The UK Politics and EU Referendum thread - merged

[aaron1867]

You seem to think that everyone that voted to leave fell for lies.

I voted leave in spite of this.

Don't think you know why I voted.

I think the fundamental problem with Theresa May's negotiations were that she bundled all the leave votes into a narrow class of what they 'meant' and drew up unrealistic red lines based upon them.

The fundamental flaw of the referendum was that no-one truly knows why anyone voted leave.  Split the leave vote into the various preferences that people actually had for what type of exit they prefer, and you probably replicate the same impasse that exists in Parliament, with Remain outweighing any of the options that any combination of Leave voters would deem as acceptable.  No deal/hard Brexit doesn't attract those wanting a single market with free movement of people, and the Labour-style option is equally unacceptable to those who don't recognise it as Brexit.

I know why I voted to leave.

1, obviously because I am dumb, as according to the bloke who used to be quite a wordsmith, now just name calls.

2, because I was sick of the rules we are governed by coming seemingly first hand from those people in Brussels.

3, I never once believed the Farage bus promises, but I wanted the UK to govern itself.

4 , I also expected better of our government in negotiating, rather than the plain cap in hand, May we leave, what are YOUR terms approach.

The 4 reasons you have listed are ultimately 1. Point 1 & 4 are irrelevant and 2 & 3 are the same.

You fall into into a category of assumption. You assume that because we are going to govern ourselves that everything is suddenly going to be great and you don't realise that not everything is controlled by the EU. All you do is assume, assume, assume. A bit like you saying everything is going to be ok because Germany are still going to want to sell us cars.

Simplistic.

[bobAlike]

Just came across this George Orwell quote from about 75 years ago. Amazing how things haven’t changed much in the passing years.

“In intention, at any rate, the English intelligentsia are Europeanized. 
They take their cookery from Paris and their opinions from Moscow. In the 
general patriotism of the country they form a sort of island of dissident 
thought. England is perhaps the only great country whose intellectuals 
are ashamed of their own nationality. In left-wing circles it is always 
felt that there is something slightly disgraceful in being an Englishman 
and that it is a duty to snigger at every English institution, from horse 
racing to suet puddings. It is a strange fact, but it is unquestionably 
true that almost any English intellectual would feel more ashamed of 
standing to attention during ‘God save the King’ than of stealing from a 
poor box. All through the critical years many left-wingers were chipping 
away at English morale, trying to spread an outlook that was sometimes 
squashily pacifist, sometimes violently pro-Russian, but always 
anti-British.”

[Doobs]

Just came across this George Orwell quote from about 75 years ago. Amazing how things haven’t changed much in the passing years.

“In intention, at any rate, the English intelligentsia are Europeanized. 
They take their cookery from Paris and their opinions from Moscow. In the 
general patriotism of the country they form a sort of island of dissident 
thought. England is perhaps the only great country whose intellectuals 
are ashamed of their own nationality. In left-wing circles it is always 
felt that there is something slightly disgraceful in being an Englishman 
and that it is a duty to snigger at every English institution, from horse 
racing to suet puddings. It is a strange fact, but it is unquestionably 
true that almost any English intellectual would feel more ashamed of 
standing to attention during ‘God save the King’ than of stealing from a 
poor box. All through the critical years many left-wingers were chipping 
away at English morale, trying to spread an outlook that was sometimes 
squashily pacifist, sometimes violently pro-Russian, but always 
anti-British.”

Guess you mean it was bollocks then too?

[Pokerpops]

You seem to think that everyone that voted to leave fell for lies.

I voted leave in spite of this.

Don't think you know why I voted.

I think the fundamental problem with Theresa May's negotiations were that she bundled all the leave votes into a narrow class of what they 'meant' and drew up unrealistic red lines based upon them.

The fundamental flaw of the referendum was that no-one truly knows why anyone voted leave.  Split the leave vote into the various preferences that people actually had for what type of exit they prefer, and you probably replicate the same impasse that exists in Parliament, with Remain outweighing any of the options that any combination of Leave voters would deem as acceptable.  No deal/hard Brexit doesn't attract those wanting a single market with free movement of people, and the Labour-style option is equally unacceptable to those who don't recognise it as Brexit.

I know why I voted to leave.

1, obviously because I am dumb, as according to the bloke who used to be quite a wordsmith, now just name calls.

2, because I was sick of the rules we are governed by coming seemingly first hand from those people in Brussels.

3, I never once believed the Farage bus promises, but I wanted the UK to govern itself.

4 , I also expected better of our government in negotiating, rather than the plain cap in hand, May we leave, what are YOUR terms approach.

The 4 reasons you have listed are ultimately 1. Point 1 & 4 are irrelevant and 2 & 3 are the same.

You fall into into a category of assumption. You assume that because we are going to govern ourselves that everything is suddenly going to be great and you don't realise that not everything is controlled by the EU. All you do is assume, assume, assume. A bit like you saying everything is going to be ok because Germany are still going to want to sell us cars.

Simplistic.

Indeed, your arguments are, as is often the case, simplistic.

The assumptions you make about the rationale behind a vote for Leave; the assumptions you make about the depth of understanding of the pros and cons of the EU; the assumptions you make about 52% of those who cast a vote. All simplistic.

Point 4 from the original post by BigArz is totally relevant. Politicians across the spectrum have let us down badly over the past two and a half years.
First Cameron, whose exit was cowardly and craven in the extreme. Gove and Johnson ducked and left the task to the supremely under-qualified May. Whose tactic throughout now appears to have been to fudge until the public could be asked if this is ‘really what they want’?

[BigAdz]

You seem to think that everyone that voted to leave fell for lies.

I voted leave in spite of this.

Don't think you know why I voted.

I think the fundamental problem with Theresa May's negotiations were that she bundled all the leave votes into a narrow class of what they 'meant' and drew up unrealistic red lines based upon them.

The fundamental flaw of the referendum was that no-one truly knows why anyone voted leave.  Split the leave vote into the various preferences that people actually had for what type of exit they prefer, and you probably replicate the same impasse that exists in Parliament, with Remain outweighing any of the options that any combination of Leave voters would deem as acceptable.  No deal/hard Brexit doesn't attract those wanting a single market with free movement of people, and the Labour-style option is equally unacceptable to those who don't recognise it as Brexit.

I know why I voted to leave.

1, obviously because I am dumb, as according to the bloke who used to be quite a wordsmith, now just name calls.

2, because I was sick of the rules we are governed by coming seemingly first hand from those people in Brussels.

3, I never once believed the Farage bus promises, but I wanted the UK to govern itself.

4 , I also expected better of our government in negotiating, rather than the plain cap in hand, May we leave, what are YOUR terms approach.

The 4 reasons you have listed are ultimately 1. Point 1 & 4 are irrelevant and 2 & 3 are the same.

You fall into into a category of assumption. You assume that because we are going to govern ourselves that everything is suddenly going to be great and you don't realise that not everything is controlled by the EU. All you do is assume, assume, assume. A bit like you saying everything is going to be ok because Germany are still going to want to sell us cars.

Simplistic.

Not quite sure what I am assuming will happen?

I haven't once said everything will be ok because Germany want to sell us cars. To use your example, I have suggested that when Germany realise that Brussels being dickheads, means it will be far more difficult to sell us cars, and maybe they then try and be more proactive before they lose a large captive audience.

A long way from what you assumed I said.....but you tend not to read what anyone says, you just keep spouting the same old rubbish, regardless.

[kukushkin88]

You seem to think that everyone that voted to leave fell for lies.

I voted leave in spite of this.

Don't think you know why I voted.

I think the fundamental problem with Theresa May's negotiations were that she bundled all the leave votes into a narrow class of what they 'meant' and drew up unrealistic red lines based upon them.

The fundamental flaw of the referendum was that no-one truly knows why anyone voted leave.  Split the leave vote into the various preferences that people actually had for what type of exit they prefer, and you probably replicate the same impasse that exists in Parliament, with Remain outweighing any of the options that any combination of Leave voters would deem as acceptable.  No deal/hard Brexit doesn't attract those wanting a single market with free movement of people, and the Labour-style option is equally unacceptable to those who don't recognise it as Brexit.

I know why I voted to leave.

1, obviously because I am dumb, as according to the bloke who used to be quite a wordsmith, now just name calls.

2, because I was sick of the rules we are governed by coming seemingly first hand from those people in Brussels.

3, I never once believed the Farage bus promises, but I wanted the UK to govern itself.

4 , I also expected better of our government in negotiating, rather than the plain cap in hand, May we leave, what are YOUR terms approach.

The 4 reasons you have listed are ultimately 1. Point 1 & 4 are irrelevant and 2 & 3 are the same.

You fall into into a category of assumption. You assume that because we are going to govern ourselves that everything is suddenly going to be great and you don't realise that not everything is controlled by the EU. All you do is assume, assume, assume. A bit like you saying everything is going to be ok because Germany are still going to want to sell us cars.

Simplistic.

Not quite sure what I am assuming will happen?

I haven't once said everything will be ok because Germany want to sell us cars. To use your example, I have suggested that when Germany realise that Brussels being dickheads, means it will be far more difficult to sell us cars, and maybe they then try and be more proactive before they lose a large captive audience.

A long way from what you assumed I said.....but you tend not to read what anyone says, you just keep spouting the same old rubbish, regardless.

Of course your wrong about the middle paragraph, they’ve already confirmed the terms of our departure and have been absolutely clear that they won’t change. The optimistic ‘Daily Express’ style narrative has already failed to materialise. You must remember the dozens of times it was explained why this would be a non factor?

[BigAdz]

Of course I'm wrong. I'm always wrong. You're always right. You are so smug it's untrue and thankfully others see it too.

I have no doubt that what you might be picking up from all your well educated and well read sources, these are purely my thoughts.

I don't see how I can be wrong when the period of adjustment hasn't happened yet? When these suppliers notice massive falls in profits etc. Can you categorically tell me something won't change, or can you tell the future too now?

I didn't say that was the policy, I just suggested, wait and see, so not sure how I can be wrong, if we are nit picking.....

[kukushkin88]

I’m wrong all the time, anybody with an interest in learning is. It gets boring when you always write the opposite of what I say. I’m very comfortable with being wrong and acknowledge that fact a lot.

I thought we were talking about the terms of our leaving. If we are talking about a trade deal between the UK and the EU at an undisclosed time in the future, then you are right we don’t know.

[MANTIS01]

Think that’s a good post and would defo agree

“I’m wrong all the time” is accurate and insightful

[kukushkin88]

Think that’s a good post and would defo agree

“I’m wrong all the time” is accurate and insightful

Nice we agree for once. Just to be clear though. There is a considerable difference (in fact they’re in some respects oppposite) in being wrong because you constantly seek evidence and empirical study that contradicts the way you currently think and being wrong because everything you think (or certainly that you write) looks suspiciously like a Sun/Mail/Express headline and you steadfastly refuse to contemplate an alternative.

A good case study on this would be Adz and his support for the death penalty.

[BigAdz]

I’m wrong all the time, anybody with an interest in learning is. It gets boring when you always write the opposite of what I say. I’m very comfortable with being wrong and acknowledge that fact a lot.

I thought we were talking about the terms of our leaving. If we are talking about a trade deal between the UK and the EU at an undisclosed time in the future, then you are right we don’t know.

Even your posts are getting more desperate.

First you say I'm wrong then turn if round to a self effacing I'm wrong.

I wasn't saying you were wrong either, just that to call me out like Aaron has on something that can't possibly have an answer yet is pretty stupid.

[BigAdz]

Think that’s a good post and would defo agree

“I’m wrong all the time” is accurate and insightful

Nice we agree for once. Just to be clear though. There is a considerable difference (in fact they’re in some respects oppposite) in being wrong because you constantly seek evidence and empirical study that contradicts the way you currently think and being wrong because everything you think (or certainly that you write) looks suspiciously like a Sun/Mail/Express headline and you steadfastly refuse to contemplate an alternative.

A good case study on this would be Adz and his support for the death penalty.

What?

You have some messed up thinking boy.

I believe in the death penalty, not because the Sun or the Mail tells me to, even if they do for that matter(do they even?).

I just think we shouldn't waste money on people that have clearly blown people up, or chopped their heads of because of religious based motives, amongst other things.

I can read all I like about 're educating them and second chances, but it won't change my opinion, because that is what it is, an opinion.

And if I do believe in it still doesn't make me wrong, or right, because no one knows if it is. Who has the final say, or is it you now?

[kukushkin88]

I’m wrong all the time, anybody with an interest in learning is. It gets boring when you always write the opposite of what I say. I’m very comfortable with being wrong and acknowledge that fact a lot.

I thought we were talking about the terms of our leaving. If we are talking about a trade deal between the UK and the EU at an undisclosed time in the future, then you are right we don’t know.

Even your posts are getting more desperate.

First you say I'm wrong then turn if round to a self effacing I'm wrong.

I wasn't saying you were wrong either, just that to call me out like Aaron has on something that can't possibly have an answer yet is pretty stupid.

There’s nothing remotely desperate about acknowledging that on this one occasion it seems we may have been talking at cross purposes. There is nothing desperate about insulting the obvious trolling of the past. If you think my contribution to this thread has anything to do with desperation, I am certain as can be that you are wrong.

What do you suppose I am desperate about? (Please try and answer sincerely)

[kukushkin88]

Think that’s a good post and would defo agree

“I’m wrong all the time” is accurate and insightful

Nice we agree for once. Just to be clear though. There is a considerable difference (in fact they’re in some respects oppposite) in being wrong because you constantly seek evidence and empirical study that contradicts the way you currently think and being wrong because everything you think (or certainly that you write) looks suspiciously like a Sun/Mail/Express headline and you steadfastly refuse to contemplate an alternative.

A good case study on this would be Adz and his support for the death penalty.

What?

You have some messed up thinking boy.

I believe in the death penalty, not because the Sun or the Mail tells me to, even if they do for that matter(do they even?).

I just think we shouldn't waste money on people that have clearly blown people up, or chopped their heads of because of religious based motives, amongst other things.

I can read all I like about 're educating them and second chances, but it won't change my opinion, because that is what it is, an opinion.

And if I do believe in it still doesn't make me wrong, or right, because no one knows if it is. Who has the final say, or is it you now?

“Boy”? That’s an interesting one.

Shall we make a list of all the questions we can think of that should be answered in order to establish whether the death penalty is a good idea?

[BigAdz]

I am sat here watching a news item where some idiot has just gone up to a girl in a park listening to music, stabbed her, that he has never met, let alone offended him etc etc. She dies.

Tell me, not that you will change my mind, why should that waste of skin live himself?