human history.
Are you joking or serious?
Serious. Look, Brexit, and the lead-up to DC's referendum rattled on for years, decades even. Everybody knew the issues and voted accordingly. This stuff about being conned is a fallacy, and just an excuse.
Never has there been a bigger campaign of misinformation in living memory.
If misinformation is an "excuse" what would say is the reason for people voting against their own interests en masse?
Well if you feel that's the case how come the sage and wise didn't prove it was all 'misinformation' and discredit the perpetrators at the time? You had your chance, no good having regrets now. "They did. The illegally funded leave campaigns wrote off real life information as "project fear". Which in itself is yet more misinformation. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit has deep roots. How about the notion that the trade bloc we thought we'd joined developed by stealth into a federalist super-state? What is wrong with a federal ‘super state’ ? Nothing if the majority want it. Turns out they didn't. The majority were conned
Well you would say that wouldn't you? Nobody was conned, it was probably the most informed and discussed vote in human history.
Are you joking or serious?
Serious. Look, Brexit, and the lead-up to DC's referendum rattled on for years, decades even. Everybody knew the issues and voted accordingly. This stuff about being conned is a fallacy, and just an excuse.
Never has there been a bigger campaign of misinformation in living memory.
If misinformation is an "excuse" what would say is the reason for people voting against their own interests en masse?
Well if you feel that's the case how come the sage and wise didn't prove it was all 'misinformation' and discredit the perpetrators at the time? You had your chance, no good having regrets now.
They did. The illegally funded leave campaigns wrote off real life information as "project fear". Which in itself is yet more misinformation.
"Whereas, Remain with the vast funding and resources of the state behind it couldn't convince the electorate. Who knows, perhaps they had an inferior case? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit has deep roots. How about the notion that the trade bloc we thought we'd joined developed by stealth into a federalist super-state? What is wrong with a federal ‘super state’ ? Nothing if the majority want it. Turns out they didn't. The majority were conned
Well you would say that wouldn't you? Nobody was conned, it was probably the most informed and discussed vote in human history.
Are you joking or serious?
Serious. Look, Brexit, and the lead-up to DC's referendum rattled on for years, decades even. Everybody knew the issues and voted accordingly. This stuff about being conned is a fallacy, and just an excuse.
Never has there been a bigger campaign of misinformation in living memory.
If misinformation is an "excuse" what would say is the reason for people voting against their own interests en masse?
Well if you feel that's the case how come the sage and wise didn't prove it was all 'misinformation' and discredit the perpetrators at the time? You had your chance, no good having regrets now.
They did. The illegally funded leave campaigns wrote off real life information as "project fear". Which in itself is yet more misinformation.
Whereas, Remain with the vast funding and resources of the state behind it couldn't convince the electorate. Who knows, perhaps they had an inferior case?"The remain campaign was funded legally and provided real life information on the consequences of leaving the EU. If you want to blame them for people believing the misinformation of the leave campaigns. That's fine, maybe you're right. But you can't then argue "Nobody was conned, it was probably the most informed and discussed vote in human history." | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The 2016 referendum was do you want to stay in the EU or leave it. The leave vote won. In my view it is a success." The referendum was actually about "something" (admittedly unspecified) being improved or at a minimum being neutral as a consequence of leaving the EU. You personally,may believe that the consequences of Brexit are fabulous. That does not appear to be the case for many other voters and even Farage seems to believe that whatever form of Brexit that we do have is a failure. Of course that is everyone else's fault and nothing to do with him. Regardless of what you believe, one of Brexit's greatest advocates does believe that it has been a failure. It has not achieved any of the goals (whatever they may have been) that he spent 20 years campaigning for. That is correct, yes? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit has deep roots. How about the notion that the trade bloc we thought we'd joined developed by stealth into a federalist super-state? What is wrong with a federal ‘super state’ ? Nothing if the majority want it. Turns out they didn't. The majority were conned
Well you would say that wouldn't you? Nobody was conned, it was probably the most informed and discussed vote in human history.
Are you joking or serious?
Serious. Look, Brexit, and the lead-up to DC's referendum rattled on for years, decades even. Everybody knew the issues and voted accordingly. This stuff about being conned is a fallacy, and just an excuse.
Never has there been a bigger campaign of misinformation in living memory.
If misinformation is an "excuse" what would say is the reason for people voting against their own interests en masse?
Well if you feel that's the case how come the sage and wise didn't prove it was all 'misinformation' and discredit the perpetrators at the time? You had your chance, no good having regrets now.
They did. The illegally funded leave campaigns wrote off real life information as "project fear". Which in itself is yet more misinformation.
Whereas, Remain with the vast funding and resources of the state behind it couldn't convince the electorate. Who knows, perhaps they had an inferior case?
The remain campaign was funded legally and provided real life information on the consequences of leaving the EU.
If you want to blame them for people believing the misinformation of the leave campaigns. That's fine, maybe you're right. But you can't then argue "Nobody was conned, it was probably the most informed and discussed vote in human history.""But it was debated, discussed, analysed like no event I can recall before. Months after month of Newspapers, TV, Radio, Online......yet apparently we were 'misinformed'. Bit of a thin argument, no? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit has deep roots. How about the notion that the trade bloc we thought we'd joined developed by stealth into a federalist super-state? What is wrong with a federal ‘super state’ ? Nothing if the majority want it. Turns out they didn't. The majority were conned
Well you would say that wouldn't you? Nobody was conned, it was probably the most informed and discussed vote in human history. "Informed by what? Personalised Facebook news-streams and echo chambers? Years of anti-EU news stories and the blame for every incompetence of national Government? If people were so well informed why do they not seem to like the consequences? Being "well informed" (having lots of information) is not the same as being "correctly informed". Might it be that what they were informed would happen may not have turned out to be what has actually happened? That doesn't make the results of the referendum illegitimate, it just makes it a hard, irreversible, lesson to have to learn. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit has deep roots. How about the notion that the trade bloc we thought we'd joined developed by stealth into a federalist super-state? What is wrong with a federal ‘super state’ ? Nothing if the majority want it. Turns out they didn't. The majority were conned
Well you would say that wouldn't you? Nobody was conned, it was probably the most informed and discussed vote in human history.
Are you joking or serious?
Serious. Look, Brexit, and the lead-up to DC's referendum rattled on for years, decades even. Everybody knew the issues and voted accordingly. This stuff about being conned is a fallacy, and just an excuse.
Never has there been a bigger campaign of misinformation in living memory.
If misinformation is an "excuse" what would say is the reason for people voting against their own interests en masse?
Well if you feel that's the case how come the sage and wise didn't prove it was all 'misinformation' and discredit the perpetrators at the time? You had your chance, no good having regrets now.
They did. The illegally funded leave campaigns wrote off real life information as "project fear". Which in itself is yet more misinformation.
Whereas, Remain with the vast funding and resources of the state behind it couldn't convince the electorate. Who knows, perhaps they had an inferior case?
The remain campaign was funded legally and provided real life information on the consequences of leaving the EU.
If you want to blame them for people believing the misinformation of the leave campaigns. That's fine, maybe you're right. But you can't then argue "Nobody was conned, it was probably the most informed and discussed vote in human history."
But it was debated, discussed, analysed like no event I can recall before. Months after month of Newspapers, TV, Radio, Online......yet apparently we were 'misinformed'. Bit of a thin argument, no?"There was lots of "information". Much of it tailored to suit the individual voter. Much of it contradictory from the same side. You could choose to believe that we would leave the EU with no changes to anything. You could choose to believe that we would be immediately ramping up huge exports to the USA and South East Asia. You could choose to believe that there would be no immigrants ever again. You could choose to believe it would stop Turkey from instantly joining the EU and a hoard of Syrians arriving to carry out acts of terrorism. Every combination of anything that you chose to believe was available for you to vote for. All contrary arguments were "project fear" and " experts" whom we'd had "too much" of. The electorate were encouraged to believe not consider. That's what happened. So no, not a "thin argument". | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit has deep roots. How about the notion that the trade bloc we thought we'd joined developed by stealth into a federalist super-state? What is wrong with a federal ‘super state’ ? Nothing if the majority want it. Turns out they didn't. The majority were conned
Well you would say that wouldn't you? Nobody was conned, it was probably the most informed and discussed vote in human history.
Are you joking or serious?
Serious. Look, Brexit, and the lead-up to DC's referendum rattled on for years, decades even. Everybody knew the issues and voted accordingly. This stuff about being conned is a fallacy, and just an excuse.
So, people knew what they were voting for and knowingly voted for this clusterfuck ?
Yes they did, and accepted there would be short term pain. There were always two parts to Brexit 1) Political and 2) Economic. Were the political gains worth the short term economic pain? That's a fine call, but 52% thought it was - it's called democracy. "‘Brexit is a failure’ Nigel Farage, he states that people voted for Brexit to decrease immigration, it hasn’t, are you saying he is wrong? Or did he voted for a different ‘type’ of Brexit ?? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit has deep roots. How about the notion that the trade bloc we thought we'd joined developed by stealth into a federalist super-state? What is wrong with a federal ‘super state’ ? Nothing if the majority want it. Turns out they didn't. The majority were conned
Well you would say that wouldn't you? Nobody was conned, it was probably the most informed and discussed vote in human history.
Are you joking or serious?
Serious. Look, Brexit, and the lead-up to DC's referendum rattled on for years, decades even. Everybody knew the issues and voted accordingly. This stuff about being conned is a fallacy, and just an excuse.
Never has there been a bigger campaign of misinformation in living memory.
If misinformation is an "excuse" what would say is the reason for people voting against their own interests en masse?
Well if you feel that's the case how come the sage and wise didn't prove it was all 'misinformation' and discredit the perpetrators at the time? You had your chance, no good having regrets now.
They did. The illegally funded leave campaigns wrote off real life information as "project fear". Which in itself is yet more misinformation.
Whereas, Remain with the vast funding and resources of the state behind it couldn't convince the electorate. Who knows, perhaps they had an inferior case?
The remain campaign was funded legally and provided real life information on the consequences of leaving the EU.
If you want to blame them for people believing the misinformation of the leave campaigns. That's fine, maybe you're right. But you can't then argue "Nobody was conned, it was probably the most informed and discussed vote in human history."
But it was debated, discussed, analysed like no event I can recall before. Months after month of Newspapers, TV, Radio, Online......yet apparently we were 'misinformed'. Bit of a thin argument, no?"Why did you (personally ) vote for Brexit ? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit has deep roots. How about the notion that the trade bloc we thought we'd joined developed by stealth into a federalist super-state? What is wrong with a federal ‘super state’ ? Nothing if the majority want it. Turns out they didn't. The majority were conned
Well you would say that wouldn't you? Nobody was conned, it was probably the most informed and discussed vote in human history.
Are you joking or serious?
Serious. Look, Brexit, and the lead-up to DC's referendum rattled on for years, decades even. Everybody knew the issues and voted accordingly. This stuff about being conned is a fallacy, and just an excuse.
Never has there been a bigger campaign of misinformation in living memory.
If misinformation is an "excuse" what would say is the reason for people voting against their own interests en masse?
Well if you feel that's the case how come the sage and wise didn't prove it was all 'misinformation' and discredit the perpetrators at the time? You had your chance, no good having regrets now.
They did. The illegally funded leave campaigns wrote off real life information as "project fear". Which in itself is yet more misinformation.
Whereas, Remain with the vast funding and resources of the state behind it couldn't convince the electorate. Who knows, perhaps they had an inferior case?
The remain campaign was funded legally and provided real life information on the consequences of leaving the EU.
If you want to blame them for people believing the misinformation of the leave campaigns. That's fine, maybe you're right. But you can't then argue "Nobody was conned, it was probably the most informed and discussed vote in human history."
But it was debated, discussed, analysed like no event I can recall before. Months after month of Newspapers, TV, Radio, Online......yet apparently we were 'misinformed'. Bit of a thin argument, no?
Why did you (personally ) vote for Brexit ? "Where did I say I did? But the thing is, I accept the referendum result. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit has deep roots. How about the notion that the trade bloc we thought we'd joined developed by stealth into a federalist super-state? What is wrong with a federal ‘super state’ ? Nothing if the majority want it. Turns out they didn't. The majority were conned
Well you would say that wouldn't you? Nobody was conned, it was probably the most informed and discussed vote in human history.
Are you joking or serious?
Serious. Look, Brexit, and the lead-up to DC's referendum rattled on for years, decades even. Everybody knew the issues and voted accordingly. This stuff about being conned is a fallacy, and just an excuse.
Never has there been a bigger campaign of misinformation in living memory.
If misinformation is an "excuse" what would say is the reason for people voting against their own interests en masse?
Well if you feel that's the case how come the sage and wise didn't prove it was all 'misinformation' and discredit the perpetrators at the time? You had your chance, no good having regrets now.
They did. The illegally funded leave campaigns wrote off real life information as "project fear". Which in itself is yet more misinformation.
Whereas, Remain with the vast funding and resources of the state behind it couldn't convince the electorate. Who knows, perhaps they had an inferior case?
The remain campaign was funded legally and provided real life information on the consequences of leaving the EU.
If you want to blame them for people believing the misinformation of the leave campaigns. That's fine, maybe you're right. But you can't then argue "Nobody was conned, it was probably the most informed and discussed vote in human history."
But it was debated, discussed, analysed like no event I can recall before. Months after month of Newspapers, TV, Radio, Online......yet apparently we were 'misinformed'. Bit of a thin argument, no?
Why did you (personally ) vote for Brexit ?
Where did I say I did? But the thing is, I accept the referendum result."Where did I say I didn’t accept the result ? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well your OP asked the question "who should take the blame for this clusterfuck?" But if you accept the result, that's good." It is a clusterfuck, even Nigel Farage agrees, do you think he didn’t accept the result of the referendum? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well your OP asked the question "who should take the blame for this clusterfuck?" But if you accept the result, that's good. It is a clusterfuck, even Nigel Farage agrees, do you think he didn’t accept the result of the referendum? " Reading what he says, his meaning is that Brexit in it's purest form is not being adhered to by the Tories. He wants Brexit not Brexit Lite. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well your OP asked the question "who should take the blame for this clusterfuck?" But if you accept the result, that's good. It is a clusterfuck, even Nigel Farage agrees, do you think he didn’t accept the result of the referendum? Reading what he says, his meaning is that Brexit in it's purest form is not being adhered to by the Tories. He wants Brexit not Brexit Lite." But he was well informed, he knew what he was voting for? Or was he voting for a different type of Brexit than everyone else? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ah the daily Brexit thread, in which dullard Remoaners tell each other for the six thousandth time why they voted Remain seven years ago. " Did you read it? ‘Brexit is a failure’ Nigel Farage, your poster boy | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well your OP asked the question "who should take the blame for this clusterfuck?" But if you accept the result, that's good. It is a clusterfuck, even Nigel Farage agrees, do you think he didn’t accept the result of the referendum? Reading what he says, his meaning is that Brexit in it's purest form is not being adhered to by the Tories. He wants Brexit not Brexit Lite. But he was well informed, he knew what he was voting for? Or was he voting for a different type of Brexit than everyone else? " I have no idea how well informed he was, but I'm sure NF saw Brexit as a complete withdrawal from the EU, including repealing their laws. But Sunak, as PM, has to operate within political realities - and rightly so. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ah the daily Brexit thread, in which dullard Remoaners tell each other for the six thousandth time why they voted Remain seven years ago. " Is Farage a ‘remoaner’ ? Big news if true | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ah the daily Brexit thread, in which dullard Remoaners tell each other for the six thousandth time why they voted Remain seven years ago. Did you read it? ‘Brexit is a failure’ Nigel Farage, your poster boy "So did you vote Remain then? I hadn't heard that from you before. I wonder if you might mention it tomorrow. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well your OP asked the question "who should take the blame for this clusterfuck?" But if you accept the result, that's good. It is a clusterfuck, even Nigel Farage agrees, do you think he didn’t accept the result of the referendum? Reading what he says, his meaning is that Brexit in it's purest form is not being adhered to by the Tories. He wants Brexit not Brexit Lite. But he was well informed, he knew what he was voting for? Or was he voting for a different type of Brexit than everyone else? I have no idea how well informed he was, but I'm sure NF saw Brexit as a complete withdrawal from the EU, including repealing their laws. But Sunak, as PM, has to operate within political realities - and rightly so." Ah, so Farage voted for a different type of Brexit ? He must feel like a bit of a tit | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ah the daily Brexit thread, in which dullard Remoaners tell each other for the six thousandth time why they voted Remain seven years ago. Did you read it? ‘Brexit is a failure’ Nigel Farage, your poster boy
So did you vote Remain then? I hadn't heard that from you before. I wonder if you might mention it tomorrow. "Do you think Farage is a ‘remoaner’? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ah the daily Brexit thread, in which dullard Remoaners tell each other for the six thousandth time why they voted Remain seven years ago. Did you read it? ‘Brexit is a failure’ Nigel Farage, your poster boy
So did you vote Remain then? I hadn't heard that from you before. I wonder if you might mention it tomorrow.
Do you think Farage is a ‘remoaner’? "I don't think about it at all. I'm not the one who spends every waking minute talking about the same stuff every day on this forum. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ah the daily Brexit thread, in which dullard Remoaners tell each other for the six thousandth time why they voted Remain seven years ago. Did you read it? ‘Brexit is a failure’ Nigel Farage, your poster boy
So did you vote Remain then? I hadn't heard that from you before. I wonder if you might mention it tomorrow.
Do you think Farage is a ‘remoaner’?
I don't think about it at all. I'm not the one who spends every waking minute talking about the same stuff every day on this forum. "You’re literally on a forum thread, talking about it | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well your OP asked the question "who should take the blame for this clusterfuck?" But if you accept the result, that's good. It is a clusterfuck, even Nigel Farage agrees, do you think he didn’t accept the result of the referendum? Reading what he says, his meaning is that Brexit in it's purest form is not being adhered to by the Tories. He wants Brexit not Brexit Lite. But he was well informed, he knew what he was voting for? Or was he voting for a different type of Brexit than everyone else? I have no idea how well informed he was, but I'm sure NF saw Brexit as a complete withdrawal from the EU, including repealing their laws. But Sunak, as PM, has to operate within political realities - and rightly so. Ah, so Farage voted for a different type of Brexit ? He must feel like a bit of a tit "Well he's not getting the hard Brexit he'd have wanted. But so what? Political projects evolve. He's not running the country is he? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well your OP asked the question "who should take the blame for this clusterfuck?" But if you accept the result, that's good. It is a clusterfuck, even Nigel Farage agrees, do you think he didn’t accept the result of the referendum? Reading what he says, his meaning is that Brexit in it's purest form is not being adhered to by the Tories. He wants Brexit not Brexit Lite. But he was well informed, he knew what he was voting for? Or was he voting for a different type of Brexit than everyone else? I have no idea how well informed he was, but I'm sure NF saw Brexit as a complete withdrawal from the EU, including repealing their laws. But Sunak, as PM, has to operate within political realities - and rightly so. Ah, so Farage voted for a different type of Brexit ? He must feel like a bit of a tit
Well he's not getting the hard Brexit he'd have wanted. But so what? Political projects evolve. He's not running the country is he?"So many people were badly informed about what the consequences of Brexit would actually mean, including Nigel Farage. Well summarised. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit has deep roots. How about the notion that the trade bloc we thought we'd joined developed by stealth into a federalist super-state? What is wrong with a federal ‘super state’ ? Nothing if the majority want it. Turns out they didn't. The majority were conned
Well you would say that wouldn't you? Nobody was conned, it was probably the most informed and discussed vote in human history.
Are you joking or serious?
Serious. Look, Brexit, and the lead-up to DC's referendum rattled on for years, decades even. Everybody knew the issues and voted accordingly. This stuff about being conned is a fallacy, and just an excuse.
Never has there been a bigger campaign of misinformation in living memory.
If misinformation is an "excuse" what would say is the reason for people voting against their own interests en masse?
Well if you feel that's the case how come the sage and wise didn't prove it was all 'misinformation' and discredit the perpetrators at the time? You had your chance, no good having regrets now.
They did. The illegally funded leave campaigns wrote off real life information as "project fear". Which in itself is yet more misinformation.
Whereas, Remain with the vast funding and resources of the state behind it couldn't convince the electorate. Who knows, perhaps they had an inferior case?
The remain campaign was funded legally and provided real life information on the consequences of leaving the EU.
If you want to blame them for people believing the misinformation of the leave campaigns. That's fine, maybe you're right. But you can't then argue "Nobody was conned, it was probably the most informed and discussed vote in human history."
But it was debated, discussed, analysed like no event I can recall before. Months after month of Newspapers, TV, Radio, Online......yet apparently we were 'misinformed'. Bit of a thin argument, no?"Not when you look at the huge reams of misinformation that was spouted. It actually happened. You appear to be arguing against reality. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well your OP asked the question "who should take the blame for this clusterfuck?" But if you accept the result, that's good. It is a clusterfuck, even Nigel Farage agrees, do you think he didn’t accept the result of the referendum? Reading what he says, his meaning is that Brexit in it's purest form is not being adhered to by the Tories. He wants Brexit not Brexit Lite. But he was well informed, he knew what he was voting for? Or was he voting for a different type of Brexit than everyone else? I have no idea how well informed he was, but I'm sure NF saw Brexit as a complete withdrawal from the EU, including repealing their laws. But Sunak, as PM, has to operate within political realities - and rightly so. Ah, so Farage voted for a different type of Brexit ? He must feel like a bit of a tit
Well he's not getting the hard Brexit he'd have wanted. But so what? Political projects evolve. He's not running the country is he?"He was one of the 52%,one of the ‘well informed’, he isn’t getting the Brexit he voted for, he thinks it has ‘failed’ do you think he is the only one ? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit has deep roots. How about the notion that the trade bloc we thought we'd joined developed by stealth into a federalist super-state? What is wrong with a federal ‘super state’ ? Nothing if the majority want it. Turns out they didn't. The majority were conned
Well you would say that wouldn't you? Nobody was conned, it was probably the most informed and discussed vote in human history.
Are you joking or serious?
Serious. Look, Brexit, and the lead-up to DC's referendum rattled on for years, decades even. Everybody knew the issues and voted accordingly. This stuff about being conned is a fallacy, and just an excuse.
Never has there been a bigger campaign of misinformation in living memory.
If misinformation is an "excuse" what would say is the reason for people voting against their own interests en masse?
Well if you feel that's the case how come the sage and wise didn't prove it was all 'misinformation' and discredit the perpetrators at the time? You had your chance, no good having regrets now.
They did. The illegally funded leave campaigns wrote off real life information as "project fear". Which in itself is yet more misinformation.
Whereas, Remain with the vast funding and resources of the state behind it couldn't convince the electorate. Who knows, perhaps they had an inferior case?
The remain campaign was funded legally and provided real life information on the consequences of leaving the EU.
If you want to blame them for people believing the misinformation of the leave campaigns. That's fine, maybe you're right. But you can't then argue "Nobody was conned, it was probably the most informed and discussed vote in human history."
But it was debated, discussed, analysed like no event I can recall before. Months after month of Newspapers, TV, Radio, Online......yet apparently we were 'misinformed'. Bit of a thin argument, no?
Not when you look at the huge reams of misinformation that was spouted. It actually happened.
You appear to be arguing against reality. "The only reality here, is that Brexit has happened and it isn't going to be reversed anytime soon. That being the case, it's hard to see what all this navel gazing brings. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well your OP asked the question "who should take the blame for this clusterfuck?" But if you accept the result, that's good. It is a clusterfuck, even Nigel Farage agrees, do you think he didn’t accept the result of the referendum? Reading what he says, his meaning is that Brexit in it's purest form is not being adhered to by the Tories. He wants Brexit not Brexit Lite. But he was well informed, he knew what he was voting for? Or was he voting for a different type of Brexit than everyone else? I have no idea how well informed he was, but I'm sure NF saw Brexit as a complete withdrawal from the EU, including repealing their laws. But Sunak, as PM, has to operate within political realities - and rightly so. Ah, so Farage voted for a different type of Brexit ? He must feel like a bit of a tit
Well he's not getting the hard Brexit he'd have wanted. But so what? Political projects evolve. He's not running the country is he?
He was one of the 52%,one of the ‘well informed’, he isn’t getting the Brexit he voted for, he thinks it has ‘failed’ do you think he is the only one ? "I have no idea what people think, but I imagine they look at the political realities and accept government policies. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well your OP asked the question "who should take the blame for this clusterfuck?" But if you accept the result, that's good. It is a clusterfuck, even Nigel Farage agrees, do you think he didn’t accept the result of the referendum? Reading what he says, his meaning is that Brexit in it's purest form is not being adhered to by the Tories. He wants Brexit not Brexit Lite. But he was well informed, he knew what he was voting for? Or was he voting for a different type of Brexit than everyone else? I have no idea how well informed he was, but I'm sure NF saw Brexit as a complete withdrawal from the EU, including repealing their laws. But Sunak, as PM, has to operate within political realities - and rightly so. Ah, so Farage voted for a different type of Brexit ? He must feel like a bit of a tit
Well he's not getting the hard Brexit he'd have wanted. But so what? Political projects evolve. He's not running the country is he?
He was one of the 52%,one of the ‘well informed’, he isn’t getting the Brexit he voted for, he thinks it has ‘failed’ do you think he is the only one ?
I have no idea what people think, but I imagine they look at the political realities and accept government policies. "Nigel Farage hasn’t | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit has deep roots. How about the notion that the trade bloc we thought we'd joined developed by stealth into a federalist super-state? What is wrong with a federal ‘super state’ ? Nothing if the majority want it. Turns out they didn't. The majority were conned
Well you would say that wouldn't you? Nobody was conned, it was probably the most informed and discussed vote in human history.
Are you joking or serious?
Serious. Look, Brexit, and the lead-up to DC's referendum rattled on for years, decades even. Everybody knew the issues and voted accordingly. This stuff about being conned is a fallacy, and just an excuse.
Never has there been a bigger campaign of misinformation in living memory.
If misinformation is an "excuse" what would say is the reason for people voting against their own interests en masse?
Well if you feel that's the case how come the sage and wise didn't prove it was all 'misinformation' and discredit the perpetrators at the time? You had your chance, no good having regrets now.
They did. The illegally funded leave campaigns wrote off real life information as "project fear". Which in itself is yet more misinformation.
Whereas, Remain with the vast funding and resources of the state behind it couldn't convince the electorate. Who knows, perhaps they had an inferior case?
The remain campaign was funded legally and provided real life information on the consequences of leaving the EU.
If you want to blame them for people believing the misinformation of the leave campaigns. That's fine, maybe you're right. But you can't then argue "Nobody was conned, it was probably the most informed and discussed vote in human history."
But it was debated, discussed, analysed like no event I can recall before. Months after month of Newspapers, TV, Radio, Online......yet apparently we were 'misinformed'. Bit of a thin argument, no?
Not when you look at the huge reams of misinformation that was spouted. It actually happened.
You appear to be arguing against reality.
The only reality here, is that Brexit has happened and it isn't going to be reversed anytime soon. That being the case, it's hard to see what all this navel gazing brings."Brexit has happened, no one is saying it hasn't. People voted for it based on misinformation. This doesn't bring anything. It's just interesting when the final stragglers that still think brexit was a good idea pop up. Arguing that despite the reality of brexit, despite the huge volumes of misinformation that is still readily available, that people who voted leave were well informed is a new one. It's as far fetched as it gets. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well your OP asked the question "who should take the blame for this clusterfuck?" But if you accept the result, that's good. It is a clusterfuck, even Nigel Farage agrees, do you think he didn’t accept the result of the referendum? Reading what he says, his meaning is that Brexit in it's purest form is not being adhered to by the Tories. He wants Brexit not Brexit Lite. But he was well informed, he knew what he was voting for? Or was he voting for a different type of Brexit than everyone else? I have no idea how well informed he was, but I'm sure NF saw Brexit as a complete withdrawal from the EU, including repealing their laws. But Sunak, as PM, has to operate within political realities - and rightly so. Ah, so Farage voted for a different type of Brexit ? He must feel like a bit of a tit
Well he's not getting the hard Brexit he'd have wanted. But so what? Political projects evolve. He's not running the country is he?
He was one of the 52%,one of the ‘well informed’, he isn’t getting the Brexit he voted for, he thinks it has ‘failed’ do you think he is the only one ?
I have no idea what people think, but I imagine they look at the political realities and accept government policies. "I do agree with this. The majority don't question, obey unquestioning, and some go as far as attacking randomers on a swingers forum for not wishing to accept the bullshit government policies. (Last part is not aimed at you btw) | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The 2016 referendum was do you want to stay in the EU or leave it. The leave vote won. In my view it is a success. Nigel Farage has publicly stated that ‘Brexit has failed ‘ . How has it been a success?
For the reason stated. Here's what happened in 2016, we were asked a question.
Should we leave the EU.
For those who answered YES, we left. That's a success.
They answered in that way and got their wish.
Pretty sure that's what Shy said.
To be fair that is objectively true so I will partially revise my response...
I blame David Cameron
Why?
There was no way the referendum should have been a single binary vote. It should have had a second vote activated if the majority voted leave to then vote on nature of future relationship."I can understand the logic for a second referendum on how the UK left the EU but that should have been planned and made clear before the first referendum. Trying to introduce it after the result did not look good and if I recall correctly those calling for the second referendum after the result went against them said remaining in the EU should be on the ballot paper. This goes against the idea that the second referendum was only to decide on the method of leaving. Yes D.C. should be accountable for much of this | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well your OP asked the question "who should take the blame for this clusterfuck?" But if you accept the result, that's good. It is a clusterfuck, even Nigel Farage agrees, do you think he didn’t accept the result of the referendum? " What the hell does 'clusterfuck' mean (obviously the OP likes using it)? It is almost as meaningless a word as 'Brexit' has turned out to be! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well your OP asked the question "who should take the blame for this clusterfuck?" But if you accept the result, that's good. It is a clusterfuck, even Nigel Farage agrees, do you think he didn’t accept the result of the referendum? What the hell does 'clusterfuck' mean (obviously the OP likes using it)? It is almost as meaningless a word as 'Brexit' has turned out to be!" I would take to mean, big fucking mess that we knew was coming, with no sign of it getting resolved anytime soon. Brexit would be a good example of a clusterfuck. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If the promises had been implemented there wouldn't be an issue and for that the blame lies squarely at the feet of the Tories. They had the majority and have failed to deliver. Recently the opportunity to dump EU regs that were of no benefit to the UK were missed. Not good enough " Which promises? Personally I'm glad they're not binning workers rights, environment protections, food safety standards etc, just yet. But I don't think you need to worry. They will. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The 2016 referendum was do you want to stay in the EU or leave it. The leave vote won. In my view it is a success. Nigel Farage has publicly stated that ‘Brexit has failed ‘ . How has it been a success?
For the reason stated. Here's what happened in 2016, we were asked a question.
Should we leave the EU.
For those who answered YES, we left. That's a success.
They answered in that way and got their wish.
Pretty sure that's what Shy said.
To be fair that is objectively true so I will partially revise my response...
I blame David Cameron
Why?
There was no way the referendum should have been a single binary vote. It should have had a second vote activated if the majority voted leave to then vote on nature of future relationship.
I can understand the logic for a second referendum on how the UK left the EU but that should have been planned and made clear before the first referendum. Trying to introduce it after the result did not look good and if I recall correctly those calling for the second referendum after the result went against them said remaining in the EU should be on the ballot paper. This goes against the idea that the second referendum was only to decide on the method of leaving. Yes D.C. should be accountable for much of this"Yep there should ALWAYS have been a plan for a two step referendum but Cameron was too arrogant to even consider more people voting leave. He then ran away. While remainers were unhappy with the 52/48 split to leave, many would have accepted a second vote on the nature of the future relationship outside the EU. Knowing there was a second step would also have changed the discussion and much of the rhetoric. It should never have been a binary decision. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well your OP asked the question "who should take the blame for this clusterfuck?" But if you accept the result, that's good. It is a clusterfuck, even Nigel Farage agrees, do you think he didn’t accept the result of the referendum? What the hell does 'clusterfuck' mean (obviously the OP likes using it)? It is almost as meaningless a word as 'Brexit' has turned out to be!" On Fab a clusterfuck sounds like great fun. In the real world not so much!  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well your OP asked the question "who should take the blame for this clusterfuck?" But if you accept the result, that's good. It is a clusterfuck, even Nigel Farage agrees, do you think he didn’t accept the result of the referendum? What the hell does 'clusterfuck' mean (obviously the OP likes using it)? It is almost as meaningless a word as 'Brexit' has turned out to be!" Cluster a group of similar things or people positioned or occurring closely together Fuck damage or ruin something So a clusterfuck is a group of fucks or a number of things that damage or ruin something, in this case, the country | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If the promises had been implemented there wouldn't be an issue and for that the blame lies squarely at the feet of the Tories. They had the majority and have failed to deliver. Recently the opportunity to dump EU regs that were of no benefit to the UK were missed. Not good enough Which promises? Personally I'm glad they're not binning workers rights, environment protections, food safety standards etc, just yet. But I don't think you need to worry. They will." Which promises? Seriously? The majority voted one way and minority the other. The majority have been let down by the Tories failure to implement this idea. No more,no less | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If the promises had been implemented there wouldn't be an issue and for that the blame lies squarely at the feet of the Tories. They had the majority and have failed to deliver. Recently the opportunity to dump EU regs that were of no benefit to the UK were missed. Not good enough Which promises? Personally I'm glad they're not binning workers rights, environment protections, food safety standards etc, just yet. But I don't think you need to worry. They will. Which promises? Seriously? The majority voted one way and minority the other. The majority have been let down by the Tories failure to implement this idea. No more,no less " There certainly looks like little chance of whatever benefits there might have been from leaving will ever be implemented. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If the promises had been implemented there wouldn't be an issue and for that the blame lies squarely at the feet of the Tories. They had the majority and have failed to deliver. Recently the opportunity to dump EU regs that were of no benefit to the UK were missed. Not good enough Which promises? Personally I'm glad they're not binning workers rights, environment protections, food safety standards etc, just yet. But I don't think you need to worry. They will. Which promises? Seriously? The majority voted one way and minority the other. The majority have been let down by the Tories failure to implement this idea. No more,no less " They promised to ruin the economy and fuck us over so the billionaires and disaster capitalists could make some money and avoid taxes. They achieved that. I don't see any missed promises. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If the promises had been implemented there wouldn't be an issue and for that the blame lies squarely at the feet of the Tories. They had the majority and have failed to deliver. Recently the opportunity to dump EU regs that were of no benefit to the UK were missed. Not good enough Which promises? Personally I'm glad they're not binning workers rights, environment protections, food safety standards etc, just yet. But I don't think you need to worry. They will. Which promises? Seriously? The majority voted one way and minority the other. The majority have been let down by the Tories failure to implement this idea. No more,no less They promised to ruin the economy and fuck us over so the billionaires and disaster capitalists could make some money and avoid taxes. They achieved that. I don't see any missed promises." Nothing you can do the vote was cast in stone. Everyone bitching about brexit is solving what again? It's over the majority voted right or wrong. I got told plenty of times the same exact thing. The people voted. I moved on until I can enact change. Some people just can't accept reality and then I am the crazy one.  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If the promises had been implemented there wouldn't be an issue and for that the blame lies squarely at the feet of the Tories. They had the majority and have failed to deliver. Recently the opportunity to dump EU regs that were of no benefit to the UK were missed. Not good enough Which promises? Personally I'm glad they're not binning workers rights, environment protections, food safety standards etc, just yet. But I don't think you need to worry. They will. Which promises? Seriously? The majority voted one way and minority the other. The majority have been let down by the Tories failure to implement this idea. No more,no less They promised to ruin the economy and fuck us over so the billionaires and disaster capitalists could make some money and avoid taxes. They achieved that. I don't see any missed promises. Nothing you can do the vote was cast in stone. Everyone bitching about brexit is solving what again? It's over the majority voted right or wrong. I got told plenty of times the same exact thing. The people voted. I moved on until I can enact change. Some people just can't accept reality and then I am the crazy one. "We've all accepted that brexit has actually happened. No one is denying that. Should we pretend it was a good idea? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If the promises had been implemented there wouldn't be an issue and for that the blame lies squarely at the feet of the Tories. They had the majority and have failed to deliver. Recently the opportunity to dump EU regs that were of no benefit to the UK were missed. Not good enough Which promises? Personally I'm glad they're not binning workers rights, environment protections, food safety standards etc, just yet. But I don't think you need to worry. They will. Which promises? Seriously? The majority voted one way and minority the other. The majority have been let down by the Tories failure to implement this idea. No more,no less " What "idea" have the Tories failed to implement? Having a hard Brexit or not leaving the free trade zone? Having control of our borders by preventing nearly all immigration or having control of our borders and allowing immigration from anywhere? Having a "bonfire of red tape" or having to create more red tape because we've created new borders? Having access to billions in funding for battery gigafactories and scientific research or hundreds of millions? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If the promises had been implemented there wouldn't be an issue and for that the blame lies squarely at the feet of the Tories. They had the majority and have failed to deliver. Recently the opportunity to dump EU regs that were of no benefit to the UK were missed. Not good enough Which promises? Personally I'm glad they're not binning workers rights, environment protections, food safety standards etc, just yet. But I don't think you need to worry. They will. Which promises? Seriously? The majority voted one way and minority the other. The majority have been let down by the Tories failure to implement this idea. No more,no less They promised to ruin the economy and fuck us over so the billionaires and disaster capitalists could make some money and avoid taxes. They achieved that. I don't see any missed promises. Nothing you can do the vote was cast in stone. Everyone bitching about brexit is solving what again? It's over the majority voted right or wrong. I got told plenty of times the same exact thing. The people voted. I moved on until I can enact change. Some people just can't accept reality and then I am the crazy one.
We've all accepted that brexit has actually happened. No one is denying that.
Should we pretend it was a good idea?"Can you change it? It is a harsh realization is it not ? Bitching is solving what again ? Nothing. The ot spoke you just don't want to accept it is all just like others. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If the promises had been implemented there wouldn't be an issue and for that the blame lies squarely at the feet of the Tories. They had the majority and have failed to deliver. Recently the opportunity to dump EU regs that were of no benefit to the UK were missed. Not good enough Which promises? Personally I'm glad they're not binning workers rights, environment protections, food safety standards etc, just yet. But I don't think you need to worry. They will. Which promises? Seriously? The majority voted one way and minority the other. The majority have been let down by the Tories failure to implement this idea. No more,no less They promised to ruin the economy and fuck us over so the billionaires and disaster capitalists could make some money and avoid taxes. They achieved that. I don't see any missed promises. Nothing you can do the vote was cast in stone. Everyone bitching about brexit is solving what again? It's over the majority voted right or wrong. I got told plenty of times the same exact thing. The people voted. I moved on until I can enact change. Some people just can't accept reality and then I am the crazy one.
We've all accepted that brexit has actually happened. No one is denying that.
Should we pretend it was a good idea? Can you change it? It is a harsh realization is it not ? Bitching is solving what again ? Nothing. The ot spoke you just don't want to accept it is all just like others."We have accepted brexit has happened. Can't stress this enough. It is shit. It was designed to be shit. People believed some bullshit or other and voted leave. I don't see why we should no longer be allowed to express dissent. In the meantime, it's funny when someone who still thinks brexit was a good idea pops up. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"By the article I read he is blaming the implementation of brexit more than anything. Apparently he is also considering returning to politics but the first past the post system makes it very hard. However there is rumours that the lib dems will demand a change to the voting system in return for supporting Labour in a future coalition should they need one. That would help farage and other small parties" It would finally mean that the Conservative party can split and end the psychodrama that has caused so much chaos over the last decade. A proper far right party so that they don't have to pretend to be centre right and perhaps even the Labour party will finally split and there'll be a proper Socialist party for those who like that sort of thing. We'll finally see how small the extremes that have been dominating the political discussion are. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If the promises had been implemented there wouldn't be an issue and for that the blame lies squarely at the feet of the Tories. They had the majority and have failed to deliver. Recently the opportunity to dump EU regs that were of no benefit to the UK were missed. Not good enough Which promises? Personally I'm glad they're not binning workers rights, environment protections, food safety standards etc, just yet. But I don't think you need to worry. They will. Which promises? Seriously? The majority voted one way and minority the other. The majority have been let down by the Tories failure to implement this idea. No more,no less They promised to ruin the economy and fuck us over so the billionaires and disaster capitalists could make some money and avoid taxes. They achieved that. I don't see any missed promises. Nothing you can do the vote was cast in stone. Everyone bitching about brexit is solving what again? It's over the majority voted right or wrong. I got told plenty of times the same exact thing. The people voted. I moved on until I can enact change. Some people just can't accept reality and then I am the crazy one.
We've all accepted that brexit has actually happened. No one is denying that.
Should we pretend it was a good idea? Can you change it? It is a harsh realization is it not ? Bitching is solving what again ? Nothing. The ot spoke you just don't want to accept it is all just like others."its Daily entertainment for me. Something Brexit related pops up in the news. Incoming division like a artillery strike and I am crazy pfft some of you need meds. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If the promises had been implemented there wouldn't be an issue and for that the blame lies squarely at the feet of the Tories. They had the majority and have failed to deliver. Recently the opportunity to dump EU regs that were of no benefit to the UK were missed. Not good enough Which promises? Personally I'm glad they're not binning workers rights, environment protections, food safety standards etc, just yet. But I don't think you need to worry. They will. Which promises? Seriously? The majority voted one way and minority the other. The majority have been let down by the Tories failure to implement this idea. No more,no less They promised to ruin the economy and fuck us over so the billionaires and disaster capitalists could make some money and avoid taxes. They achieved that. I don't see any missed promises. Nothing you can do the vote was cast in stone. Everyone bitching about brexit is solving what again? It's over the majority voted right or wrong. I got told plenty of times the same exact thing. The people voted. I moved on until I can enact change. Some people just can't accept reality and then I am the crazy one.
We've all accepted that brexit has actually happened. No one is denying that.
Should we pretend it was a good idea? Can you change it? It is a harsh realization is it not ? Bitching is solving what again ? Nothing. The ot spoke you just don't want to accept it is all just like others. its Daily entertainment for me. Something Brexit related pops up in the news. Incoming division like a artillery strike and I am crazy pfft some of you need meds."So is your defence of the " need" for any idiot to have a weapon in the US | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If the promises had been implemented there wouldn't be an issue and for that the blame lies squarely at the feet of the Tories. They had the majority and have failed to deliver. Recently the opportunity to dump EU regs that were of no benefit to the UK were missed. Not good enough Which promises? Personally I'm glad they're not binning workers rights, environment protections, food safety standards etc, just yet. But I don't think you need to worry. They will. Which promises? Seriously? The majority voted one way and minority the other. The majority have been let down by the Tories failure to implement this idea. No more,no less They promised to ruin the economy and fuck us over so the billionaires and disaster capitalists could make some money and avoid taxes. They achieved that. I don't see any missed promises. Nothing you can do the vote was cast in stone. Everyone bitching about brexit is solving what again? It's over the majority voted right or wrong. I got told plenty of times the same exact thing. The people voted. I moved on until I can enact change. Some people just can't accept reality and then I am the crazy one.
We've all accepted that brexit has actually happened. No one is denying that.
Should we pretend it was a good idea? Can you change it? It is a harsh realization is it not ? Bitching is solving what again ? Nothing. The ot spoke you just don't want to accept it is all just like others. its Daily entertainment for me. Something Brexit related pops up in the news. Incoming division like a artillery strike and I am crazy pfft some of you need meds.
So is your defence of the " need" for any idiot to have a weapon in the US "Did I say that? I do predict though you couldn't fight your way out of a wet paper bag with a fistful of razors. It's just my opinion | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If the promises had been implemented there wouldn't be an issue and for that the blame lies squarely at the feet of the Tories. They had the majority and have failed to deliver. Recently the opportunity to dump EU regs that were of no benefit to the UK were missed. Not good enough Which promises? Personally I'm glad they're not binning workers rights, environment protections, food safety standards etc, just yet. But I don't think you need to worry. They will. Which promises? Seriously? The majority voted one way and minority the other. The majority have been let down by the Tories failure to implement this idea. No more,no less They promised to ruin the economy and fuck us over so the billionaires and disaster capitalists could make some money and avoid taxes. They achieved that. I don't see any missed promises. Nothing you can do the vote was cast in stone. Everyone bitching about brexit is solving what again? It's over the majority voted right or wrong. I got told plenty of times the same exact thing. The people voted. I moved on until I can enact change. Some people just can't accept reality and then I am the crazy one.
We've all accepted that brexit has actually happened. No one is denying that.
Should we pretend it was a good idea? Can you change it? It is a harsh realization is it not ? Bitching is solving what again ? Nothing. The ot spoke you just don't want to accept it is all just like others. its Daily entertainment for me. Something Brexit related pops up in the news. Incoming division like a artillery strike and I am crazy pfft some of you need meds.
So is your defence of the " need" for any idiot to have a weapon in the US Did I say that? I do predict though you couldn't fight your way out of a wet paper bag with a fistful of razors. It's just my opinion "What a zinger! Which playground are you bossing? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"According to Nigel Farage, I have found something that I agree with him about, he is blaming the tories (obviously) , I also agree with that . So, who should take the blame for this clusterfuck " Wasn't Farage going to move abroad if Brexit was a failure? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If the promises had been implemented there wouldn't be an issue and for that the blame lies squarely at the feet of the Tories. They had the majority and have failed to deliver. Recently the opportunity to dump EU regs that were of no benefit to the UK were missed. Not good enough Which promises? Personally I'm glad they're not binning workers rights, environment protections, food safety standards etc, just yet. But I don't think you need to worry. They will. Which promises? Seriously? The majority voted one way and minority the other. The majority have been let down by the Tories failure to implement this idea. No more,no less They promised to ruin the economy and fuck us over so the billionaires and disaster capitalists could make some money and avoid taxes. They achieved that. I don't see any missed promises. Nothing you can do the vote was cast in stone. Everyone bitching about brexit is solving what again? It's over the majority voted right or wrong. I got told plenty of times the same exact thing. The people voted. I moved on until I can enact change. Some people just can't accept reality and then I am the crazy one.
We've all accepted that brexit has actually happened. No one is denying that.
Should we pretend it was a good idea? Can you change it? It is a harsh realization is it not ? Bitching is solving what again ? Nothing. The ot spoke you just don't want to accept it is all just like others. its Daily entertainment for me. Something Brexit related pops up in the news. Incoming division like a artillery strike and I am crazy pfft some of you need meds.
So is your defence of the " need" for any idiot to have a weapon in the US Did I say that? I do predict though you couldn't fight your way out of a wet paper bag with a fistful of razors. It's just my opinion
What a zinger! Which playground are you bossing? "Love you too  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"According to Nigel Farage, I have found something that I agree with him about, he is blaming the tories (obviously) , I also agree with that . So, who should take the blame for this clusterfuck Wasn't Farage going to move abroad if Brexit was a failure? "apparently so…. we can but hope…. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"According to Nigel Farage, I have found something that I agree with him about, he is blaming the tories (obviously) , I also agree with that . So, who should take the blame for this clusterfuck Wasn't Farage going to move abroad if Brexit was a failure?
apparently so…. we can but hope…."Funny we had celebrities and politicians say the same here It doesn't happen. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"May of left the EU but we still are relied on heavily from funding IE Ukraine intact we are the at the top funding Ukraine in Europe (which I don't have a problem with)" Well, I can assure you of the fact I and many others do..... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"May of left the EU but we still are relied on heavily from funding IE Ukraine intact we are the at the top funding Ukraine in Europe (which I don't have a problem with)" Ukraine isn't in the EU. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"May of left the EU but we still are relied on heavily from funding IE Ukraine intact we are the at the top funding Ukraine in Europe (which I don't have a problem with) Ukraine isn't in the EU." The poster didn't suggest that Ukraine is an EU member, he said "we are at the top funding Ukraine in Europe" | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"May of left the EU but we still are relied on heavily from funding IE Ukraine intact we are the at the top funding Ukraine in Europe (which I don't have a problem with) Ukraine isn't in the EU. The poster didn't suggest that Ukraine is an EU member, he said "we are at the top funding Ukraine in Europe"" So what? We aren't funding Ukraine for the benefit of the EU. We're funding Ukraine for about own reasons. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The auto.otive industry is suffering because of it, and the Vauxhall plant in Ellesmere Port that was going to be an electric van plant has been paused and possibly will go to mainland Europe. A total fucking mess. " There will be another, perhaps temporary, renegotiation until the EU has established its battery building capacity. We are unlikely to without huge subsidies which we will struggle to provide alone. So, Brexit will never be done. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Seen a lot in media about net migration figures but nobody is mentioning the elephant in the room. The implication is more people are coming here than before. Are they? Or is it that less people are leaving (hence a rise in net migration). Because of Brexit far fewer Brits are moving to Spain, France, Italy and Greece. " That may well be correct. The reality of owning a place in the sun was always more hassle in reality than the dream that it appeared to be, but at least the positives outweighed the negatives when U.K. citizens were also EU citizens. Now the balance has tipped. Two of my former neighbours in Lanzarote have sold up and returned to the U.K. and I know of three digital nomads who lived on boats in the Med who have also returned to the U.K. now as what they called “The Shenghen Shuffle” just became to complicated to live with. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If the promises had been implemented there wouldn't be an issue and for that the blame lies squarely at the feet of the Tories. They had the majority and have failed to deliver. Recently the opportunity to dump EU regs that were of no benefit to the UK were missed. Not good enough Which promises? Personally I'm glad they're not binning workers rights, environment protections, food safety standards etc, just yet. But I don't think you need to worry. They will. Which promises? Seriously? The majority voted one way and minority the other. The majority have been let down by the Tories failure to implement this idea. No more,no less They promised to ruin the economy and fuck us over so the billionaires and disaster capitalists could make some money and avoid taxes. They achieved that. I don't see any missed promises. Nothing you can do the vote was cast in stone. Everyone bitching about brexit is solving what again? It's over the majority voted right or wrong. I got told plenty of times the same exact thing. The people voted. I moved on until I can enact change. Some people just can't accept reality and then I am the crazy one. "Has Trump accepted he lost the 2020 election ? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The auto.otive industry is suffering because of it, and the Vauxhall plant in Ellesmere Port that was going to be an electric van plant has been paused and possibly will go to mainland Europe. A total fucking mess. There will be another, perhaps temporary, renegotiation until the EU has established its battery building capacity. We are unlikely to without huge subsidies which we will struggle to provide alone. So, Brexit will never be done." The much heralded Britvolt battery factory in Tyneside failed (I believe that issues around supply chains and trade to the EU were behind the collapse) and the battery plant in Merseyside has never got off the ground. The Ukraine war has also hit supply chains, with the shortfall being filled by China who are trading with the European car makers who have the bigger bargaining power. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Seen a lot in media about net migration figures but nobody is mentioning the elephant in the room. The implication is more people are coming here than before. Are they? Or is it that less people are leaving (hence a rise in net migration). Because of Brexit far fewer Brits are moving to Spain, France, Italy and Greece. That may well be correct. The reality of owning a place in the sun was always more hassle in reality than the dream that it appeared to be, but at least the positives outweighed the negatives when U.K. citizens were also EU citizens. Now the balance has tipped. Two of my former neighbours in Lanzarote have sold up and returned to the U.K. and I know of three digital nomads who lived on boats in the Med who have also returned to the U.K. now as what they called “The Shenghen Shuffle” just became to complicated to live with." agreed - and yet another very obvious and foreseeable effect of brexit. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"According to Nigel Farage, I have found something that I agree with him about, he is blaming the tories (obviously) , I also agree with that . So, who should take the blame for this clusterfuck " Still waiting on Farages promised 350m per week we'd be better off. Fuck him and his opinion. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit cannot be deemed a success or a failure in such a short length of time. Headline grabbing to influence the changes he wants." Can’t it be a short-term failure with concerns medium-term and jury out long-term? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit cannot be deemed a success or a failure in such a short length of time. Headline grabbing to influence the changes he wants. Can’t it be a short-term failure with concerns medium-term and jury out long-term?" It is transitioning and too early to say. I think the planning and execution stages are a more apt measurement of success. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit cannot be deemed a success or a failure in such a short length of time. Headline grabbing to influence the changes he wants." When we joined the EEC back in the 1970’s, it was because successive Prime Ministers and leading economists believed that the U.K. had lost its way in an ever expanding globalised economy and that the way forwards was closer cooperation with our closest and most important trading partners. It took thirty years or so after WW2 for Britain to take appropriate action to manage its decline. Nothing has changed other than Nationalists and economic radicals seem to believe that the U.K. can return to being the buccaneering economic powerhouse that it once was by putting up barriers with the most important trading partners that the country has had for literally hundreds of years. Radical thinking that was sold with nationalist fervour so that common sense could be ignored. Brexit won’t work in the long term and anyone with an ounce of common sense knows this to be the case. The only question is how long will the country keep torturing itself until common sense prevails? We are all Brexiters now and we have to decide through careful thought and analysis what we do to improve the economic landscape going forwards. Ignoring the elephant in the room is just silly. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit cannot be deemed a success or a failure in such a short length of time. Headline grabbing to influence the changes he wants. When we joined the EEC back in the 1970’s, it was because successive Prime Ministers and leading economists believed that the U.K. had lost its way in an ever expanding globalised economy and that the way forwards was closer cooperation with our closest and most important trading partners. It took thirty years or so after WW2 for Britain to take appropriate action to manage its decline. Nothing has changed other than Nationalists and economic radicals seem to believe that the U.K. can return to being the buccaneering economic powerhouse that it once was by putting up barriers with the most important trading partners that the country has had for literally hundreds of years. Radical thinking that was sold with nationalist fervour so that common sense could be ignored. Brexit won’t work in the long term and anyone with an ounce of common sense knows this to be the case. The only question is how long will the country keep torturing itself until common sense prevails? We are all Brexiters now and we have to decide through careful thought and analysis what we do to improve the economic landscape going forwards. Ignoring the elephant in the room is just silly." I have not ignored anything, rather the opposite. I'm taking into account the timelines, the decisions and a 360 degree view rather than the tunnel view of brexit is broken, brexit is shit, brexit whatever else! The country has made a choice, for better or for worse is yet unknown and I would not expect us to start realising any benefits for a good number of years. Brexit is not a short term win or loss, it is longterm investment that needs to mature. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit cannot be deemed a success or a failure in such a short length of time. Headline grabbing to influence the changes he wants. When we joined the EEC back in the 1970’s, it was because successive Prime Ministers and leading economists believed that the U.K. had lost its way in an ever expanding globalised economy and that the way forwards was closer cooperation with our closest and most important trading partners. It took thirty years or so after WW2 for Britain to take appropriate action to manage its decline. Nothing has changed other than Nationalists and economic radicals seem to believe that the U.K. can return to being the buccaneering economic powerhouse that it once was by putting up barriers with the most important trading partners that the country has had for literally hundreds of years. Radical thinking that was sold with nationalist fervour so that common sense could be ignored. Brexit won’t work in the long term and anyone with an ounce of common sense knows this to be the case. The only question is how long will the country keep torturing itself until common sense prevails? We are all Brexiters now and we have to decide through careful thought and analysis what we do to improve the economic landscape going forwards. Ignoring the elephant in the room is just silly. I have not ignored anything, rather the opposite. I'm taking into account the timelines, the decisions and a 360 degree view rather than the tunnel view of brexit is broken, brexit is shit, brexit whatever else! The country has made a choice, for better or for worse is yet unknown and I would not expect us to start realising any benefits for a good number of years. Brexit is not a short term win or loss, it is longterm investment that needs to mature. " However, “longterm” is a convenient get out clause. Just wait and see. It will be great. However, evidence currently indicates to the contrary and polls show the vast majority would now vote differently. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit cannot be deemed a success or a failure in such a short length of time. Headline grabbing to influence the changes he wants. When we joined the EEC back in the 1970’s, it was because successive Prime Ministers and leading economists believed that the U.K. had lost its way in an ever expanding globalised economy and that the way forwards was closer cooperation with our closest and most important trading partners. It took thirty years or so after WW2 for Britain to take appropriate action to manage its decline. Nothing has changed other than Nationalists and economic radicals seem to believe that the U.K. can return to being the buccaneering economic powerhouse that it once was by putting up barriers with the most important trading partners that the country has had for literally hundreds of years. Radical thinking that was sold with nationalist fervour so that common sense could be ignored. Brexit won’t work in the long term and anyone with an ounce of common sense knows this to be the case. The only question is how long will the country keep torturing itself until common sense prevails? We are all Brexiters now and we have to decide through careful thought and analysis what we do to improve the economic landscape going forwards. Ignoring the elephant in the room is just silly. I have not ignored anything, rather the opposite. I'm taking into account the timelines, the decisions and a 360 degree view rather than the tunnel view of brexit is broken, brexit is shit, brexit whatever else! The country has made a choice, for better or for worse is yet unknown and I would not expect us to start realising any benefits for a good number of years. Brexit is not a short term win or loss, it is longterm investment that needs to mature. " How can you be taking a 360 view if you are ignoring the fact that we have put up barriers with our closest and most important trading partners? Brexit can never work until that single issue is addressed as it stifles inward investment into this country and it stifles ordinary day-to-day trade with our biggest suppliers and customers. Pretending that this isn’t an issue and that trade with Chile, Peru and Australia is fantastic is myopic. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit cannot be deemed a success or a failure in such a short length of time. Headline grabbing to influence the changes he wants. When we joined the EEC back in the 1970’s, it was because successive Prime Ministers and leading economists believed that the U.K. had lost its way in an ever expanding globalised economy and that the way forwards was closer cooperation with our closest and most important trading partners. It took thirty years or so after WW2 for Britain to take appropriate action to manage its decline. Nothing has changed other than Nationalists and economic radicals seem to believe that the U.K. can return to being the buccaneering economic powerhouse that it once was by putting up barriers with the most important trading partners that the country has had for literally hundreds of years. Radical thinking that was sold with nationalist fervour so that common sense could be ignored. Brexit won’t work in the long term and anyone with an ounce of common sense knows this to be the case. The only question is how long will the country keep torturing itself until common sense prevails? We are all Brexiters now and we have to decide through careful thought and analysis what we do to improve the economic landscape going forwards. Ignoring the elephant in the room is just silly. I have not ignored anything, rather the opposite. I'm taking into account the timelines, the decisions and a 360 degree view rather than the tunnel view of brexit is broken, brexit is shit, brexit whatever else! The country has made a choice, for better or for worse is yet unknown and I would not expect us to start realising any benefits for a good number of years. Brexit is not a short term win or loss, it is longterm investment that needs to mature. " How long will it take ? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit cannot be deemed a success or a failure in such a short length of time. Headline grabbing to influence the changes he wants. When we joined the EEC back in the 1970’s, it was because successive Prime Ministers and leading economists believed that the U.K. had lost its way in an ever expanding globalised economy and that the way forwards was closer cooperation with our closest and most important trading partners. It took thirty years or so after WW2 for Britain to take appropriate action to manage its decline. Nothing has changed other than Nationalists and economic radicals seem to believe that the U.K. can return to being the buccaneering economic powerhouse that it once was by putting up barriers with the most important trading partners that the country has had for literally hundreds of years. Radical thinking that was sold with nationalist fervour so that common sense could be ignored. Brexit won’t work in the long term and anyone with an ounce of common sense knows this to be the case. The only question is how long will the country keep torturing itself until common sense prevails? We are all Brexiters now and we have to decide through careful thought and analysis what we do to improve the economic landscape going forwards. Ignoring the elephant in the room is just silly. I have not ignored anything, rather the opposite. I'm taking into account the timelines, the decisions and a 360 degree view rather than the tunnel view of brexit is broken, brexit is shit, brexit whatever else! The country has made a choice, for better or for worse is yet unknown and I would not expect us to start realising any benefits for a good number of years. Brexit is not a short term win or loss, it is longterm investment that needs to mature. How can you be taking a 360 view if you are ignoring the fact that we have put up barriers with our closest and most important trading partners? Brexit can never work until that single issue is addressed as it stifles inward investment into this country and it stifles ordinary day-to-day trade with our biggest suppliers and customers. Pretending that this isn’t an issue and that trade with Chile, Peru and Australia is fantastic is myopic." The trade with the EU will evolve over the longterm. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit cannot be deemed a success or a failure in such a short length of time. Headline grabbing to influence the changes he wants. When we joined the EEC back in the 1970’s, it was because successive Prime Ministers and leading economists believed that the U.K. had lost its way in an ever expanding globalised economy and that the way forwards was closer cooperation with our closest and most important trading partners. It took thirty years or so after WW2 for Britain to take appropriate action to manage its decline. Nothing has changed other than Nationalists and economic radicals seem to believe that the U.K. can return to being the buccaneering economic powerhouse that it once was by putting up barriers with the most important trading partners that the country has had for literally hundreds of years. Radical thinking that was sold with nationalist fervour so that common sense could be ignored. Brexit won’t work in the long term and anyone with an ounce of common sense knows this to be the case. The only question is how long will the country keep torturing itself until common sense prevails? We are all Brexiters now and we have to decide through careful thought and analysis what we do to improve the economic landscape going forwards. Ignoring the elephant in the room is just silly. I have not ignored anything, rather the opposite. I'm taking into account the timelines, the decisions and a 360 degree view rather than the tunnel view of brexit is broken, brexit is shit, brexit whatever else! The country has made a choice, for better or for worse is yet unknown and I would not expect us to start realising any benefits for a good number of years. Brexit is not a short term win or loss, it is longterm investment that needs to mature. How long will it take ? " You will never know | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit cannot be deemed a success or a failure in such a short length of time. Headline grabbing to influence the changes he wants. When we joined the EEC back in the 1970’s, it was because successive Prime Ministers and leading economists believed that the U.K. had lost its way in an ever expanding globalised economy and that the way forwards was closer cooperation with our closest and most important trading partners. It took thirty years or so after WW2 for Britain to take appropriate action to manage its decline. Nothing has changed other than Nationalists and economic radicals seem to believe that the U.K. can return to being the buccaneering economic powerhouse that it once was by putting up barriers with the most important trading partners that the country has had for literally hundreds of years. Radical thinking that was sold with nationalist fervour so that common sense could be ignored. Brexit won’t work in the long term and anyone with an ounce of common sense knows this to be the case. The only question is how long will the country keep torturing itself until common sense prevails? We are all Brexiters now and we have to decide through careful thought and analysis what we do to improve the economic landscape going forwards. Ignoring the elephant in the room is just silly. I have not ignored anything, rather the opposite. I'm taking into account the timelines, the decisions and a 360 degree view rather than the tunnel view of brexit is broken, brexit is shit, brexit whatever else! The country has made a choice, for better or for worse is yet unknown and I would not expect us to start realising any benefits for a good number of years. Brexit is not a short term win or loss, it is longterm investment that needs to mature. However, “longterm” is a convenient get out clause. Just wait and see. It will be great. However, evidence currently indicates to the contrary and polls show the vast majority would now vote differently." Not a get out clause, a more realistic summary of the journey the country needs to take post brexit and into the future. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit cannot be deemed a success or a failure in such a short length of time. Headline grabbing to influence the changes he wants. When we joined the EEC back in the 1970’s, it was because successive Prime Ministers and leading economists believed that the U.K. had lost its way in an ever expanding globalised economy and that the way forwards was closer cooperation with our closest and most important trading partners. It took thirty years or so after WW2 for Britain to take appropriate action to manage its decline. Nothing has changed other than Nationalists and economic radicals seem to believe that the U.K. can return to being the buccaneering economic powerhouse that it once was by putting up barriers with the most important trading partners that the country has had for literally hundreds of years. Radical thinking that was sold with nationalist fervour so that common sense could be ignored. Brexit won’t work in the long term and anyone with an ounce of common sense knows this to be the case. The only question is how long will the country keep torturing itself until common sense prevails? We are all Brexiters now and we have to decide through careful thought and analysis what we do to improve the economic landscape going forwards. Ignoring the elephant in the room is just silly. I have not ignored anything, rather the opposite. I'm taking into account the timelines, the decisions and a 360 degree view rather than the tunnel view of brexit is broken, brexit is shit, brexit whatever else! The country has made a choice, for better or for worse is yet unknown and I would not expect us to start realising any benefits for a good number of years. Brexit is not a short term win or loss, it is longterm investment that needs to mature. How long will it take ? You will never know" Neither do you | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit cannot be deemed a success or a failure in such a short length of time. Headline grabbing to influence the changes he wants. When we joined the EEC back in the 1970’s, it was because successive Prime Ministers and leading economists believed that the U.K. had lost its way in an ever expanding globalised economy and that the way forwards was closer cooperation with our closest and most important trading partners. It took thirty years or so after WW2 for Britain to take appropriate action to manage its decline. Nothing has changed other than Nationalists and economic radicals seem to believe that the U.K. can return to being the buccaneering economic powerhouse that it once was by putting up barriers with the most important trading partners that the country has had for literally hundreds of years. Radical thinking that was sold with nationalist fervour so that common sense could be ignored. Brexit won’t work in the long term and anyone with an ounce of common sense knows this to be the case. The only question is how long will the country keep torturing itself until common sense prevails? We are all Brexiters now and we have to decide through careful thought and analysis what we do to improve the economic landscape going forwards. Ignoring the elephant in the room is just silly. I have not ignored anything, rather the opposite. I'm taking into account the timelines, the decisions and a 360 degree view rather than the tunnel view of brexit is broken, brexit is shit, brexit whatever else! The country has made a choice, for better or for worse is yet unknown and I would not expect us to start realising any benefits for a good number of years. Brexit is not a short term win or loss, it is longterm investment that needs to mature. However, “longterm” is a convenient get out clause. Just wait and see. It will be great. However, evidence currently indicates to the contrary and polls show the vast majority would now vote differently. Not a get out clause, a more realistic summary of the journey the country needs to take post brexit and into the future." Fair point except that any strategy needs to provide short term and long term benefits. It simply cannot all be back weighted as it needs a benefits realisation plan to demonstrate the cumulative effect of the project. I seriously do not believe as many would have voted for Leave if the message had been “next 10-20 years are going to be really hard for most of you but it will be worth it in the end” people expected (and were sold) short term benefits and these are not being realised for the most part. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit cannot be deemed a success or a failure in such a short length of time. Headline grabbing to influence the changes he wants. When we joined the EEC back in the 1970’s, it was because successive Prime Ministers and leading economists believed that the U.K. had lost its way in an ever expanding globalised economy and that the way forwards was closer cooperation with our closest and most important trading partners. It took thirty years or so after WW2 for Britain to take appropriate action to manage its decline. Nothing has changed other than Nationalists and economic radicals seem to believe that the U.K. can return to being the buccaneering economic powerhouse that it once was by putting up barriers with the most important trading partners that the country has had for literally hundreds of years. Radical thinking that was sold with nationalist fervour so that common sense could be ignored. Brexit won’t work in the long term and anyone with an ounce of common sense knows this to be the case. The only question is how long will the country keep torturing itself until common sense prevails? We are all Brexiters now and we have to decide through careful thought and analysis what we do to improve the economic landscape going forwards. Ignoring the elephant in the room is just silly. I have not ignored anything, rather the opposite. I'm taking into account the timelines, the decisions and a 360 degree view rather than the tunnel view of brexit is broken, brexit is shit, brexit whatever else! The country has made a choice, for better or for worse is yet unknown and I would not expect us to start realising any benefits for a good number of years. Brexit is not a short term win or loss, it is longterm investment that needs to mature. However, “longterm” is a convenient get out clause. Just wait and see. It will be great. However, evidence currently indicates to the contrary and polls show the vast majority would now vote differently. Not a get out clause, a more realistic summary of the journey the country needs to take post brexit and into the future. Fair point except that any strategy needs to provide short term and long term benefits. It simply cannot all be back weighted as it needs a benefits realisation plan to demonstrate the cumulative effect of the project. I seriously do not believe as many would have voted for Leave if the message had been “next 10-20 years are going to be really hard for most of you but it will be worth it in the end” people expected (and were sold) short term benefits and these are not being realised for the most part." Many didn't vote for brexit at an economic level or even as a consideration. That is the why the things you mention, which are valid, was never a consideration, until now when it is hurting them in the pocket. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit cannot be deemed a success or a failure in such a short length of time. Headline grabbing to influence the changes he wants. When we joined the EEC back in the 1970’s, it was because successive Prime Ministers and leading economists believed that the U.K. had lost its way in an ever expanding globalised economy and that the way forwards was closer cooperation with our closest and most important trading partners. It took thirty years or so after WW2 for Britain to take appropriate action to manage its decline. Nothing has changed other than Nationalists and economic radicals seem to believe that the U.K. can return to being the buccaneering economic powerhouse that it once was by putting up barriers with the most important trading partners that the country has had for literally hundreds of years. Radical thinking that was sold with nationalist fervour so that common sense could be ignored. Brexit won’t work in the long term and anyone with an ounce of common sense knows this to be the case. The only question is how long will the country keep torturing itself until common sense prevails? We are all Brexiters now and we have to decide through careful thought and analysis what we do to improve the economic landscape going forwards. Ignoring the elephant in the room is just silly. I have not ignored anything, rather the opposite. I'm taking into account the timelines, the decisions and a 360 degree view rather than the tunnel view of brexit is broken, brexit is shit, brexit whatever else! The country has made a choice, for better or for worse is yet unknown and I would not expect us to start realising any benefits for a good number of years. Brexit is not a short term win or loss, it is longterm investment that needs to mature. How long will it take ? You will never know Neither do you "I know that, that is why I used the word "longterm" | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit cannot be deemed a success or a failure in such a short length of time. Headline grabbing to influence the changes he wants. When we joined the EEC back in the 1970’s, it was because successive Prime Ministers and leading economists believed that the U.K. had lost its way in an ever expanding globalised economy and that the way forwards was closer cooperation with our closest and most important trading partners. It took thirty years or so after WW2 for Britain to take appropriate action to manage its decline. Nothing has changed other than Nationalists and economic radicals seem to believe that the U.K. can return to being the buccaneering economic powerhouse that it once was by putting up barriers with the most important trading partners that the country has had for literally hundreds of years. Radical thinking that was sold with nationalist fervour so that common sense could be ignored. Brexit won’t work in the long term and anyone with an ounce of common sense knows this to be the case. The only question is how long will the country keep torturing itself until common sense prevails? We are all Brexiters now and we have to decide through careful thought and analysis what we do to improve the economic landscape going forwards. Ignoring the elephant in the room is just silly. I have not ignored anything, rather the opposite. I'm taking into account the timelines, the decisions and a 360 degree view rather than the tunnel view of brexit is broken, brexit is shit, brexit whatever else! The country has made a choice, for better or for worse is yet unknown and I would not expect us to start realising any benefits for a good number of years. Brexit is not a short term win or loss, it is longterm investment that needs to mature. However, “longterm” is a convenient get out clause. Just wait and see. It will be great. However, evidence currently indicates to the contrary and polls show the vast majority would now vote differently. Not a get out clause, a more realistic summary of the journey the country needs to take post brexit and into the future. Fair point except that any strategy needs to provide short term and long term benefits. It simply cannot all be back weighted as it needs a benefits realisation plan to demonstrate the cumulative effect of the project. I seriously do not believe as many would have voted for Leave if the message had been “next 10-20 years are going to be really hard for most of you but it will be worth it in the end” people expected (and were sold) short term benefits and these are not being realised for the most part. Many didn't vote for brexit at an economic level or even as a consideration. That is the why the things you mention, which are valid, was never a consideration, until now when it is hurting them in the pocket. " And generally that is why Leave won and Remain lost. Remain tried to argue with logic and macro-economic arguments. Leave mostly focused on emotion led arguments. Not everyone can identify with or understand the former. Everyone is however triggered by emotions. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit cannot be deemed a success or a failure in such a short length of time. Headline grabbing to influence the changes he wants. When we joined the EEC back in the 1970’s, it was because successive Prime Ministers and leading economists believed that the U.K. had lost its way in an ever expanding globalised economy and that the way forwards was closer cooperation with our closest and most important trading partners. It took thirty years or so after WW2 for Britain to take appropriate action to manage its decline. Nothing has changed other than Nationalists and economic radicals seem to believe that the U.K. can return to being the buccaneering economic powerhouse that it once was by putting up barriers with the most important trading partners that the country has had for literally hundreds of years. Radical thinking that was sold with nationalist fervour so that common sense could be ignored. Brexit won’t work in the long term and anyone with an ounce of common sense knows this to be the case. The only question is how long will the country keep torturing itself until common sense prevails? We are all Brexiters now and we have to decide through careful thought and analysis what we do to improve the economic landscape going forwards. Ignoring the elephant in the room is just silly. I have not ignored anything, rather the opposite. I'm taking into account the timelines, the decisions and a 360 degree view rather than the tunnel view of brexit is broken, brexit is shit, brexit whatever else! The country has made a choice, for better or for worse is yet unknown and I would not expect us to start realising any benefits for a good number of years. Brexit is not a short term win or loss, it is longterm investment that needs to mature. How long will it take ? You will never know Neither do you
I know that, that is why I used the word "longterm""Long term is too vague, it could mean 10 to 1,000 years | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit cannot be deemed a success or a failure in such a short length of time. Headline grabbing to influence the changes he wants. When we joined the EEC back in the 1970’s, it was because successive Prime Ministers and leading economists believed that the U.K. had lost its way in an ever expanding globalised economy and that the way forwards was closer cooperation with our closest and most important trading partners. It took thirty years or so after WW2 for Britain to take appropriate action to manage its decline. Nothing has changed other than Nationalists and economic radicals seem to believe that the U.K. can return to being the buccaneering economic powerhouse that it once was by putting up barriers with the most important trading partners that the country has had for literally hundreds of years. Radical thinking that was sold with nationalist fervour so that common sense could be ignored. Brexit won’t work in the long term and anyone with an ounce of common sense knows this to be the case. The only question is how long will the country keep torturing itself until common sense prevails? We are all Brexiters now and we have to decide through careful thought and analysis what we do to improve the economic landscape going forwards. Ignoring the elephant in the room is just silly. I have not ignored anything, rather the opposite. I'm taking into account the timelines, the decisions and a 360 degree view rather than the tunnel view of brexit is broken, brexit is shit, brexit whatever else! The country has made a choice, for better or for worse is yet unknown and I would not expect us to start realising any benefits for a good number of years. Brexit is not a short term win or loss, it is longterm investment that needs to mature. However, “longterm” is a convenient get out clause. Just wait and see. It will be great. However, evidence currently indicates to the contrary and polls show the vast majority would now vote differently. Not a get out clause, a more realistic summary of the journey the country needs to take post brexit and into the future. Fair point except that any strategy needs to provide short term and long term benefits. It simply cannot all be back weighted as it needs a benefits realisation plan to demonstrate the cumulative effect of the project. I seriously do not believe as many would have voted for Leave if the message had been “next 10-20 years are going to be really hard for most of you but it will be worth it in the end” people expected (and were sold) short term benefits and these are not being realised for the most part. Many didn't vote for brexit at an economic level or even as a consideration. That is the why the things you mention, which are valid, was never a consideration, until now when it is hurting them in the pocket. And generally that is why Leave won and Remain lost. Remain tried to argue with logic and macro-economic arguments. Leave mostly focused on emotion led arguments. Not everyone can identify with or understand the former. Everyone is however triggered by emotions." But and this a big but... Brexit has not failed yet, the vote result failed 48% of the people, that is not the result of brexit that was the result of the vote. For Farage to say brexit is a failure is him saying it isn't going how I want it to go, nothing more than that in my opinion. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit cannot be deemed a success or a failure in such a short length of time. Headline grabbing to influence the changes he wants. When we joined the EEC back in the 1970’s, it was because successive Prime Ministers and leading economists believed that the U.K. had lost its way in an ever expanding globalised economy and that the way forwards was closer cooperation with our closest and most important trading partners. It took thirty years or so after WW2 for Britain to take appropriate action to manage its decline. Nothing has changed other than Nationalists and economic radicals seem to believe that the U.K. can return to being the buccaneering economic powerhouse that it once was by putting up barriers with the most important trading partners that the country has had for literally hundreds of years. Radical thinking that was sold with nationalist fervour so that common sense could be ignored. Brexit won’t work in the long term and anyone with an ounce of common sense knows this to be the case. The only question is how long will the country keep torturing itself until common sense prevails? We are all Brexiters now and we have to decide through careful thought and analysis what we do to improve the economic landscape going forwards. Ignoring the elephant in the room is just silly. I have not ignored anything, rather the opposite. I'm taking into account the timelines, the decisions and a 360 degree view rather than the tunnel view of brexit is broken, brexit is shit, brexit whatever else! The country has made a choice, for better or for worse is yet unknown and I would not expect us to start realising any benefits for a good number of years. Brexit is not a short term win or loss, it is longterm investment that needs to mature. However, “longterm” is a convenient get out clause. Just wait and see. It will be great. However, evidence currently indicates to the contrary and polls show the vast majority would now vote differently. Not a get out clause, a more realistic summary of the journey the country needs to take post brexit and into the future. Fair point except that any strategy needs to provide short term and long term benefits. It simply cannot all be back weighted as it needs a benefits realisation plan to demonstrate the cumulative effect of the project. I seriously do not believe as many would have voted for Leave if the message had been “next 10-20 years are going to be really hard for most of you but it will be worth it in the end” people expected (and were sold) short term benefits and these are not being realised for the most part. Many didn't vote for brexit at an economic level or even as a consideration. That is the why the things you mention, which are valid, was never a consideration, until now when it is hurting them in the pocket. And generally that is why Leave won and Remain lost. Remain tried to argue with logic and macro-economic arguments. Leave mostly focused on emotion led arguments. Not everyone can identify with or understand the former. Everyone is however triggered by emotions. But and this a big but... Brexit has not failed yet, the vote result failed 48% of the people, that is not the result of brexit that was the result of the vote. For Farage to say brexit is a failure is him saying it isn't going how I want it to go, nothing more than that in my opinion. " Are you saying he didn’t know what he was voting for? Because it’s going the way I expected it | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit cannot be deemed a success or a failure in such a short length of time. Headline grabbing to influence the changes he wants. When we joined the EEC back in the 1970’s, it was because successive Prime Ministers and leading economists believed that the U.K. had lost its way in an ever expanding globalised economy and that the way forwards was closer cooperation with our closest and most important trading partners. It took thirty years or so after WW2 for Britain to take appropriate action to manage its decline. Nothing has changed other than Nationalists and economic radicals seem to believe that the U.K. can return to being the buccaneering economic powerhouse that it once was by putting up barriers with the most important trading partners that the country has had for literally hundreds of years. Radical thinking that was sold with nationalist fervour so that common sense could be ignored. Brexit won’t work in the long term and anyone with an ounce of common sense knows this to be the case. The only question is how long will the country keep torturing itself until common sense prevails? We are all Brexiters now and we have to decide through careful thought and analysis what we do to improve the economic landscape going forwards. Ignoring the elephant in the room is just silly. I have not ignored anything, rather the opposite. I'm taking into account the timelines, the decisions and a 360 degree view rather than the tunnel view of brexit is broken, brexit is shit, brexit whatever else! The country has made a choice, for better or for worse is yet unknown and I would not expect us to start realising any benefits for a good number of years. Brexit is not a short term win or loss, it is longterm investment that needs to mature. How long will it take ? You will never know Neither do you
I know that, that is why I used the word "longterm"
Long term is too vague, it could mean 10 to 1,000 years "It is vague and that is why people who are good at managing the vague elements of a strategy are getting on with producing the longterm plans to get us from the starting position. Anyone telling you that it will be X years is making it up. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit cannot be deemed a success or a failure in such a short length of time. Headline grabbing to influence the changes he wants. When we joined the EEC back in the 1970’s, it was because successive Prime Ministers and leading economists believed that the U.K. had lost its way in an ever expanding globalised economy and that the way forwards was closer cooperation with our closest and most important trading partners. It took thirty years or so after WW2 for Britain to take appropriate action to manage its decline. Nothing has changed other than Nationalists and economic radicals seem to believe that the U.K. can return to being the buccaneering economic powerhouse that it once was by putting up barriers with the most important trading partners that the country has had for literally hundreds of years. Radical thinking that was sold with nationalist fervour so that common sense could be ignored. Brexit won’t work in the long term and anyone with an ounce of common sense knows this to be the case. The only question is how long will the country keep torturing itself until common sense prevails? We are all Brexiters now and we have to decide through careful thought and analysis what we do to improve the economic landscape going forwards. Ignoring the elephant in the room is just silly. I have not ignored anything, rather the opposite. I'm taking into account the timelines, the decisions and a 360 degree view rather than the tunnel view of brexit is broken, brexit is shit, brexit whatever else! The country has made a choice, for better or for worse is yet unknown and I would not expect us to start realising any benefits for a good number of years. Brexit is not a short term win or loss, it is longterm investment that needs to mature. However, “longterm” is a convenient get out clause. Just wait and see. It will be great. However, evidence currently indicates to the contrary and polls show the vast majority would now vote differently. Not a get out clause, a more realistic summary of the journey the country needs to take post brexit and into the future. Fair point except that any strategy needs to provide short term and long term benefits. It simply cannot all be back weighted as it needs a benefits realisation plan to demonstrate the cumulative effect of the project. I seriously do not believe as many would have voted for Leave if the message had been “next 10-20 years are going to be really hard for most of you but it will be worth it in the end” people expected (and were sold) short term benefits and these are not being realised for the most part. Many didn't vote for brexit at an economic level or even as a consideration. That is the why the things you mention, which are valid, was never a consideration, until now when it is hurting them in the pocket. And generally that is why Leave won and Remain lost. Remain tried to argue with logic and macro-economic arguments. Leave mostly focused on emotion led arguments. Not everyone can identify with or understand the former. Everyone is however triggered by emotions. But and this a big but... Brexit has not failed yet, the vote result failed 48% of the people, that is not the result of brexit that was the result of the vote. For Farage to say brexit is a failure is him saying it isn't going how I want it to go, nothing more than that in my opinion. Are you saying he didn’t know what he was voting for? Because it’s going the way I expected it " He wanted the UK to leave the EU, "mission accomplished", remember that? He is now saying it isn't going how he wanted it to and I'm saying it is just noise. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit cannot be deemed a success or a failure in such a short length of time. Headline grabbing to influence the changes he wants. When we joined the EEC back in the 1970’s, it was because successive Prime Ministers and leading economists believed that the U.K. had lost its way in an ever expanding globalised economy and that the way forwards was closer cooperation with our closest and most important trading partners. It took thirty years or so after WW2 for Britain to take appropriate action to manage its decline. Nothing has changed other than Nationalists and economic radicals seem to believe that the U.K. can return to being the buccaneering economic powerhouse that it once was by putting up barriers with the most important trading partners that the country has had for literally hundreds of years. Radical thinking that was sold with nationalist fervour so that common sense could be ignored. Brexit won’t work in the long term and anyone with an ounce of common sense knows this to be the case. The only question is how long will the country keep torturing itself until common sense prevails? We are all Brexiters now and we have to decide through careful thought and analysis what we do to improve the economic landscape going forwards. Ignoring the elephant in the room is just silly. I have not ignored anything, rather the opposite. I'm taking into account the timelines, the decisions and a 360 degree view rather than the tunnel view of brexit is broken, brexit is shit, brexit whatever else! The country has made a choice, for better or for worse is yet unknown and I would not expect us to start realising any benefits for a good number of years. Brexit is not a short term win or loss, it is longterm investment that needs to mature. However, “longterm” is a convenient get out clause. Just wait and see. It will be great. However, evidence currently indicates to the contrary and polls show the vast majority would now vote differently. Not a get out clause, a more realistic summary of the journey the country needs to take post brexit and into the future. Fair point except that any strategy needs to provide short term and long term benefits. It simply cannot all be back weighted as it needs a benefits realisation plan to demonstrate the cumulative effect of the project. I seriously do not believe as many would have voted for Leave if the message had been “next 10-20 years are going to be really hard for most of you but it will be worth it in the end” people expected (and were sold) short term benefits and these are not being realised for the most part. Many didn't vote for brexit at an economic level or even as a consideration. That is the why the things you mention, which are valid, was never a consideration, until now when it is hurting them in the pocket. And generally that is why Leave won and Remain lost. Remain tried to argue with logic and macro-economic arguments. Leave mostly focused on emotion led arguments. Not everyone can identify with or understand the former. Everyone is however triggered by emotions. But and this a big but... Brexit has not failed yet, the vote result failed 48% of the people, that is not the result of brexit that was the result of the vote. For Farage to say brexit is a failure is him saying it isn't going how I want it to go, nothing more than that in my opinion. Are you saying he didn’t know what he was voting for? Because it’s going the way I expected it He wanted the UK to leave the EU, "mission accomplished", remember that? He is now saying it isn't going how he wanted it to and I'm saying it is just noise." He said it’s a failure, nobody wants to invest in the Uk, Vauxhall are saying the same | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit cannot be deemed a success or a failure in such a short length of time. Headline grabbing to influence the changes he wants. When we joined the EEC back in the 1970’s, it was because successive Prime Ministers and leading economists believed that the U.K. had lost its way in an ever expanding globalised economy and that the way forwards was closer cooperation with our closest and most important trading partners. It took thirty years or so after WW2 for Britain to take appropriate action to manage its decline. Nothing has changed other than Nationalists and economic radicals seem to believe that the U.K. can return to being the buccaneering economic powerhouse that it once was by putting up barriers with the most important trading partners that the country has had for literally hundreds of years. Radical thinking that was sold with nationalist fervour so that common sense could be ignored. Brexit won’t work in the long term and anyone with an ounce of common sense knows this to be the case. The only question is how long will the country keep torturing itself until common sense prevails? We are all Brexiters now and we have to decide through careful thought and analysis what we do to improve the economic landscape going forwards. Ignoring the elephant in the room is just silly. I have not ignored anything, rather the opposite. I'm taking into account the timelines, the decisions and a 360 degree view rather than the tunnel view of brexit is broken, brexit is shit, brexit whatever else! The country has made a choice, for better or for worse is yet unknown and I would not expect us to start realising any benefits for a good number of years. Brexit is not a short term win or loss, it is longterm investment that needs to mature. How long will it take ? You will never know Neither do you
I know that, that is why I used the word "longterm"
Long term is too vague, it could mean 10 to 1,000 years
It is vague and that is why people who are good at managing the vague elements of a strategy are getting on with producing the longterm plans to get us from the starting position.
Anyone telling you that it will be X years is making it up.
"And anyone using ‘long term’ is also making it up, | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit cannot be deemed a success or a failure in such a short length of time. Headline grabbing to influence the changes he wants. When we joined the EEC back in the 1970’s, it was because successive Prime Ministers and leading economists believed that the U.K. had lost its way in an ever expanding globalised economy and that the way forwards was closer cooperation with our closest and most important trading partners. It took thirty years or so after WW2 for Britain to take appropriate action to manage its decline. Nothing has changed other than Nationalists and economic radicals seem to believe that the U.K. can return to being the buccaneering economic powerhouse that it once was by putting up barriers with the most important trading partners that the country has had for literally hundreds of years. Radical thinking that was sold with nationalist fervour so that common sense could be ignored. Brexit won’t work in the long term and anyone with an ounce of common sense knows this to be the case. The only question is how long will the country keep torturing itself until common sense prevails? We are all Brexiters now and we have to decide through careful thought and analysis what we do to improve the economic landscape going forwards. Ignoring the elephant in the room is just silly. I have not ignored anything, rather the opposite. I'm taking into account the timelines, the decisions and a 360 degree view rather than the tunnel view of brexit is broken, brexit is shit, brexit whatever else! The country has made a choice, for better or for worse is yet unknown and I would not expect us to start realising any benefits for a good number of years. Brexit is not a short term win or loss, it is longterm investment that needs to mature. How long will it take ? You will never know Neither do you
I know that, that is why I used the word "longterm"
Long term is too vague, it could mean 10 to 1,000 years
It is vague and that is why people who are good at managing the vague elements of a strategy are getting on with producing the longterm plans to get us from the starting position.
Anyone telling you that it will be X years is making it up.
And anyone using ‘long term’ is also making it up, "I'm pleased you have such realistic expectations | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit cannot be deemed a success or a failure in such a short length of time. Headline grabbing to influence the changes he wants. When we joined the EEC back in the 1970’s, it was because successive Prime Ministers and leading economists believed that the U.K. had lost its way in an ever expanding globalised economy and that the way forwards was closer cooperation with our closest and most important trading partners. It took thirty years or so after WW2 for Britain to take appropriate action to manage its decline. Nothing has changed other than Nationalists and economic radicals seem to believe that the U.K. can return to being the buccaneering economic powerhouse that it once was by putting up barriers with the most important trading partners that the country has had for literally hundreds of years. Radical thinking that was sold with nationalist fervour so that common sense could be ignored. Brexit won’t work in the long term and anyone with an ounce of common sense knows this to be the case. The only question is how long will the country keep torturing itself until common sense prevails? We are all Brexiters now and we have to decide through careful thought and analysis what we do to improve the economic landscape going forwards. Ignoring the elephant in the room is just silly. I have not ignored anything, rather the opposite. I'm taking into account the timelines, the decisions and a 360 degree view rather than the tunnel view of brexit is broken, brexit is shit, brexit whatever else! The country has made a choice, for better or for worse is yet unknown and I would not expect us to start realising any benefits for a good number of years. Brexit is not a short term win or loss, it is longterm investment that needs to mature. How long will it take ? You will never know Neither do you
I know that, that is why I used the word "longterm"
Long term is too vague, it could mean 10 to 1,000 years
It is vague and that is why people who are good at managing the vague elements of a strategy are getting on with producing the longterm plans to get us from the starting position.
Anyone telling you that it will be X years is making it up.
And anyone using ‘long term’ is also making it up,
I'm pleased you have such realistic expectations"Thanks, | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit cannot be deemed a success or a failure in such a short length of time. Headline grabbing to influence the changes he wants. Can’t it be a short-term failure with concerns medium-term and jury out long-term? It is transitioning and too early to say. I think the planning and execution stages are a more apt measurement of success." You're 57, its unlikely you will be around to see any benefit looking at economists forecasts | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"By the article I read he is blaming the implementation of brexit more than anything. Apparently he is also considering returning to politics but the first past the post system makes it very hard. However there is rumours that the lib dems will demand a change to the voting system in return for supporting Labour in a future coalition should they need one. That would help farage and other small parties It would finally mean that the Conservative party can split and end the psychodrama that has caused so much chaos over the last decade. A proper far right party so that they don't have to pretend to be centre right and perhaps even the Labour party will finally split and there'll be a proper Socialist party for those who like that sort of thing. We'll finally see how small the extremes that have been dominating the political discussion are." It's a possibility for sure though not sure if it's any more likely now than in the past with the ERG. Both conservative and Labour splitting sounds quite logical but it's a big step. As I understand it, a PR system will benefit smaller parties and be more representative. The greens and the old UKIP seemed to get lots of votes but little in the way of MP's | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"By the article I read he is blaming the implementation of brexit more than anything. Apparently he is also considering returning to politics but the first past the post system makes it very hard. However there is rumours that the lib dems will demand a change to the voting system in return for supporting Labour in a future coalition should they need one. That would help farage and other small parties It would finally mean that the Conservative party can split and end the psychodrama that has caused so much chaos over the last decade. A proper far right party so that they don't have to pretend to be centre right and perhaps even the Labour party will finally split and there'll be a proper Socialist party for those who like that sort of thing. We'll finally see how small the extremes that have been dominating the political discussion are. It's a possibility for sure though not sure if it's any more likely now than in the past with the ERG. Both conservative and Labour splitting sounds quite logical but it's a big step. As I understand it, a PR system will benefit smaller parties and be more representative. The greens and the old UKIP seemed to get lots of votes but little in the way of MP's" PR would make our political future akin to this forum, unworkable for a solution, or common goal | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"By the article I read he is blaming the implementation of brexit more than anything. Apparently he is also considering returning to politics but the first past the post system makes it very hard. However there is rumours that the lib dems will demand a change to the voting system in return for supporting Labour in a future coalition should they need one. That would help farage and other small parties It would finally mean that the Conservative party can split and end the psychodrama that has caused so much chaos over the last decade. A proper far right party so that they don't have to pretend to be centre right and perhaps even the Labour party will finally split and there'll be a proper Socialist party for those who like that sort of thing. We'll finally see how small the extremes that have been dominating the political discussion are. It's a possibility for sure though not sure if it's any more likely now than in the past with the ERG. Both conservative and Labour splitting sounds quite logical but it's a big step. As I understand it, a PR system will benefit smaller parties and be more representative. The greens and the old UKIP seemed to get lots of votes but little in the way of MP's PR would make our political future akin to this forum, unworkable for a solution, or common goal" It works in most civilised countries so there is no reason why it should not work in ours. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"By the article I read he is blaming the implementation of brexit more than anything. Apparently he is also considering returning to politics but the first past the post system makes it very hard. However there is rumours that the lib dems will demand a change to the voting system in return for supporting Labour in a future coalition should they need one. That would help farage and other small parties It would finally mean that the Conservative party can split and end the psychodrama that has caused so much chaos over the last decade. A proper far right party so that they don't have to pretend to be centre right and perhaps even the Labour party will finally split and there'll be a proper Socialist party for those who like that sort of thing. We'll finally see how small the extremes that have been dominating the political discussion are. It's a possibility for sure though not sure if it's any more likely now than in the past with the ERG. Both conservative and Labour splitting sounds quite logical but it's a big step. As I understand it, a PR system will benefit smaller parties and be more representative. The greens and the old UKIP seemed to get lots of votes but little in the way of MP's PR would make our political future akin to this forum, unworkable for a solution, or common goal It works in most civilised countries so there is no reason why it should not work in ours." You think the voting public are simple people, how does that work with power sharing, confused negotiations and compromise? Surely PR is far too complex? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"By the article I read he is blaming the implementation of brexit more than anything. Apparently he is also considering returning to politics but the first past the post system makes it very hard. However there is rumours that the lib dems will demand a change to the voting system in return for supporting Labour in a future coalition should they need one. That would help farage and other small parties It would finally mean that the Conservative party can split and end the psychodrama that has caused so much chaos over the last decade. A proper far right party so that they don't have to pretend to be centre right and perhaps even the Labour party will finally split and there'll be a proper Socialist party for those who like that sort of thing. We'll finally see how small the extremes that have been dominating the political discussion are. It's a possibility for sure though not sure if it's any more likely now than in the past with the ERG. Both conservative and Labour splitting sounds quite logical but it's a big step. As I understand it, a PR system will benefit smaller parties and be more representative. The greens and the old UKIP seemed to get lots of votes but little in the way of MP's PR would make our political future akin to this forum, unworkable for a solution, or common goal" In fairness, would "unworkable" be any worse than the disaster we've had for the past 13 years? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"By the article I read he is blaming the implementation of brexit more than anything. Apparently he is also considering returning to politics but the first past the post system makes it very hard. However there is rumours that the lib dems will demand a change to the voting system in return for supporting Labour in a future coalition should they need one. That would help farage and other small parties It would finally mean that the Conservative party can split and end the psychodrama that has caused so much chaos over the last decade. A proper far right party so that they don't have to pretend to be centre right and perhaps even the Labour party will finally split and there'll be a proper Socialist party for those who like that sort of thing. We'll finally see how small the extremes that have been dominating the political discussion are. It's a possibility for sure though not sure if it's any more likely now than in the past with the ERG. Both conservative and Labour splitting sounds quite logical but it's a big step. As I understand it, a PR system will benefit smaller parties and be more representative. The greens and the old UKIP seemed to get lots of votes but little in the way of MP's PR would make our political future akin to this forum, unworkable for a solution, or common goal In fairness, would "unworkable" be any worse than the disaster we've had for the past 13 years?" Disaster? It's been a bit ropey but hardly a disaster. Typical of Brits these days. Wouldn't know hardship if it hit you in the face | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"By the article I read he is blaming the implementation of brexit more than anything. Apparently he is also considering returning to politics but the first past the post system makes it very hard. However there is rumours that the lib dems will demand a change to the voting system in return for supporting Labour in a future coalition should they need one. That would help farage and other small parties It would finally mean that the Conservative party can split and end the psychodrama that has caused so much chaos over the last decade. A proper far right party so that they don't have to pretend to be centre right and perhaps even the Labour party will finally split and there'll be a proper Socialist party for those who like that sort of thing. We'll finally see how small the extremes that have been dominating the political discussion are. It's a possibility for sure though not sure if it's any more likely now than in the past with the ERG. Both conservative and Labour splitting sounds quite logical but it's a big step. As I understand it, a PR system will benefit smaller parties and be more representative. The greens and the old UKIP seemed to get lots of votes but little in the way of MP's PR would make our political future akin to this forum, unworkable for a solution, or common goal In fairness, would "unworkable" be any worse than the disaster we've had for the past 13 years? Disaster? It's been a bit ropey but hardly a disaster. Typical of Brits these days. Wouldn't know hardship if it hit you in the face " Blimey, how bad do you want it to get before we can call these self serving narcissists "a disaster"? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"By the article I read he is blaming the implementation of brexit more than anything. Apparently he is also considering returning to politics but the first past the post system makes it very hard. However there is rumours that the lib dems will demand a change to the voting system in return for supporting Labour in a future coalition should they need one. That would help farage and other small parties It would finally mean that the Conservative party can split and end the psychodrama that has caused so much chaos over the last decade. A proper far right party so that they don't have to pretend to be centre right and perhaps even the Labour party will finally split and there'll be a proper Socialist party for those who like that sort of thing. We'll finally see how small the extremes that have been dominating the political discussion are. It's a possibility for sure though not sure if it's any more likely now than in the past with the ERG. Both conservative and Labour splitting sounds quite logical but it's a big step. As I understand it, a PR system will benefit smaller parties and be more representative. The greens and the old UKIP seemed to get lots of votes but little in the way of MP's PR would make our political future akin to this forum, unworkable for a solution, or common goal In fairness, would "unworkable" be any worse than the disaster we've had for the past 13 years? Disaster? It's been a bit ropey but hardly a disaster. Typical of Brits these days. Wouldn't know hardship if it hit you in the face Blimey, how bad do you want it to get before we can call these self serving narcissists "a disaster"?" Disaster my arse. It's tough a worst | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"By the article I read he is blaming the implementation of brexit more than anything. Apparently he is also considering returning to politics but the first past the post system makes it very hard. However there is rumours that the lib dems will demand a change to the voting system in return for supporting Labour in a future coalition should they need one. That would help farage and other small parties It would finally mean that the Conservative party can split and end the psychodrama that has caused so much chaos over the last decade. A proper far right party so that they don't have to pretend to be centre right and perhaps even the Labour party will finally split and there'll be a proper Socialist party for those who like that sort of thing. We'll finally see how small the extremes that have been dominating the political discussion are. It's a possibility for sure though not sure if it's any more likely now than in the past with the ERG. Both conservative and Labour splitting sounds quite logical but it's a big step. As I understand it, a PR system will benefit smaller parties and be more representative. The greens and the old UKIP seemed to get lots of votes but little in the way of MP's" UKIP got lots of votes based on a single short-term issue. In trying to hold that vote, the Conservative party metastasised the small ultra right wing of the party into what ran it. That is why we are now where we are. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"By the article I read he is blaming the implementation of brexit more than anything. Apparently he is also considering returning to politics but the first past the post system makes it very hard. However there is rumours that the lib dems will demand a change to the voting system in return for supporting Labour in a future coalition should they need one. That would help farage and other small parties It would finally mean that the Conservative party can split and end the psychodrama that has caused so much chaos over the last decade. A proper far right party so that they don't have to pretend to be centre right and perhaps even the Labour party will finally split and there'll be a proper Socialist party for those who like that sort of thing. We'll finally see how small the extremes that have been dominating the political discussion are. It's a possibility for sure though not sure if it's any more likely now than in the past with the ERG. Both conservative and Labour splitting sounds quite logical but it's a big step. As I understand it, a PR system will benefit smaller parties and be more representative. The greens and the old UKIP seemed to get lots of votes but little in the way of MP's PR would make our political future akin to this forum, unworkable for a solution, or common goal" Yes. Terrible things have happened in Germany and Holland, amongst many other countries, over the last fifty years. Things have gone nothing but well here. Do you think you might just be unable to accept change whilst simultaneously saying that the positive change from Brexit could take an unspecified period of time? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"By the article I read he is blaming the implementation of brexit more than anything. Apparently he is also considering returning to politics but the first past the post system makes it very hard. However there is rumours that the lib dems will demand a change to the voting system in return for supporting Labour in a future coalition should they need one. That would help farage and other small parties It would finally mean that the Conservative party can split and end the psychodrama that has caused so much chaos over the last decade. A proper far right party so that they don't have to pretend to be centre right and perhaps even the Labour party will finally split and there'll be a proper Socialist party for those who like that sort of thing. We'll finally see how small the extremes that have been dominating the political discussion are. It's a possibility for sure though not sure if it's any more likely now than in the past with the ERG. Both conservative and Labour splitting sounds quite logical but it's a big step. As I understand it, a PR system will benefit smaller parties and be more representative. The greens and the old UKIP seemed to get lots of votes but little in the way of MP's PR would make our political future akin to this forum, unworkable for a solution, or common goal It works in most civilised countries so there is no reason why it should not work in ours. You think the voting public are simple people, how does that work with power sharing, confused negotiations and compromise? Surely PR is far too complex? " It's not up to the public to make Government work. It's up to the politicians who they vote for. Just as it is now. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"By the article I read he is blaming the implementation of brexit more than anything. Apparently he is also considering returning to politics but the first past the post system makes it very hard. However there is rumours that the lib dems will demand a change to the voting system in return for supporting Labour in a future coalition should they need one. That would help farage and other small parties It would finally mean that the Conservative party can split and end the psychodrama that has caused so much chaos over the last decade. A proper far right party so that they don't have to pretend to be centre right and perhaps even the Labour party will finally split and there'll be a proper Socialist party for those who like that sort of thing. We'll finally see how small the extremes that have been dominating the political discussion are. It's a possibility for sure though not sure if it's any more likely now than in the past with the ERG. Both conservative and Labour splitting sounds quite logical but it's a big step. As I understand it, a PR system will benefit smaller parties and be more representative. The greens and the old UKIP seemed to get lots of votes but little in the way of MP's PR would make our political future akin to this forum, unworkable for a solution, or common goal It works in most civilised countries so there is no reason why it should not work in ours. You think the voting public are simple people, how does that work with power sharing, confused negotiations and compromise? Surely PR is far too complex? It's not up to the public to make Government work. It's up to the politicians who they vote for. Just as it is now." It is up to the public to choose the government, who make it work. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"By the article I read he is blaming the implementation of brexit more than anything. Apparently he is also considering returning to politics but the first past the post system makes it very hard. However there is rumours that the lib dems will demand a change to the voting system in return for supporting Labour in a future coalition should they need one. That would help farage and other small parties It would finally mean that the Conservative party can split and end the psychodrama that has caused so much chaos over the last decade. A proper far right party so that they don't have to pretend to be centre right and perhaps even the Labour party will finally split and there'll be a proper Socialist party for those who like that sort of thing. We'll finally see how small the extremes that have been dominating the political discussion are. It's a possibility for sure though not sure if it's any more likely now than in the past with the ERG. Both conservative and Labour splitting sounds quite logical but it's a big step. As I understand it, a PR system will benefit smaller parties and be more representative. The greens and the old UKIP seemed to get lots of votes but little in the way of MP's PR would make our political future akin to this forum, unworkable for a solution, or common goal Yes. Terrible things have happened in Germany and Holland, amongst many other countries, over the last fifty years. Things have gone nothing but well here. Do you think you might just be unable to accept change whilst simultaneously saying that the positive change from Brexit could take an unspecified period of time?" Very good, but no and my view is supported as per the last time the question was asked on mass. Let me guess, people are too simple to know what they want, or things have changed... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"By the article I read he is blaming the implementation of brexit more than anything. Apparently he is also considering returning to politics but the first past the post system makes it very hard. However there is rumours that the lib dems will demand a change to the voting system in return for supporting Labour in a future coalition should they need one. That would help farage and other small parties It would finally mean that the Conservative party can split and end the psychodrama that has caused so much chaos over the last decade. A proper far right party so that they don't have to pretend to be centre right and perhaps even the Labour party will finally split and there'll be a proper Socialist party for those who like that sort of thing. We'll finally see how small the extremes that have been dominating the political discussion are. It's a possibility for sure though not sure if it's any more likely now than in the past with the ERG. Both conservative and Labour splitting sounds quite logical but it's a big step. As I understand it, a PR system will benefit smaller parties and be more representative. The greens and the old UKIP seemed to get lots of votes but little in the way of MP's PR would make our political future akin to this forum, unworkable for a solution, or common goal It works in most civilised countries so there is no reason why it should not work in ours. You think the voting public are simple people, how does that work with power sharing, confused negotiations and compromise? Surely PR is far too complex? It's not up to the public to make Government work. It's up to the politicians who they vote for. Just as it is now. It is up to the public to choose the government, who make it work. " The public vote for MPs and their party's policies. They do not choose Ministers. They do not choose how Government is run now. The public would still be voting for their Parliamentary representatives to form a Government to deliver what policies that they can. In fact, a majority of voters will have their aspirations represented in a PR coalition than they do in a first past the post majority. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"By the article I read he is blaming the implementation of brexit more than anything. Apparently he is also considering returning to politics but the first past the post system makes it very hard. However there is rumours that the lib dems will demand a change to the voting system in return for supporting Labour in a future coalition should they need one. That would help farage and other small parties It would finally mean that the Conservative party can split and end the psychodrama that has caused so much chaos over the last decade. A proper far right party so that they don't have to pretend to be centre right and perhaps even the Labour party will finally split and there'll be a proper Socialist party for those who like that sort of thing. We'll finally see how small the extremes that have been dominating the political discussion are. It's a possibility for sure though not sure if it's any more likely now than in the past with the ERG. Both conservative and Labour splitting sounds quite logical but it's a big step. As I understand it, a PR system will benefit smaller parties and be more representative. The greens and the old UKIP seemed to get lots of votes but little in the way of MP's PR would make our political future akin to this forum, unworkable for a solution, or common goal Yes. Terrible things have happened in Germany and Holland, amongst many other countries, over the last fifty years. Things have gone nothing but well here. Do you think you might just be unable to accept change whilst simultaneously saying that the positive change from Brexit could take an unspecified period of time? Very good, but no and my view is supported as per the last time the question was asked on mass. Let me guess, people are too simple to know what they want, or things have changed..." Not a game. I'm not interested in those. One change is unacceptable because it's different to what we have but works all over the world in very successful countries. Another change that has never happened we will just have to give time to. Why are you talking about people "being simple"? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"By the article I read he is blaming the implementation of brexit more than anything. Apparently he is also considering returning to politics but the first past the post system makes it very hard. However there is rumours that the lib dems will demand a change to the voting system in return for supporting Labour in a future coalition should they need one. That would help farage and other small parties It would finally mean that the Conservative party can split and end the psychodrama that has caused so much chaos over the last decade. A proper far right party so that they don't have to pretend to be centre right and perhaps even the Labour party will finally split and there'll be a proper Socialist party for those who like that sort of thing. We'll finally see how small the extremes that have been dominating the political discussion are. It's a possibility for sure though not sure if it's any more likely now than in the past with the ERG. Both conservative and Labour splitting sounds quite logical but it's a big step. As I understand it, a PR system will benefit smaller parties and be more representative. The greens and the old UKIP seemed to get lots of votes but little in the way of MP's PR would make our political future akin to this forum, unworkable for a solution, or common goal It works in most civilised countries so there is no reason why it should not work in ours. You think the voting public are simple people, how does that work with power sharing, confused negotiations and compromise? Surely PR is far too complex? It's not up to the public to make Government work. It's up to the politicians who they vote for. Just as it is now. It is up to the public to choose the government, who make it work. The public vote for MPs and their party's policies. They do not choose Ministers. They do not choose how Government is run now. The public would still be voting for their Parliamentary representatives to form a Government to deliver what policies that they can. In fact, a majority of voters will have their aspirations represented in a PR coalition than they do in a first past the post majority." Semantics, the people vote and the government is chosen, it works and will not change anytime soon. The idea of giving everyone a seat at the table makes no sense and only offers congestion towards policy reforms. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit cannot be deemed a success or a failure in such a short length of time. Headline grabbing to influence the changes he wants. When we joined the EEC back in the 1970’s, it was because successive Prime Ministers and leading economists believed that the U.K. had lost its way in an ever expanding globalised economy and that the way forwards was closer cooperation with our closest and most important trading partners. It took thirty years or so after WW2 for Britain to take appropriate action to manage its decline. Nothing has changed other than Nationalists and economic radicals seem to believe that the U.K. can return to being the buccaneering economic powerhouse that it once was by putting up barriers with the most important trading partners that the country has had for literally hundreds of years. Radical thinking that was sold with nationalist fervour so that common sense could be ignored. Brexit won’t work in the long term and anyone with an ounce of common sense knows this to be the case. The only question is how long will the country keep torturing itself until common sense prevails? We are all Brexiters now and we have to decide through careful thought and analysis what we do to improve the economic landscape going forwards. Ignoring the elephant in the room is just silly. I have not ignored anything, rather the opposite. I'm taking into account the timelines, the decisions and a 360 degree view rather than the tunnel view of brexit is broken, brexit is shit, brexit whatever else! The country has made a choice, for better or for worse is yet unknown and I would not expect us to start realising any benefits for a good number of years. Brexit is not a short term win or loss, it is longterm investment that needs to mature. However, “longterm” is a convenient get out clause. Just wait and see. It will be great. However, evidence currently indicates to the contrary and polls show the vast majority would now vote differently. Not a get out clause, a more realistic summary of the journey the country needs to take post brexit and into the future. Fair point except that any strategy needs to provide short term and long term benefits. It simply cannot all be back weighted as it needs a benefits realisation plan to demonstrate the cumulative effect of the project. I seriously do not believe as many would have voted for Leave if the message had been “next 10-20 years are going to be really hard for most of you but it will be worth it in the end” people expected (and were sold) short term benefits and these are not being realised for the most part. Many didn't vote for brexit at an economic level or even as a consideration. That is the why the things you mention, which are valid, was never a consideration, until now when it is hurting them in the pocket. And generally that is why Leave won and Remain lost. Remain tried to argue with logic and macro-economic arguments. Leave mostly focused on emotion led arguments. Not everyone can identify with or understand the former. Everyone is however triggered by emotions. But and this a big but... Brexit has not failed yet, the vote result failed 48% of the people, that is not the result of brexit that was the result of the vote. For Farage to say brexit is a failure is him saying it isn't going how I want it to go, nothing more than that in my opinion. " How is Brexit "supposed to go"? Does anyone know? What is the definition of failure or success after the unspecified amount of time that this will be judged over? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"By the article I read he is blaming the implementation of brexit more than anything. Apparently he is also considering returning to politics but the first past the post system makes it very hard. However there is rumours that the lib dems will demand a change to the voting system in return for supporting Labour in a future coalition should they need one. That would help farage and other small parties It would finally mean that the Conservative party can split and end the psychodrama that has caused so much chaos over the last decade. A proper far right party so that they don't have to pretend to be centre right and perhaps even the Labour party will finally split and there'll be a proper Socialist party for those who like that sort of thing. We'll finally see how small the extremes that have been dominating the political discussion are. It's a possibility for sure though not sure if it's any more likely now than in the past with the ERG. Both conservative and Labour splitting sounds quite logical but it's a big step. As I understand it, a PR system will benefit smaller parties and be more representative. The greens and the old UKIP seemed to get lots of votes but little in the way of MP's PR would make our political future akin to this forum, unworkable for a solution, or common goal Yes. Terrible things have happened in Germany and Holland, amongst many other countries, over the last fifty years. Things have gone nothing but well here. Do you think you might just be unable to accept change whilst simultaneously saying that the positive change from Brexit could take an unspecified period of time? Very good, but no and my view is supported as per the last time the question was asked on mass. Let me guess, people are too simple to know what they want, or things have changed... Not a game. I'm not interested in those. One change is unacceptable because it's different to what we have but works all over the world in very successful countries. Another change that has never happened we will just have to give time to. Why are you talking about people "being simple"?" The point of people being simple and not understanding the impact of brexit is the key message in this forum, not yours but others who are less constructive in their arguments. Accepting and time for change, was my position towards providing ID in the 21st century, not a constitutional change in how we elect a government. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit cannot be deemed a success or a failure in such a short length of time. Headline grabbing to influence the changes he wants. When we joined the EEC back in the 1970’s, it was because successive Prime Ministers and leading economists believed that the U.K. had lost its way in an ever expanding globalised economy and that the way forwards was closer cooperation with our closest and most important trading partners. It took thirty years or so after WW2 for Britain to take appropriate action to manage its decline. Nothing has changed other than Nationalists and economic radicals seem to believe that the U.K. can return to being the buccaneering economic powerhouse that it once was by putting up barriers with the most important trading partners that the country has had for literally hundreds of years. Radical thinking that was sold with nationalist fervour so that common sense could be ignored. Brexit won’t work in the long term and anyone with an ounce of common sense knows this to be the case. The only question is how long will the country keep torturing itself until common sense prevails? We are all Brexiters now and we have to decide through careful thought and analysis what we do to improve the economic landscape going forwards. Ignoring the elephant in the room is just silly." When Britain was a "buccaneering" economic powerhouse it was the head of a global empire organised to service the centre of power. It has it's own trading block organised for its own benefit. We were recently an economic powerhouse when part of the EU. Britain has never been an economic powerhouse on its own. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brexit cannot be deemed a success or a failure in such a short length of time. Headline grabbing to influence the changes he wants. When we joined the EEC back in the 1970’s, it was because successive Prime Ministers and leading economists believed that the U.K. had lost its way in an ever expanding globalised economy and that the way forwards was closer cooperation with our closest and most important trading partners. It took thirty years or so after WW2 for Britain to take appropriate action to manage its decline. Nothing has changed other than Nationalists and economic radicals seem to believe that the U.K. can return to being the buccaneering economic powerhouse that it once was by putting up barriers with the most important trading partners that the country has had for literally hundreds of years. Radical thinking that was sold with nationalist fervour so that common sense could be ignored. Brexit won’t work in the long term and anyone with an ounce of common sense knows this to be the case. The only question is how long will the country keep torturing itself until common sense prevails? We are all Brexiters now and we have to decide through careful thought and analysis what we do to improve the economic landscape going forwards. Ignoring the elephant in the room is just silly. I have not ignored anything, rather the opposite. I'm taking into account the timelines, the decisions and a 360 degree view rather than the tunnel view of brexit is broken, brexit is shit, brexit whatever else! The country has made a choice, for better or for worse is yet unknown and I would not expect us to start realising any benefits for a good number of years. Brexit is not a short term win or loss, it is longterm investment that needs to mature. However, “longterm” is a convenient get out clause. Just wait and see. It will be great. However, evidence currently indicates to the contrary and polls show the vast majority would now vote differently. Not a get out clause, a more realistic summary of the journey the country needs to take post brexit and into the future. Fair point except that any strategy needs to provide short term and long term benefits. It simply cannot all be back weighted as it needs a benefits realisation plan to demonstrate the cumulative effect of the project. I seriously do not believe as many would have voted for Leave if the message had been “next 10-20 years are going to be really hard for most of you but it will be worth it in the end” people expected (and were sold) short term benefits and these are not being realised for the most part. Many didn't vote for brexit at an economic level or even as a consideration. That is the why the things you mention, which are valid, was never a consideration, until now when it is hurting them in the pocket. And generally that is why Leave won and Remain lost. Remain tried to argue with logic and macro-economic arguments. Leave mostly focused on emotion led arguments. Not everyone can identify with or understand the former. Everyone is however triggered by emotions. But and this a big but... Brexit has not failed yet, the vote result failed 48% of the people, that is not the result of brexit that was the result of the vote. For Farage to say brexit is a failure is him saying it isn't going how I want it to go, nothing more than that in my opinion. How is Brexit "supposed to go"? Does anyone know? What is the definition of failure or success after the unspecified amount of time that this will be judged over?" Hence my post ref: It is transitioning and too early to say. I think the planning and execution stages are a more apt measurement of success. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"By the article I read he is blaming the implementation of brexit more than anything. Apparently he is also considering returning to politics but the first past the post system makes it very hard. However there is rumours that the lib dems will demand a change to the voting system in return for supporting Labour in a future coalition should they need one. That would help farage and other small parties It would finally mean that the Conservative party can split and end the psychodrama that has caused so much chaos over the last decade. A proper far right party so that they don't have to pretend to be centre right and perhaps even the Labour party will finally split and there'll be a proper Socialist party for those who like that sort of thing. We'll finally see how small the extremes that have been dominating the political discussion are. It's a possibility for sure though not sure if it's any more likely now than in the past with the ERG. Both conservative and Labour splitting sounds quite logical but it's a big step. As I understand it, a PR system will benefit smaller parties and be more representative. The greens and the old UKIP seemed to get lots of votes but little in the way of MP's PR would make our political future akin to this forum, unworkable for a solution, or common goal Yes. Terrible things have happened in Germany and Holland, amongst many other countries, over the last fifty years. Things have gone nothing but well here. Do you think you might just be unable to accept change whilst simultaneously saying that the positive change from Brexit could take an unspecified period of time? Very good, but no and my view is supported as per the last time the question was asked on mass. Let me guess, people are too simple to know what they want, or things have changed... Not a game. I'm not interested in those. One change is unacceptable because it's different to what we have but works all over the world in very successful countries. Another change that has never happened we will just have to give time to. Why are you talking about people "being simple"? The point of people being simple and not understanding the impact of brexit is the key message in this forum, not yours but others who are less constructive in their arguments. Accepting and time for change, was my position towards providing ID in the 21st century, not a constitutional change in how we elect a government." People are politically manipulated over time to overrule logic with emotion. Look at what is happening in Turkey now. That doesn't make people simple, it makes them human. Sadly, our politicians are happy to exploit that. Why is the current electoral process in the UK better than PR given what happens in the rest of the World? Why should there not be change if more people's views will be represented in Government with PR? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
