Project fear aka pure political fantasy..

[RingoMcCartney]

Since you brought in the comparison, it's worth reminding you that the public gets to change its mind when it comes to electing a government. So i guess that would mean you're ok with the public changing it's mind with regards to this referendum.

So, do you support a second referendum if there's good reason to believe that the public has changed its mind? Or even simply to affirm the decision it made?

Following a General election if an opinion poll suggests a government is unpopular. There should be another general election.

Yes or no ?

[Greenmile]

Where do I imply I'd be "happy for the government to ignore the (advisory) referendum result, if doing so would have popular suppor."

Do I really have to walk you through this?

You claimed the losing party in an election can’t have any of their policies implemented (note the passive voice in that sentence -it’s important).

You clearly implied that when, for example, the Tories implemented a policy from the Lib Dem’s manifesto, that doesn’t count, because it’s just “political opportunism”.

I asked what’s the difference between that and the leave government implementing the policies of the remain campaign (ie staying in the EU) for “political opportunism”. Here was (the relevant) part of your reply :-

“The former would be proactively adopting a policy, that majority the electorate have shown they would approve. In order , one would assume, to increase its popularity.

The latter would be choosing to ignore the majority of the electorate by adopting what they have shown they would not approve. In order, inexplicably, to become less popular.”

This obviously implies that, if it was shown that the policy of remaining In the EU had the approval of the majority of the electorate, you’d be happy for them to ignore the referendum result by way of political opportunism.

[Greenmile]

"The former would be proactively adopting a policy, that majority the electorate have shown they would approve. In order , one would assume, to increase its popularity.

The latter would be choosing to ignore the majority of the electorate by adopting what they have shown they would not approve. In order, inexplicably, to become less popular."

This is not me implying I'd be happy, or disappointed, for that matter. This is me explaining what difference between the 2 scenarios you set out.

It's the 2 different actions of a government behaving diffently in 2 separate scenarios.

Again where do I imply my approval or disapproval of either course of action of the government?

In which case, you still haven’t answered my original question. Do you want another go?

[UpTheBeehole]

Done him like a kipper Greenmile.

The fool will just come back with something childish, because his pitiful intellect doesn't stretch to reading and understanding words.

[Greenmile]

To be honest, I’m not confident he will understand my reference to the passive voice, but he has the entire internet at his disposal, so I’m not willing to dumb down that much for him.

[Greenmile]

Cat got ya tongue, Ringo?

[RingoMcCartney]

Do I really have to walk you through this?

You claimed the losing party in an election can’t have any of their policies implemented (note the passive voice in that sentence -it’s important).

You clearly implied that when, for example, the Tories implemented a policy from the Lib Dem’s manifesto, that doesn’t count, because it’s just “political opportunism”.

I asked what’s the difference between that and the leave government implementing the policies of the remain campaign (ie staying in the EU) for “political opportunism”. Here was (the relevant) part of your reply :-

“The former would be proactively adopting a policy, that majority the electorate have shown they would approve. In order , one would assume, to increase its popularity.

The latter would be choosing to ignore the majority of the electorate by adopting what they have shown they would not approve. In order, inexplicably, to become less popular.”

This obviously implies that, if it was shown that the policy of remaining In the EU had the approval of the majority of the electorate, you’d be happy for them to ignore the referendum result by way of political opportunism.

If you aren't able to comprehend my answer. That is not an issue for me it's an issue for you.

So yes I'll try , for your benefit, again.

You asked what the difference would be. I explained-


The former would be proactively adopting a policy, that majority the electorate have shown they would approve. In order , one would assume, to increase its popularity.

The latter would be choosing to ignore the majority of the electorate by adopting what they have shown they would not approve. In order, inexplicably, to become less popular.

Again , based on those words why do you make an assumption that I'd "be happy for them to ignore the referendum result by way of political opportunism"

Your trying frame my opinion on the government taking 2 separate courses of actions

1 to gain popularity

2 to ignore the referendum result and effectively write their own electoral suicide note.

My view, whether you imply I'd approve or disapprove , of the government's choices, is irrelevant.

Why? Because itd be 2 separate decisions made by the government.

Question. How likely do you think the 2nd scenario is happen. I.e the a British government being given a mandate via a referendum result. And setting a precedent and ignoring it?

[RingoMcCartney]

Cat got ya tongue, Ringo?

No

[RingoMcCartney]

I have to break off around 4.30. Got to pick up family then footy BTW. not excuse making just reality.

[RingoMcCartney]

Done him like a kipper Greenmile.

The fool will just come back with something childish, because his pitiful intellect doesn't stretch to reading and understanding words.

Really?

You stick to calling Burnley women scrubbers and claiming that blokes that sit in the JMU are paedos mate. That's about your level.

[Greenmile]

If you aren't able to comprehend my answer. That is not an issue for me it's an issue for you.

So yes I'll try , for your benefit, again.

You asked what the difference would be. I explained-


The former would be proactively adopting a policy, that majority the electorate have shown they would approve. In order , one would assume, to increase its popularity.

The latter would be choosing to ignore the majority of the electorate by adopting what they have shown they would not approve. In order, inexplicably, to become less popular.

Again , based on those words why do you make an assumption that I'd "be happy for them to ignore the referendum result by way of political opportunism"

Your trying frame my opinion on the government taking 2 separate courses of actions

1 to gain popularity

2 to ignore the referendum result and effectively write their own electoral suicide note.

My view, whether you imply I'd approve or disapprove , of the government's choices, is irrelevant.

Why? Because itd be 2 separate decisions made by the government.

Question. How likely do you think the 2nd scenario is happen. I.e the a British government being given a mandate via a referendum result. And setting a precedent and ignoring it?

That wasn’t what I asked though, was it? Here’s my original post (with the childish bits removed)...

So if the (leave) government enacted the policies of the remain side (ie remaining in the eu), that would just be political opportunism and therefore ok in your mind, as long as that policy wasn’t enacted by the losing (remain) side?

Now if you’d care to answer the question I asked instead of the one you imagined, I’ll be happy to wait until you’re back for an answer.

I see you’ve asked a question of me, so I’ll answer it (see how this works?).

I think it’s very unlikely that the government will ignore the results of a referendum and remain in the EU, although the optimist in me still thinks there might just be a second referendum, and if there was I would be very confident that remain would win (based, in part, on the number of obvious brexiters I’ve seen saying stuff like “I voted remain but...” and then parroting a load of brexiter talking points).

To be clear though, i don’t think that will happen and my question was largely hypothetical (which isn’t an excuse to not answer it, before you start down that road).

[RingoMcCartney]

That wasn’t what I asked though, was it? Here’s my original post (with the childish bits removed)...



Now if you’d care to answer the question I asked instead of the one you imagined, I’ll be happy to wait until you’re back for an answer.

I see you’ve asked a question of me, so I’ll answer it (see how this works?).

I think it’s very unlikely that the government will ignore the results of a referendum and remain in the EU, although the optimist in me still thinks there might just be a second referendum, and if there was I would be very confident that remain would win (based, in part, on the number of obvious brexiters I’ve seen saying stuff like “I voted remain but...” and then parroting a load of brexiter talking points).

To be clear though, i don’t think that will happen and my question was largely hypothetical (which isn’t an excuse to not answer it, before you start down that road).

First you asked-

What would be the difference between an elected government implementing the policies of a losing party (which you have been provided numerous examples of, and written off as “polotical opportunism”), and the leave party (ie the government) implementing the proposals of the losing remain campaign, and ignoring the results of the close, lie-based, advisory, referendum?

I then answered

Then you asked-

Your explanation implied you’d be happy for the government to ignore the (advisory) referendum result, if doing so would have popular support. That surprises me, so I’m asking you to confirm this is the case.

I pointed out I was being objective about the course of action taken by an hyperthetical government. Neither expressing approval nor disapproval

Then you asked-

So, to be clear, if it became clear that the majority of the electorate no longer want to leave the EU, you’d be happy for the government to ignore the result of the advisory referendum?

Again , I pointed out I was being objective about the course of action taken by an hyperthetical government. Neither expressing approval nor disapproval

Now your asking -

So if the (leave) government enacted the policies of the remain side (ie remaining in the eu), that would just be political opportunism and therefore ok in your mind, as long as that policy wasn’t enacted by the losing (remain) side?

Now your question assumes I approve of political opportunism. I neither approve nor disapprove of the actions of a hyperthetical government following a course of what YOU describe as "political opportunism". And you also admit is, "it’s very unlikely that the government will ignore the results of a referendum and remain in the EU, "

May I ask you why you think it's "very unlikely that the government will ignore the results of a referendum and remain in the EU,"

I'd be interested.

[Greenmile]

First you asked-

What would be the difference between an elected government implementing the policies of a losing party (which you have been provided numerous examples of, and written off as “polotical opportunism”), and the leave party (ie the government) implementing the proposals of the losing remain campaign, and ignoring the results of the close, lie-based, advisory, referendum?

Then you asked-

Your explanation implied you’d be happy for the government to ignore the (advisory) referendum result, if doing so would have popular support. That surprises me, so I’m asking you to confirm this is the case.

Then you asked-

So, to be clear, if it became clear that the majority of the electorate no longer want to leave the EU, you’d be happy for the government to ignore the result of the advisory referendum?

Now your asking

They’re pretty much the same question though, aren’t they? I’m just trying to pin you down because you’re being evasive.

[RingoMcCartney]

They’re pretty much the same question though, aren’t they? I’m just trying to pin you down because you’re being evasive.

Not being evasive.

Setting out my answer.

See above

[UpTheBeehole]

Really?

You stick to calling Burnley women scrubbers and claiming that blokes that sit in the JMU are paedos mate. That's about your level.

Let me guess, your wife's from Burnley and you sit in the JMU (surrounded by other people's children)

[RingoMcCartney]

They’re pretty much the same question though, aren’t they? I’m just trying to pin you down because you’re being evasive.

Also , your original question began with "what's the difference"
This meant my answer was likely to be objective.

If you'd have asked" what would be the benefits or advantages to a hyperthetical government following 2 certain courses of action"

I may have been likely to be subjective and have an opinion. There fore giving you the opportunity to ascertain whether I approved or disapproved of the 2 separate decisions.

Who's holding who's hand again?.......

[Greenmile]

First you asked-

What would be the difference between an elected government implementing the policies of a losing party (which you have been provided numerous examples of, and written off as “polotical opportunism”), and the leave party (ie the government) implementing the proposals of the losing remain campaign, and ignoring the results of the close, lie-based, advisory, referendum?

I then answered

Then you asked-

Your explanation implied you’d be happy for the government to ignore the (advisory) referendum result, if doing so would have popular support. That surprises me, so I’m asking you to confirm this is the case.

I pointed out I was being objective about the course of action taken by an hyperthetical government. Neither expressing approval nor disapproval

Then you asked-

So, to be clear, if it became clear that the majority of the electorate no longer want to leave the EU, you’d be happy for the government to ignore the result of the advisory referendum?

Again , I pointed out I was being objective about the course of action taken by an hyperthetical government. Neither expressing approval nor disapproval

Now your asking -

So if the (leave) government enacted the policies of the remain side (ie remaining in the eu), that would just be political opportunism and therefore ok in your mind, as long as that policy wasn’t enacted by the losing (remain) side?

Now your question assumes I approve of political opportunism. I neither approve nor disapprove of the actions of a hyperthetical government following a course of what YOU describe as "political opportunism". And you also admit is, "it’s very unlikely that the government will ignore the results of a referendum and remain in the EU, "

May I ask you why you think it's "very unlikely that the government will ignore the results of a referendum and remain in the EU,"

I'd be interested.

So does “neither expressing approval nor disapproval” mean you would feel entirely neutral about the situation, or are you being evasive (which you’ve just denied)?

I think it’s unlikely the government would ignore the results of the referendum because the Express, the Mail and folks like you would call them traitors etc, and there’s no-one in government with the balls to put country before their own careers and take that.

Fwiw, I don’t think they should ignore the referendum result myself.

Shouldn’t you have gone out by now?

[RingoMcCartney]

Let me guess, your wife's from Burnley and you sit in the JMU (surrounded by other people's children)

This stitched up like a kipper....

Not panning out that way is it ?

Another Remoaner on a premature lap of honour!

[Greenmile]

Also , your original question began with "what's the difference"
This meant my answer was likely to be objective.

If you'd have asked" what would be the benefits or advantages to a hyperthetical government following 2 certain courses of action"

I may have been likely to be subjective and have an opinion. There fore giving you the opportunity to ascertain whether I approved or disapproved of the 2 separate decisions.

Who's holding who's hand again?.......

Hi Ringo

what would be the benefits or advantages to a hyperthetical government following 2 certain courses of action?

(sic)

[RingoMcCartney]

Done him like a kipper Greenmile.

The fool will just come back with something childish, because his pitiful intellect doesn't stretch to reading and understanding words.

Your post number 15 sounds a lot like "something childish, because his pitiful intellect doesn't stretch to reading and understanding words"

Clown!

[RingoMcCartney]

Hi Ringo

what would be the benefits or advantages to a hyperthetical government following 2 certain courses of action?

(sic)

You're actually having to resort to using questions that I set, to ask me, because you can't prise what ever answer it was you wanted out of me!!!!

And I didn't have to use a passive voice!

You couldn't dumb down any more. You're at base level now!

And why no answer to my question. I asked it first. I'll ask again-

why you think it's "very unlikely that the government will ignore the results of a referendum and remain in the EU," 

I'd be interested.

[Greenmile]

I quote you directly and you say...

You couldn't dumb down any more. You're at base level now! .

I can’t help but think that you’re beating me with experience here (to coin a phrase).

I answered your question in my post 467, btw. (or post17 on this page)

Edit - you still haven’t answered my question. I’m asking you to approve or disapprove (or confirm complete disinterest) of my hypothetical government’s actions (cancelling Brexit for political opportunism).

[Greenmile]

You're actually having to resort to using questions that I set, to ask me, because you can't prise what ever answer it was you wanted out of me!!

This is 100% correct and reflects far worse on you than it does on me.

[Imploding Turtle]

Remember when the Leave campaign used certain companies to promote how secure jobs would be after Brexit?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/p ... 84126.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[ClaretMoffitt]

Remember when the Leave campaign used certain companies to promote how secure jobs would be after Brexit?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/p ... 84126.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Because the best place to get an unbiased and neutral perspective on a Brexit prospect is definitely The Independent which runs 5 anti-brexit articles every single day.

[cblantfanclub]

Ringo "Following a General election if an opinion poll suggests a government is unpopular. There should be another general election.

Yes or no ?"

Well that's kind of what happens isn't it? People query policy, check if the promises stack up and opinion polls are taken. The electorate then decide to give the government a second term or if they didn't like how the promises stacked up votes them out.
Now let me think of a similar event where huge promises were made and check if people think they stack up or not and give it the go ahead or say hang on I didn't expect this - nothing to fear is there?

By the way I didn't put on any laughing faces in that snide and condescending way you seem to love. Rather in the manner of the arrogant Julia Hartley - Brewer with her tutting and laughing dismissively on Question time.

[randomclaret2]

Oh how they laughed when they called their newspaper " The Independent "

[randomclaret2]

Thats not " kind of what happens " at all

[martin_p]

You're actually having to resort to using questions that I set, to ask me, because you can't prise what ever answer it was you wanted out of me!!!!

And I didn't have to use a passive voice!

You couldn't dumb down any more. You're at base level now!

This is Ringo’s best ever post. It’s very ‘meta’. Ringo has done the best take down of Ringo ever!

Ringo 1 (og) Ringo 0

[Imploding Turtle]

Because the best place to get an unbiased and neutral perspective on a Brexit prospect is definitely The Independent which runs 5 anti-brexit articles every single day.

^^^^ Someone who has completely missed the point.

(hint: look at the picture of the Leave propaganda, not the article)

[Imploding Turtle]

Oh how they laughed when they called their newspaper " The Independent "

It used to be excellent, and genuinely independent, until they looked at the Mail and realised there's more money to be made in yellow journalism.

[SmudgetheClaret]

I voted leave but it appears Airbus will now have to fly all BMWs ordered in Britain stripped down to 150,000 parts and rebuilt at the customers house !!! honest I promise it’s not project fear that was just before ..

[ClaretMoffitt]

It used to be excellent, and genuinely independent, until they looked at the Mail and realised there's more money to be made in yellow journalism.

All I remember it as is the paper that went from making 10 articles about Variant CJD a day to the paper that did 10 brexit articles a day.

[Imploding Turtle]

All I remember it as is the paper that went from making 10 articles about Variant CJD a day to the paper that did 10 brexit articles a day.

I gues syou didn't read it when it was good then.

The paper itself is probably still ok, but the website is a pile of shite when it comes to journalism, so i don't read the paper anymore. When i read the paper it didn't try to tell me how to think, like how tabloids do, it just told me the facts of a story and it was up to me to form my own feelings and opinions about someone.

[ClaretMoffitt]

I gues syou didn't read it when it was good then.

The paper itself is probably still ok, but the website is a pile of shite when it comes to journalism, so i don't read the paper anymore. When i read the paper it didn't try to tell me how to think, like how tabloids do, it just told me the facts of a story and it was up to me to form my own feelings and opinions about someone.

The BSE scandal was the independents go to story between 1990 and about 2005, then it moved onto foot and mouth but obviously that didn't have quite the detrimental affect mad cow disease did so they didn't persevere with that quite as long. Brexit was in 2016 so i'm guessing their high point was between 2010 and 2015, but I was at university around that time and I sure do remember the independent being a pest around then too. Bird flu perhaps?.

[RingoMcCartney]

This is Ringo’s best ever post. It’s very ‘meta’. Ringo has done the best take down of Ringo ever!

Ringo 1 (og) Ringo 0

It's called self-deprecating Marty. You should try it occasionally!

[RingoMcCartney]

Since you brought in the comparison, it's worth reminding you that the public gets to change its mind when it comes to electing a government. So i guess that would mean you're ok with the public changing it's mind with regards to this referendum.

So, do you support a second referendum if there's good reason to believe that the public has changed its mind? Or even simply to affirm the decision it made?

Following a General election if an opinion poll suggests a government is unpopular. There should be another general election.

Yes or no ?

[martin_p]

It's called self-deprecating Marty. You should try it occasionally!

Self-deprecating humour is normally aimed at yourself (it’s where the ‘self’ bit comes from you see). Your post was aimed at Greenmile. Try again!

Ringo 2 (2 og) Ringo 0

[RingoMcCartney]

Ringo "Following a General election if an opinion poll suggests a government is unpopular. There should be another general election.

Yes or no ?"

Well that's kind of what happens isn't it? People query policy, check if the promises stack up and opinion polls are taken. The electorate then decide to give the government a second term or if they didn't like how the promises stacked up votes them out.
Now let me think of a similar event where huge promises were made and check if people think they stack up or not and give it the go ahead or say hang on I didn't expect this - nothing to fear is there?

By the way I didn't put on any laughing faces in that snide and condescending way you seem to love. Rather in the manner of the arrogant Julia Hartley - Brewer with her tutting and laughing dismissively on Question time.

"Well that's kind of what happens isn't it?"

Kind of no, it doesn't. General elections come round on a 5 year cycle usually. Opinion polls come and go. The government, whether popular or otherwise, stays in place. They can fall. But not because of an opinion poll.

This is the prime minister saying there will be no second referendum.

https://youtu.be/JRowLjb0x48" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

That was the basis on which the referendum took place.

"https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/h ... 28181.html

"Mr Cameron said there would be "no second referendum" once Britain has voted. "This choice cannot be undone, if we vote to leave then we will leave," he said.

Hope that helps .

[martin_p]

"Well that's kind of what happens isn't it?"

Kind of no, it doesn't. General elections come round on a 5 year cycle usually. Opinion polls come and go. The government, whether popular or otherwise, stays in place. They can fall. But not because of an opinion poll.

This is the prime minister saying there will be no second referendum.

https://youtu.be/JRowLjb0x48" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

That was the basis on which the referendum took place.

"https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/h ... 28181.html

"Mr Cameron said there would be "no second referendum" once Britain has voted. "This choice cannot be undone, if we vote to leave then we will leave," he said.

Hope that helps .

But everything Cameron said was ‘Project Fear’ no? Or do you get to pick and choose what was ‘Project Fear’ and what was honest Dave telling it like it is?

[Imploding Turtle]

Following a General election if an opinion poll suggests a government is unpopular. There should be another general election.

Yes or no ?

I have answered your question already. Answering it again would be spamming.

[RingoMcCartney]

Self-deprecating humour is normally aimed at yourself (it’s where the ‘self’ bit comes from you see). Your post was aimed at Greenmile. Try again!

Ringo 2 (2 og) Ringo 0

Somebody been on the pop Marty!?

Read what I said you moron!

"You couldn't dumb down any more. You're at base level now! "

I.e your down to MY level!!!



You're so desperate aren't you Marty. So so desperate after such an embarrassing run. You'll jump in without thinking. Claiming that you know what somebody meant, better than they do!



Pour your self another beer and relax. There's less chance of you ballsing up yet again!

[RingoMcCartney]

I have answered your question already. Answering it again would be spamming.

If you could just point me to the said answer, I'd appreciate it. Not saying you haven't but if you could....

[martin_p]

Somebody been on the pop Marty!?

Read what I said you moron!

"You couldn't dumb down any more. You're at base level now! "

I.e your down to MY level!!!



You're so desperate aren't you Marty. So so desperate after such an embarrassing run. You'll jump in without thinking. Claiming that you know what somebody meant, better than they do!



Pour your self another beer and relax. There's less chance of you ballsing up yet again!

You see Ringo, if you’re trying to do self-deprecating humour and don’t mention yourself it’s not really self-depracating is it? Something else you don’t understand. Keep trying to dig yourself out of it though, it’s fun to watch. Think I will have another beer!

[RingoMcCartney]

But everything Cameron said was ‘Project Fear’ no? Or do you get to pick and choose what was ‘Project Fear’ and what was honest Dave telling it like it is?

Trying to make up for your clear lack of ability to spot someone self deprecating eh Marty!

Who said , "everything Cameron said was ‘Project Fear’ "

[RingoMcCartney]

You see Ringo, if you’re trying to do self-deprecating humour and don’t mention yourself it’s not really self-depracating is it? Something else you don’t understand. Keep trying to dig yourself out of it though, it’s fun to watch. Think I will have another beer!

So now you make up the rules of what constitutes self deprecation!!!! Well, you're quite clearly the better man!

( now here's the kicker Marty. The above sentence was me self deprecating. And guess what!? I didn't mention myself in order to do it!!!!!!



Hold that beer. You really really are in danger of looking extremely silly!!!

[Imploding Turtle]

If you could just point me to the said answer, I'd appreciate it. Not saying you haven't but if you could....

I've just been looking for it and it seems like i didn't reply. I typed it out and everything, i don't know why it didn't submit

Anyway, the long and short of it was that in responce to one opinion poll, no. In responce to many polls and the wider public pressuring the government to force an election, absolutely.

[martin_p]

So now you make up the rules of what constitutes self deprecation!!!! Well, you're quite clearly the better man!

( now here's the kicker Marty. The above sentence was me self deprecating. And guess what!? I didn't mention myself in order to do it!!!!!!



Hold that beer. You really really are in danger of looking extremely silly!!!

That literally makes no sense! Genius Ringo, keep going! Maybe your whole Ringo persona is just self-deprecation, no one can be that stupid naturally surely?

[RingoMcCartney]

I've just been looking for it and it seems like i didn't reply. I typed it out and everything, i don't know why it didn't submit

Anyway, the long and short of it was that in responce to one opinion poll, no. In responce to many polls and the wider public pressuring the government to force an election, absolutely.

So you didn't!?

Yes or no!?

[Imploding Turtle]

I refer you to the post you quoted.