Off Topic Politics Thread
- Thread starter ChilcoSaint
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
You must log in or register to see images
But this is the problem. The majority of people actually wanted to leave, hence the result of the vote yet ever since the vote it has been presented as the majority of people not wanting the vote and those MPs that want the vote fulfilled are presented as rebels when it is those that are trying to go against their own manifestos that are actually rebels.
Corbyn wants to leave. He is supporting his party's manifesto from the last election. The ERG want to leave. They are supporting their party's manifesto from the last election. They are not the ones that are rebels.
We can argue about some of the ERG wanting WTO (Most don't) but the reality is that your statement above contradicts itself because those who would be seen as "crazy right and left wing extremists" ARE the ones that want to do what they majority of people want.......at least on the issue of Brexit anyway.
It is the infighting within the house from all sides trying to present everything they say as meaning something it doesn't that has caused this. Yes Theresa May's closed shop has caused even more problems but it is the whole house that has been ignoring reality and trying to spin their own narratives that has put us into a gridlock position.
It's no good continually prefixing a statement with "We respect the referendum but......." and then moving into a spun version of how to avoid Brexit even if it is a BRINO version. Similarly it is no good some of the ERG saying they "want a deal but" when they wanted a WTO from the start. The reality is however that most in there have never respected the result, have never had any intention of working positively to deliver any kind of actual Brexit and have merely been spinning while they work out how to ignore the referendum result. They are all to blame.
Even now we have a large section saying they want to extend article 50 so that we can work out a way forward. They aren't bothered about having more time to work out how to deliver Brexit. They might say that but the reality is they want more time to work towards ignoring the result. I'm pretty sure article 50 will be extended. I;ve said it enough times but nothing will change. No-one in there is the slightest bit interested in actually delivering Brexit with a deal that satisfies.
The media (and politicians repeating on masse) have spent the last few months pushing the line that people are "tired of Brexit and just want it to be over." They are tired of Brexit but the way it is spun is that people have had enough and are saying "we give up, lets stay." They aren't tired of Brexit itself, just the constant manouevering by all involved. The zero progress by people that keep blaming each other. What we are tired of is being ignored and the "system" pretending it is trying to achieve something when they aren't.
The media and political classes then spent the last month (especially around the no confidence vote in May) telling us what the public think, that they will blame the ERG for this mess and not May. Well the polling that came out last night clearly showed that 49% do indeed blame May and the government with backbenchers on both sides being blamed in the teen percents. Most people could have predicted that yet all of those on propaganda missions across TV kept on telling the viewers that people didn't blame May at all and were disgusted with the ERG. They even searched and searched for people on the streets that would support this view.
The blame should lie with the whole house and their machinations of how not to deliver what people voted for. Yes the government should shoulder most of it because it is they that are in control and thus the inactivity is all on their shoulders however the house itself has spent 2 years trying its best to make sure that nothing is possible.
Most of the public support (which isn't a majority but is now significant) wanted a real deal not the usual EU stitchup presented as a deal and far from being WTO supporters their view is "just get out, this has gone on too long. There's no point taking any longer because nothing will change. Just get out and then get on with life." Far from being supportive from the start about WTO they are just tired of the bubble's spin and fakery and want to just get it over with and move on.
I can't see us avoiding a referendum now. I said months ago the EU would only grant an extension if we offered something and I suggested it would be a 2nd referendum. We all know how the EU loves a 2nd referendumand today that is confirmed by the leaders of the EU countries, that "the UK" must be showing there is a path forward for them to agree to an extension. This was always on the cards from the day the result went "the wrong way."
Parliament stalls and stalls, The EU give the worst deal possible, the politicians make sure that no progress can ever be made while they and the dominant screen media pump anti-Brexit propaganda into everybody's minds until they are repeating that propaganda in their sleep.
I think WTO would be a really bad option. I wanted a decent deal but WTO vs remaining in that globalist scam? My X would go next to WTO!!! And that is pretty much the sentiment of a lot of the leave vote that wanted a deal. Never wanted a WTO exit but would rather that then remain part of the EU project.
Its a pity that the leave camp downed tools thinking that winning a vote was the end of it because they have left the continuity remain side to dominate the airwaves and the screentime. How naive it is that people thought in a modern democratic country that winning a vote was what counted. They should have known that winning a vote means nothing. It is forcing that vote to be honoured that is the battle.
The only difference between modern democracy and 3rd world democracy is that there they rig the result to be what they want. In Western democracies they don;t rig the vote. They just ignore it afterwards.
Blimey that has to be the longest post i’ve Seen on here. You can’t have done it on an iPad
Agreed I expect a significant number of no voters really couldn’t be bothered, but I know some who didn’t vote because they weren’t able to make their minds up due to all the lies and rubbish peddled by both sides.
I also know some one who really couldn’t make his mind up but thought he should vote, so he voted to leave because he thought they wouldn’t win so it wouldn’t matter. How bloody stupid is that
Not sure if it’s true, but I think people are more energised and more disposed to voting if they want a change, than those who are ok with the status quo.
This is just a slogan "Take no deal off the table." There is no way to take no deal off the table other to agree a deal or to cancel Brexit. I accept many on here and across the country are quite happy to do the latter and Ides' satirical analysis that wants leave backing Tories to vote through a deal that is not leave is expected however there is no way you can take "no deal" off the table in anything other than pretence and false promises unless the process ends via a deal or revocation.
There are more slogans that are carried on with public repeating them. "Cross party negotiation." This seems to be very popular amongst those that can't see the wood for the trees. How would that have changed anything? The MPs themselves disagree with each other. The parties have setup red lines countering each others policies and in some cases countering their own manifestos. It would have changed nothing because cross party or not the house is dominated by 5:1 in favour of MPs that would only (in reality) be negotiating which is the best route to remaining or at worst (in their eyes) achieving a BRINO.
Then we get on to the whole undercurrent (that will happen) of a 2nd referendum. We are in exactly the same position as we were before the last one. An establishment that are pushing for a 2nd referendum and expecting a remain victory. If we get an extension by offering a referendum to get it then is anyone talking about what will happen after if leave wins again? Because this time there is no time to decide when to trigger the 2 year article 50 process. We've already done that card. All we will have is the remainder of the few months of extension that remain and then we default to the legal position of A50.......to leave by the default of "no deal" because the time had run out.
So how does "taking no-deal off the table" work then? If Parliament decides that it can take it off the table, a 2nd referendum happens, leave wins again and the house doesn't like the "Tory" deal?
We default to a position that parliament has tried to legislate internally as illegal. Seeing as they are all lawyers (I actually typed liars genuinely by accident there, must have been thinking it, lol) surely those legal eagles can see that no matter what they make law in this country that "leaving with no deal" is the EU's legal default. If the period ends, that is what happens on their side. Our side can refuse to accept it all they want but they do not control the EU's legal process, just ours.
So all this talk of "cross party discussions" and "taking no deal off the table" are just words that mean nothing and would change nothing. We would still be left with warring parties and MPs that would vote down their opposition's ideas even if they were exact mirrors of their own and we are still left with a parliament that is not in the slightest interested in working through an actual deal. Purely working towards trying to cancel Brexit, cheered on by many on here.
I'm sure the EU are listening to all this talk of "taking no deal off the table" and thinking "stupid British" either in that "stupid British" politicians are trying to present this as something that actually means anything OR as politicians themselves thinking that the public is stupid and lapping it up...........because the whole remain side of the argument being represented by so many more than leave in the "media bubble" of commentariat, actual media, politicians, head of unions, lobbies etc has ended up with us hearing all day long about "taking no deal off the table."
Most likely the EU are chuckling along because politicians are politicians and ours are only doing what theirs do so they are fully sold into the "we just have to say words, doesn't mean they have to be true......or even possible."
Only the EU can take "no deal" off the table in real terms without a deal or revocation because it is the EU's A50 law that has "no deal" as a default. Our parliament can do nothing about that other than try and avoid it by meeting the requirements of the EU to avoid it.
And we all know that the abundance of lawyers in the house know this very well. They are just so used to lying and presenting the impossible as fact, fiction as fact, the lack of power they have as absolute power that they just can't help themselves. They continue on and on as if they think no-one outside of their bubble can see or hear them. Either that or they think that the whole populace is so stupid that they lap up everything as being fact, that the public are just watching seeing that they are not actually doing what their words try to present them as doing.
Everytime the news has anyone on (leave or remain) it is constant slogans, constant words that don;t mean their actual intention and constant presentation of an imaginary "listening to people" that mirrors what that commentator prefers as if they had actually been inundated with "constituent concerns."
But let them pin all their hopes on a 2nd referendum and not considering that it may well confirm the last result leaving them with zero time and most definitely a "default" that the parliament tried to pretend it could "take off the table."
My uninformed opinion is that if the next referendum was simply remain:leave then leave would win again. However parliament is going to fudge this one and make it a 3 way second preference type in which remain and no deal would beat the 3rd option of "just take the deal" but 2nd preferences of the remain side would mean that despite finishing last of the 3 "just take the deal" would end up winning.
I think it should simply be a remain:leave 2 way referendum with a 2nd question IF you put your X next to leave of Deal or no deal. This despite the reality that leave was already decided in the last referendum and thus any 2nd referendum based on the language used of "what type of deal we want" (which is bandied around by political folk that really only want to remain) should mean that the next referendum is simply options of what type of leave it is.
Last edited:
leaving everything. Simple. We control our own borders. We agree our own trade deals. We control our own laws. Yes I know that there is a lot of no UK "facts of life" that mean that our own control has to take some consideration of those outside influences but our parliament to control what happens to our laws.
So the deal that was put forward was just a deal written by the EU for supporters of staying in the EU where "language" was used in a way to present some semblance that it actually meant leaving. Maybe it could have fooled people had those high up in the EU or high up in other countries administration not been so loose lipped and smug in how they had "trapped" the UK or were going to have "us" in a strangehold forever more but at the end of the day it would still have been a deal that did not represent leaving.
If we have to meet regulations to sell into the EU etc then of course we can decide to meet those regulations..........just like non EU countries do. But it would be for us to decide what the regulations in this country are and if we want them to be even tougher. This is constantly sold as being us having to comply with the EU. No-one ever considers that we might want stuff coming into this country to have tighter regulations than the EU. It is always as if we want to reduce our standards, never that we might want to strengthen some. Maybe strengthen things to stop horsemeat coming from the EU labelled as Beef? Maybe strengthen things to stop Chinese product passing through Europe, carrying fake EU certification, and ending up in our high streets?
This is always sold as the EU being the pinnacle of standards and the UK being the naughty "spiv" that wants standards to be lowered.
I do not have a tablet (4 in the house but that's 3 kids and a wife for you.) I do not own a smartphone (see previous one on that as well.)
I only ever access the internet on a laptop
I've just added a longer one
Yes I can touchtype. Learnt it at college while on day release when I was (what is now considered by some fools as "slave labour) on YTS.
I'm assuming this is the answer to my question.
If you want "control of our borders" then you want to stop freedom of movement. So no Single Market.
"Agree our own trade deals" means no Customs Union.
"Control our own laws". That's an odd one. If we've left the single market and the customs union then what laws might apply to us? The laws that apply are pretty much all to do with trade.
So, is that an accurate rephrasing of what you want?
Vin
Last edited:
As it is Winnie the Pooh Day, May Theresa should have borrowed one of his expressions, before declaring Article 50.
“Best to know what you are looking for, before you look for it”.
“Best to know what you are looking for, before you look for it”.
That was a "rent a mob" cheering there. They looked like the worst kind of Chav football supporters.
?? Including the black lady in the green jumper clapping? Doesn't look like a chav football supporter to me.
And Rent a Mob on the BBC? Surely not, they've spent years denying it when the audiences were vehemently anti-Brexit.
What are you quoting? BBC political audiences are hand picked, theyve never said any different to my knowledge. doesnt surprise me they have seating arrangements.
Anyone that backs a no deal is a total ****ing idiot.
Why gamble with the national future?
It would be a move unprecented in political history with countless ramifications. Idiots.
Why gamble with the national future?
It would be a move unprecented in political history with countless ramifications. Idiots.
Because they are usually adherents to the likes of Boris Johnson and Farage, and readers of the Express. Even the Mail does not advocate such an extreme step.