Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

You know, I’m wondering exactly which of the Brexit promises DINLT actually believes were deliverable?

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

Let the fanatics have the keys to the castle. They're welcome to it, and good luck to them. It is the logical conclusion to the decline of the Western World and our current system.

The three stages in the cycle of Democracy:

1. An informed populace who are vigilant and eager to particpate and defend their democracy having overthrown the previous corrupt system in a revolution. Voter turnout is high, the rulers mostly act fearlessly in the public good. The early years of the American Republic are a good example of this...

2. A complacent populace with a system that becomes steadily more and more corrupt. The system still functions to an extent, but gradually erodes over the years as participation drops, the leaders stop governing to the good of the nation, and entropy gradually sets in. Europe 2018 as an example.

3. A corrupt and tyrant government, that pays lip service to democratic values and the rule of law. Populace pushed to far, and revolution usually ensues.

That makes the assumption that past predicts the future. Previous revolutions people had muskets and bayonets so the balance of power between civilian and military was a lot less. The technology scales are widely different now, the assumption that a corrupt, tyrant government wouldn't just gas its own populace if it thought it might lose control is what happens - and we have a modern example.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
You know, I’m wondering exactly which of the Brexit promises DINLT actually believes were deliverable?

I had this naïve belief that an island that had made its own decisions for 1000 years, would be able to er, make it's own decisions again upon leaving the EU.

But, so incompetent are our politicians, and so intertwined are we with the EU, that we're unable to wipe our own backsides without the EU showing us how...

And please God, nobody mention the British Empire, because that's not what I'm on about here.

I just wanted Britain to be a normal, functioning non-EU nation like Japan, or New Zealand or Australia.

And again, I know that Japan makes cars and Australia sells minerals and Britain doesn't. Again, that's besides the point.

I'm happy to trade with the EU as one sovereign nation dealing with the EU bloc.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Whirlwind wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

Let the fanatics have the keys to the castle. They're welcome to it, and good luck to them. It is the logical conclusion to the decline of the Western World and our current system.

The three stages in the cycle of Democracy:

1. An informed populace who are vigilant and eager to particpate and defend their democracy having overthrown the previous corrupt system in a revolution. Voter turnout is high, the rulers mostly act fearlessly in the public good. The early years of the American Republic are a good example of this...

2. A complacent populace with a system that becomes steadily more and more corrupt. The system still functions to an extent, but gradually erodes over the years as participation drops, the leaders stop governing to the good of the nation, and entropy gradually sets in. Europe 2018 as an example.

3. A corrupt and tyrant government, that pays lip service to democratic values and the rule of law. Populace pushed to far, and revolution usually ensues.

That makes the assumption that past predicts the future. Previous revolutions people had muskets and bayonets so the balance of power between civilian and military was a lot less. The technology scales are widely different now, the assumption that a corrupt, tyrant government wouldn't just gas its own populace if it thought it might lose control is what happens - and we have a modern example.

You're forgetting velvet revolutions and Solidarity in Poland. Often, violence is not needed. If enough people peacefully refuse to engage with a state i.e fall of Communism, then the whole thing can collapse.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Da Boss wrote:
Customs Union is the only outcome that can work with the NI border as it stands.

If the UK government goes for it, the Brexiteers might challenge May for leadership of the Tories. But I honestly think they're too chicken - they don't want to have to deal with all this gak.

If it's not a Customs Union capitulation, we're getting into dangerous territory with only 4 months to go and nothing concrete on the table for the future relationship. The UK government has made a shocking mess of the Brexit negotiations, it's really shaken me to see how far a country I once thought was serious and pragmatic has fallen.

I think the negotiations could have been brought off reasonably well if May had not announced her "red lines" and sent her resignation letter right at the beginning.

This started a ticking clock which demands a resolution within two years of problems which can't be resolved within two years.

They were never going to succeed with die-hard Remainers at the wheel. The red lines are a smokescreen. The woman at the top's heart was never in it from day 1. They were always doomed to fail.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Crispy78 wrote:

Herzlos wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
My opposition to the EU needs no explanation on these pages

It really does. We know you're against it but there's so much vitriol and lack of critical though in your leave the eu at all costs stance, it's impossible to tell why you actually dislike it.

I do find it almost hilarious that you regard a 51.9% majority on a non binding referendum as being the point where democracy and common sense stop, because it's the point where you get what you want.

I believe it was Nigel Farage who said "In a 52-48 referendum this would be unfinished business by a long way."

But leave won though, so it's irrelevant.

Remain got two bites at the cherry: the referendum and then the Lib Dem's GE pitch that said vote for us and we're back in the EU.

Remain lost on both occasions.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
You know, I’m wondering exactly which of the Brexit promises DINLT actually believes were deliverable?

I had this naïve belief that an island that had made its own decisions for 1000 years, would be able to er, make it's own decisions again upon leaving the EU.

Nearer 2000 years since the Romans left. But we can make our own decisions.

But, so incompetent are our politicians, and so intertwined are we with the EU, that we're unable to wipe our own backsides without the EU showing us how...

We did warn you about that. The reason we're so intwined is because being intwined benefits us hugely.

I just wanted Britain to be a normal, functioning non-EU nation like Japan, or New Zealand or Australia.

And again, I know that Japan makes cars and Australia sells minerals and Britain doesn't. Again, that's besides the point.

I'm happy to trade with the EU as one sovereign nation dealing with the EU bloc.

But that's exactly the point; we're a service economy, not a manufacturing economy. The same trade deals as everyone else will destroy us. We also benefit hugely from being in the EU due to the seamless nature of interaction and the resource sharing.

But leave won though, so it's irrelevant.

It's very relevant. The Leave campaign regarded 48/52 as close enough to keep fighting until it won, when it became a clear mandate for the people.

Remain got two bites at the cherry: the referendum and then the Lib Dem's GE pitch that said vote for us and we're back in the EU.

Remain lost on both occasions.

Lib Dem would never have won after the betrayal of their voters in the coalition. Instead you should consider this: May called the GE to get a clear mandate to move forward, lost her parties majority and relies on a far right unionist party to support them in exchange for the fruit of the magic money tree.

If anything the referendum was inconclusive and the GE an indication that the voters aren't behind Mays Brexit.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
If we're going to complain about anti-Semitism in the Labour party, can we acknowledge the Tories are more blatant about it:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-43908496

Herzlos wrote:

If we're going to complain about anti-Semitism in the Labour party, can we acknowledge the Tories are more blatant about it:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-43908496

You'll have to comer up with a better example than that.

Theres nothing remotely antisemitic about the joke "sweating like a Jew in an attic".

Tasteless, certainly. Its very inappropriate for a candidate running for political office to make a joke about the holocaust. But anti-Semitic? How?? Its not an expression of hatred against Jews, its not an insinuation of racial inferiority, its just a humorous if tasteless analogy.

It's making light of the suffering of Jews in the holocaust. Though I'll agree it's more poor taste than anti-Semitic.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

The elites, with Remain as their useful idiots, have won...

Again!

Only one side of this debate has consistently and wilfully attacked or ignored any evidence contrary to their preconception of how Brexit would go and it wasn't remain.

All of the issues which have come up were clearly pointed out by a myriad of different groups before the referendum and then hand-waved away or outright ignored by those pushing for brexit. For example, the IOP and its equivalent bodies pointed to brexit posing a threat to the UK's science sector and, lo and behold, it has made the UK science sector less attractive as there is no guarantee of funding post-brexit. We can't even be sure of being able to continue to acquire nuclear materials, not only for research and power generation but also radioactive sources for use in medicine, due to the governments decision to leave EURATOM, for goodness sake.

Only one side of this debate has consistently and wilfully attacked or ignored any evidence contrary to their preconception of how Brexit would go and it wasn't remain.

Juncker: I want expansion into the Balkans and an EU defence force. Remain reaction: he doesn't really meant it, he has no influence, he's actually the janitor of the local school.

Macron: I want an EU defence force and Balkans expansion. Remain reaction: Sure, it will have soldiers and that, but it's not really a military their tanks and guns will be made from chocolate. And Macron is not the President of France.

Guy Verhofstadt writes in The Guardian: I want an EU defence force. Remain reaction: he used to play for the Netherlands in the 1970s. He has no influence, he doesn't mean it.

It's George Orwell from Remainers. Defence force = non military military, and expansion is really the EU contracting and rolling back its borders...

Stop it with the fake news... Verhofstadt is Belgian.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/apr/29/amber-rudd-letter-to-pm-reveals-ambitious-but-deliverable-removals-target

And the "no deportation targets" train crash keeps on rolling How much longer is Rudd going to keep on acting as the Maybots meat shield?

Apparently her resignation has been accepted.

GoatboyBeta wrote:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/apr/29/amber-rudd-letter-to-pm-reveals-ambitious-but-deliverable-removals-target

And the "no deportation targets" train crash keeps on rolling How much longer is Rudd going to keep on acting as the Maybots meat shield?

And she has gone.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43944988

Obviously she was only trying to protect the person who started the whole mess in the first place!

Edit - Ninja'd

Well that should make for some fun Monday morning headlines. I wonder how the fallout from this going to go?

I like how they still use terms like ‘misled’ when she said there weren’t targets, but wrote a letter describing setting targets. That’s just a bare faced lie surely?

GoatboyBeta wrote:
Well that should make for some fun Monday morning headlines. I wonder how the fallout from this going to go?

They'll squirm and they'll swear, and in the end they'll fill the front pages with Corbyn smears while they try and let this one quietly pass...

 reds8n wrote:

No, April 10th 1932 was a black day for Democracy.

..I know a fair few of his later films were a bit rubbish but that's a bit harsh on Omar Sharif.

Not familiar with your German elections are you?

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
...They were never going to succeed with die-hard Remainers at the wheel. The red lines are a smokescreen. The woman at the top's heart was never in it from day 1. They were always doomed to fail. ...

Hang on, who's in charge of Brexit negotiations? I believe there is a minister in charge of Brexit? David something. I'm lead to believe that he was quite positive about the whole Brexit thing. Seemed quite chipper, and assured everyone it would be a piece of piss. I also believe the foreign secretary was quite prominent in the Leave campaign, and possibly a couple of other cabinet ministers too.
But obviously Theresa May is entirely at fault for not delivering a lovely big dollop of ERG sponsored, JRM approved, full fat insanity flavoured, tell the Frogs and krauts to go whistle type of Brexit favoured by the moderates at the Express and Mail.

I'm fairly sure we mentioned something about this pre-referendum too. Should it all go to a pile of ratshit, there would be those on the leave side who will be falling over themselves to blame remainers, like they do for every fething thing. Saboteurs, Traitors, blah blah blah fething blah.

You'll be saying they'll be riots in the streets next.

Spoiler, there won't be riots in the streets over this.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
I like how they still use terms like ‘misled’ when she said there weren’t targets, but wrote a letter describing setting targets. That’s just a bare faced lie surely?

It depends, if she said it in Parliament then it's merely words which have no legal impact or basis in reality. If she said it anywhere else, then it's a bare faced lie. It's actually hard to tell now, reality seems to be quite flexible when it comes to the perception of truth and lies.
It's all about perspective.

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:I had this naïve belief that an island that had made its own decisions for 1000 years, would be able to er, make it's own decisions again upon leaving the EU.

But, so incompetent are our politicians, and so intertwined are we with the EU, that we're unable to wipe our own backsides without the EU showing us how...

And please God, nobody mention the British Empire, because that's not what I'm on about here.

I just wanted Britain to be a normal, functioning non-EU nation like Japan, or New Zealand or Australia.

And again, I know that Japan makes cars and Australia sells minerals and Britain doesn't. Again, that's besides the point.

I'm happy to trade with the EU as one sovereign nation dealing with the EU bloc.

Here it is: British Empire, and you can't ignore it. This island made its own decisions for a long time and was able to do it because it benefited hugely from having that Empire. Ignoring that and still expecting to somehow get great results while isolating oneself from the nearest neighbours just doesn't add up. All the countries you mentioned have their own circumstances that make certain parts workable and other parts bad in their own way. You constantly throw around phrases that are the equivalent of "Make Britain Great Again" and point out the positive sides of those other countries. It may work in your posts because you conveniently just ignore huge chunks of negative side effects on all sides. The reality is that the UK, as it lost its empire has modelled itself more on the US side of the economic spectrum with a slightly bigger reliance on services sector jobs (from banking to everything else).

That means there are certain dependencies that make being part of the EU a good thing and slingshotting out of the EU a really painful thing. You may have some excessively optimistic views of what the UK could do when independent but those ideas don't fully line up with the reality as it is. You may be willing to ignore all the negative side-effects but it still doesn't change the situation.

It's as if a doctor told you the good news that they don't need to amputate your finger but they'll have to take off the whole arm. Your point of view seems to just orbit around the first half of that diagnosis (and you seem very optimistic about it) while stubbornly (or wilfully?) ignoring anything after the but. I have lost count of how often people have rephrased or reframed issues they had with your arguments. At some point it's just tiring

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

I had this naïve belief that an island that had made its own decisions for 1000 years, would be able to er, make it's own decisions again upon leaving the EU.

Funny, i seem to recall that you spent MOST of that thousand years under the rule of nobles from other places, including Europe. Or did William of Orange never happen?

Herzlos wrote:

Lib Dem would never have won after the betrayal of their voters in the coalition. Instead you should consider this: May called the GE to get a clear mandate to move forward, lost her parties majority and relies on a far right unionist party to support them in exchange for the fruit of the magic money tree.

If anything the referendum was inconclusive and the GE an indication that the voters aren't behind Mays Brexit.

Exactly. It's pretty dishonest to paint the last GE as a single-issue vote and not take into account that the person who was putting his vision of Brexit to the vote lost his majority.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
You know, I’m wondering exactly which of the Brexit promises DINLT actually believes were deliverable?

I'm willing to be corrected, but it sounded as if he's not expecting any promises to be kept, and is happy with any outcome as long as we're "free of the shackles of the EU". He's essentially already admitted twice that he knows it's a disaster but wouldn't change his mind about wanting it.

From a pro-Brexit viewpoint, Rudd's departure is good news in that a prominent Remain supporter has been cast adrift. She was pushing hard for this alternative customs union bollocks.

Good riddance to her. And her handling of Windrush was a disgrace.

It was May's policy though - she should have resigned over it. She's pulling an Arlene Foster.

Herzlos wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
You know, I’m wondering exactly which of the Brexit promises DINLT actually believes were deliverable?

I'm willing to be correct, but it sounded as if he's not expecting any promises to be kept, and is happy with any outcome as long as we're "free of the shackles of the EU". He's essentially already admitted twice that he knows it's a disaster but wouldn't change his vote.

I admit to nothing. Brexit can, should, and will be a success. We're operating with one hand tied behind our backs because of Tory incompetence.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

jouso wrote:

Herzlos wrote:

Lib Dem would never have won after the betrayal of their voters in the coalition. Instead you should consider this: May called the GE to get a clear mandate to move forward, lost her parties majority and relies on a far right unionist party to support them in exchange for the fruit of the magic money tree.

If anything the referendum was inconclusive and the GE an indication that the voters aren't behind Mays Brexit.

Exactly. It's pretty dishonest to paint the last GE as a single-issue vote and not take into account that the person who was putting his vision of Brexit to the vote lost his majority.

It's not dishonest.

We've had single issue votes in UK political history. Sein Finn in 1918 being a prime example.

The Lib Dems did nothing but bang on about the EU at the last election. I should know because I watched their manifesto launch. That's the sacrifices I make.

It can be summed up as thus: Brexit. EU. Brexit. EU. Brexit. EU.

I'm not going to be lectured by people who probably didn't even watch or read a fraction of Lib Dem campaign material.

I know what I read and witnessed, and people who didn't even follow it are trying to convince me otherwise?

Pah.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Mario wrote:

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:I had this naïve belief that an island that had made its own decisions for 1000 years, would be able to er, make it's own decisions again upon leaving the EU.

But, so incompetent are our politicians, and so intertwined are we with the EU, that we're unable to wipe our own backsides without the EU showing us how...

And please God, nobody mention the British Empire, because that's not what I'm on about here.

I just wanted Britain to be a normal, functioning non-EU nation like Japan, or New Zealand or Australia.

And again, I know that Japan makes cars and Australia sells minerals and Britain doesn't. Again, that's besides the point.

I'm happy to trade with the EU as one sovereign nation dealing with the EU bloc.

Here it is: British Empire, and you can't ignore it. This island made its own decisions for a long time and was able to do it because it benefited hugely from having that Empire. Ignoring that and still expecting to somehow get great results while isolating oneself from the nearest neighbours just doesn't add up. All the countries you mentioned have their own circumstances that make certain parts workable and other parts bad in their own way. You constantly throw around phrases that are the equivalent of "Make Britain Great Again" and point out the positive sides of those other countries. It may work in your posts because you conveniently just ignore huge chunks of negative side effects on all sides. The reality is that the UK, as it lost its empire has modelled itself more on the US side of the economic spectrum with a slightly bigger reliance on services sector jobs (from banking to everything else).

That means there are certain dependencies that make being part of the EU a good thing and slingshotting out of the EU a really painful thing. You may have some excessively optimistic views of what the UK could do when independent but those ideas don't fully line up with the reality as it is. You may be willing to ignore all the negative side-effects but it still doesn't change the situation.

It's as if a doctor told you the good news that they don't need to amputate your finger but they'll have to take off the whole arm. Your point of view seems to just orbit around the first half of that diagnosis (and you seem very optimistic about it) while stubbornly (or wilfully?) ignoring anything after the but. I have lost count of how often people have rephrased or reframed issues they had with your arguments. At some point it's just tiring

There was no British Empire in the 1000s, 1100s, 1200s, 1300s, 1400s, 1500s, 1600s. Britain didn't exist until 1707.

You may have some excessively optimistic views of what the UK could do when independent but those ideas don't fully line up with the reality as it is. You may be willing to ignore all the negative side-effects but it still doesn't change the situation.

If it wasn't for people like me willing to take a risk, we'd still be living in caves and banging rocks together, whilst discussing the latest migration paths of mammoths.

Human history is full of people taking risks. That's why were talking about sending people to Mars, rather than trembling in our caves.

Yet UKIP's vote collapsed entirely.

Democracy is a strange thing.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:


I admit to nothing. Brexit can, should, and will be a success. We're operating with one hand tied behind our backs because of Tory incompetence.

So the politicians we have trying to do the thing are incompetent but you refuse to admit that the resulting thing is a disaster. At this point you're really coming across as someone standing on the bow of the Titanic yelling that eveything is fine and it'll be great over the screams of people jumping into the Atlantic.

It's not dishonest.

We've had single issue votes in UK political history. Sein Finn in 1918 being a prime example.

The Lib Dems did nothing but bang on about the EU at the last election. I should know because I watched their manifesto launch. That's the sacrifices I make.

It can be summed up as thus: Brexit. EU. Brexit. EU. Brexit. EU.

I'm not going to be lectured by people who probably didn't even watch or read a fraction of Lib Dem campaign material.

I know what I read and witnessed, and people who didn't even follow it are trying to convince me otherwise?

Pah.

Whether or not the Lib Dems ran on a single issue changes nothing. One party running on one issue doesn't make a general election in which multiple parties were running a single issue vote. If that were the case there should never have been a referendum as ukip never won a GE and so obviously the public didn't want to leave the EU.

 r_squared wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
...They were never going to succeed with die-hard Remainers at the wheel. The red lines are a smokescreen. The woman at the top's heart was never in it from day 1. They were always doomed to fail. ...

Hang on, who's in charge of Brexit negotiations? I believe there is a minister in charge of Brexit? David something. I'm lead to believe that he was quite positive about the whole Brexit thing. Seemed quite chipper, and assured everyone it would be a piece of piss. I also believe the foreign secretary was quite prominent in the Leave campaign, and possibly a couple of other cabinet ministers too.
But obviously Theresa May is entirely at fault for not delivering a lovely big dollop of ERG sponsored, JRM approved, full fat insanity flavoured, tell the Frogs and krauts to go whistle type of Brexit favoured by the moderates at the Express and Mail.

I'm fairly sure we mentioned something about this pre-referendum too. Should it all go to a pile of ratshit, there would be those on the leave side who will be falling over themselves to blame remainers, like they do for every fething thing. Saboteurs, Traitors, blah blah blah fething blah.

You'll be saying they'll be riots in the streets next.

Spoiler, there won't be riots in the streets over this.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
I like how they still use terms like ‘misled’ when she said there weren’t targets, but wrote a letter describing setting targets. That’s just a bare faced lie surely?

It depends, if she said it in Parliament then it's merely words which have no legal impact or basis in reality. If she said it anywhere else, then it's a bare faced lie. It's actually hard to tell now, reality seems to be quite flexible when it comes to the perception of truth and lies.
It's all about perspective.

Davis has been side-lined by Olly Robbins, top civil servant, and arch Remainer, and all done with the blessing of the Prime Minister.

It's hard to be a minister for Brexit when your fighting with one hand tied behind your back.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:


If it wasn't for people like me willing to take a risk, we'd still be living in caves and banging rocks together, whilst discussing the latest migration paths of mammoths.

Human history is full of people taking risks. That's why were talking about sending people to Mars, rather than trembling in our caves.

Just stop. Great visionaries care about details, something you have admitted time and again you know nothing about.

The people who pushed for leaving the caves would have recognised the seasons, giving them the most time to get established before the next winter. They would have charted out the best location to move to, how long it would take to get set up, what supplies were needed to get there etc.

You have never even given the slightest bit of thought as to the details, only sweeping generalised statements that are absolutely meaningless.

The people discussing sending people to Mars as a serious effort are not like you. They will sit for years going over every detail before taking the first step because that is the kind of planning and forethought required to make great things happen.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:


I admit to nothing. Brexit can, should, and will be a success. We're operating with one hand tied behind our backs because of Tory incompetence.

So the politicians we have trying to do the thing are incompetent but you refuse to admit that the resulting thing is a disaster. At this point you're really coming across as someone standing on the bow of the Titanic yelling that eveything is fine and it'll be great over the screams of people jumping into the Atlantic.

It's not dishonest.

We've had single issue votes in UK political history. Sein Finn in 1918 being a prime example.

The Lib Dems did nothing but bang on about the EU at the last election. I should know because I watched their manifesto launch. That's the sacrifices I make.

It can be summed up as thus: Brexit. EU. Brexit. EU. Brexit. EU.

I'm not going to be lectured by people who probably didn't even watch or read a fraction of Lib Dem campaign material.

I know what I read and witnessed, and people who didn't even follow it are trying to convince me otherwise?

Pah.

Whether or not the Lib Dems ran on a single issue changes nothing. One party running on one issue doesn't make a general election in which multiple parties were running a single issue vote. If that were the case there should never have been a referendum as ukip never won a GE and so obviously the public didn't want to leave the EU.

Well, if we're using the Titanic analogy, then Remainers are refusing to board a perfectly good lifeboat because they don't like the colour.

There is no, and will never be, a Brexit that will ever satisfy Remain voters, because obviously they don't want to leave.

Even if May had a 200 seat majority, the DUP sidelined, and Barnier on his knees promising that the EU would pay Britain 100 billion a year for 100 years

it wouldn't be enough. And frankly, I won't waste time trying to convince Remainers otherwise.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

Davis has been side-lined by Olly Robbins, top civil servant, and arch Remainer, and all done with the blessing of the Prime Minister.

It's hard to be a minister for Brexit when your fighting with one hand tied behind your back.

And I suppose the deep state is also running the USA with the backings of its zionist masters.

You are sounding like a full on conspiracy nutjob at this point.

Can't you see that you have built a version of brexit in your head that cannot possibly exist in the real world, so you have to place the blame for the failure onto outside forces rather than an inherent flaw in the brexit ideal? Brexit is going wrong because the prime minister wants to remain. Brexit is going wrong because the pro-brexit minister in charge of brexit has been pushed off stage by a remain supporting civil servant under the orders of the remain supporting prime minister etc.

The levels of conspiracy you're having to throw out there in order to preserve your brexit ideal is akin to die hard trumpers and their image of trump where every bad thing is a horrible smear by the liberals.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:


Well, if we're using the Titanic analogy, then Remainers are refusing to board a perfectly good lifeboat because they don't like the colour.

There is no, and will never be, a Brexit that will ever satisfy Remain voters, because obviously they don't want to leave.

Even if May had a 200 seat majority, the DUP sidelined, and Barnier on his knees promising that the EU would pay Britain 100 billion a year for 100 years

it wouldn't be enough. And frankly, I won't waste time trying to convince Remainers otherwise.

Ah, so you choose not to convince people who don't support brexit. It certainly is nothing to do with the fact that you have no evidence to support your side and are incapable of convincing anyone who isn't already a die hard brexiteer.

I'd also posit that there are no lifeboats left as they've been taken by the rich who were pushing for brexit as they are the only people who stand to gain and have the means to weather the storm and come out on top.

I think it's more to do with the fact that the vast majority of people here are so entrenched in their views, that nobody is going to convince anybody of anything.

Is there any undecided voters still here? I doubt it.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Yet UKIP's vote collapsed entirely.

Democracy is a strange thing.

If I'm being brutally honest, I've never been the same since the Berlin Wall came down. I don't think any political event in my lifetime, would come close to that.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
I think it's more to do with the fact that the vast majority of people here are so entrenched in their views, that nobody is going to convince anybody of anything.

Is there any undecided voters still here? I doubt it.

No. If there was any evidence that brexit might be good for the country, I'd consider it. But there is none. All the studies and reports, even those produced by the government pushing for brexit (the ones which existed in excruciating detail, then didn't exist, then were just outlines etc.) are just about how bad it will be. Then we'll have to try and secure trade deals with the US and other countries without those trade deals going over the idiotic red lines we set up with the EU because the hardcore brexiteers would consider an agreement to bring in more Indians (for example) a betrayal of the "control our borders" pledge of brexit. And even if that all happens, the country will still be worse off economically and those burdens will be pushed onto the people of the UK who cannot hide their income in accounts in the virgin islands like the rich brexiteers can.