Brexit: Uniting the Country Since 31/01/2020

[Imploding Turtle]

Only if we have a general election fairly soon. He can get what he wants without one. If a general election was to happen as it stands it looks like there will be plenty of people who vote for his party and sadly the majority of the electorate will surely be voting on the single issue of Brexit whoever they vote for.

I think it's pretty clear that Brexit isn't his endgame. He wants to be PM. He couldn't do that with UKIP because of how obviously racist they are so he started a new party and filled it with people who are more politically savvy about their racism and xenophobia so that they don't undermine his party's legitimacy quite so easily.

[Lancasterclaret]

I think it's pretty clear that Brexit isn't his endgame. He wants to be PM. He couldn't do that with UKIP because of how obviously racist they are so he started a new party and filled it with people who are more politically savvy about their racism and xenophobia so that they don't undermine his party's legitimacy quite so easily.

its a small sample admittedly, but my twitter followers who retweet stuff from the "For Britain" Party and like Tommy Robinson posts have started retweeting Brexit Party stuff, so its just a matter of time before the same issues appear.

[Imploding Turtle]

its a small sample admittedly, but my twitter followers who retweet stuff from the "For Britain" Party and like Tommy Robinson posts have started retweeting Brexit Party stuff, so its just a matter of time before the same issues appear.

Do they tend to have a string of numbers at the end of their twitter handles? like @laura95414254

[If it be your will]

.

[Lancasterclaret]

Do they tend to have a string of numbers at the end of their twitter handles? like @laura95414254

No!

Known them as Burnley fans up here for decades

[Lancasterclaret]

The correct answers to any media scrutiny of Farage would be:

1) Nigel, you're a complete and total a***, aren't you? Yes
2) Do you want to leave the EU? Yes

But it doesn't make any difference. The idea his vote would collapse after media scrutiny is wishful thinking. As taio says, a general election held now would effectively be another referendum, but one in which Farage would only need to get 30% for an overall majority.

Its not though is it?

I mean, I know you are willing to sacrifice everything you believe in to vote for him on the off chance that leads to a lexit (NOT a criticism or having a go, just what it is) but the majority want this sorting, get back to normal with as little disruption to their daily lives as possible.

Proper scrutingy will blow holes in his plans (just like they do in everyone elses plans) and people will have a choice to ignore that if they wish.

At the moment, it isn't being done, and thats not how a fair and proper democracy works.

[Erasmus]

I just watched Andrew Marr's interview with the US ambassador and it made it a lot clearer as to why Trump wants the UK to leave the EU. The way he sees the world is that there are three large and competing trade blocks, China, the EU and the US. He sees weakening both of the US's economic rivals as a positive step for the US, albeit at our expense and the expense of China and the rest of Europe.

The ambassador made it very clear that the 'very generous' trade deal that could be negotiated with the UK after leaving the EU would include allowing US food products to be imported into the UK despite differing standards of food safety and also that the NHS would be opened up to US medical and pharmaceutical companies; in other words privatisation of the NHS with US companies playing a leading role. I find this all rather troubling. I take note of 'If it be your will's left wing arguments in favour of leaving but it does seem that the absolute priority at the moment is preventing any dilution of our food standards so as to allow US imports and also avoiding the privatisation of the NHS.

From a personal point of view, my own rather indifferent support for remaining has just got a lot firmer. We have to avoid moving from EU influence into the US sphere of control. 'Independence' in the 1950s sense is long gone given the unstoppable trend towards economic globalisation and we have to choose where we want to be. To my mind alliance with the EU is infinitely preferable to being absorbed into the US block.

[GodIsADeeJay81]

A fair and proper democracy would enact the democratic vote to leave Europe.

Yes the majority on both sides want it sorting with minimal disruption, the same disruption that's been caused by Remain since they lost the vote coincidentally.

[GodIsADeeJay81]

So when negotiating a trade deal with the US you're already assuming we will roll over and accept lower standards?
As for the NHS, privatisation of parts of it was a goal of Labour under Blair, not just the Tories.

[taio]

So when negotiating a trade deal with the US you're already assuming we will roll over and accept lower standards?
As for the NHS, privatisation of parts of it was a goal of Labour under Blair, not just the Tories.

The US Ambassador said he expected the UK wouldn't have to adopt US's food and agricultural standards.

He didn't specifically refer to NHS - Marr did. He just said all aspects of an economy would have to be included in any negotiation about a trade deal with the US.

[If it be your will]

.

[nil_desperandum]

So when negotiating a trade deal with the US you're already assuming we will roll over and accept lower standards?
.

So if we leave the EU with no trade deal, how strong do you think our negotiating hand would be?
Answer: A lot weaker than in our current attempt to wear down the EU, and that hasn't exactly gone well.

[AndyClaret]

Prove it.

Prove we have.

[AndyClaret]

I think it's pretty clear that Brexit isn't his endgame. He wants to be PM. He couldn't do that with UKIP because of how obviously racist they are so he started a new party and filled it with people who are more politically savvy about their racism and xenophobia so that they don't undermine his party's legitimacy quite so easily.

Brexit party had more ethnic MEP'S than any other EU party, but yeah, racism or something.

[AndyClaret]

This just about sums things up....

https://twitter.com/alexwickham/status/ ... 19232?s=19" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[GodIsADeeJay81]

So if we leave the EU with no trade deal, how strong do you think our negotiating hand would be?
Answer: A lot weaker than in our current attempt to wear down the EU, and that hasn't exactly gone well.

Alternative view -
If we lower our standards on items we will be potentially looking at to import, we run the risk of lowering the standard of items to export and that would risk any deals we would want to have with the EU.

Just a thought.

[Devils_Advocate]

This just about sums things up....

https://twitter.com/alexwickham/status/ ... 19232?s=19" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

By this do you mean right wing Brexiteer makes something up and his idiot followers swallow it up and triumphantly repeat it as fact because it is what they want to hear? If so then yes Andy you are spot on for once

[AndyClaret]

By this do you mean right wing Brexiteer makes something up and his idiot followers swallow it up and triumphantly repeat it as fact because it is what they want to hear? If so then yes Andy you are spot on for once

Nope I mean if a remainer suggests the exact same as a brexiteer, the remainstream media react very differently.

[RingoMcCartney]

By this do you mean right wing Brexiteer makes something up and his idiot followers swallow it up and triumphantly repeat it as fact because it is what they want to hear? If so then yes Andy you are spot on for once

By this do you mean far left wing Remoaner makes something up and his idiot followers swallow it up and triumphantly repeat it as fact because it is what they want to hear? If so then yes devil's aardvark you are spot on for once.

Mr Kettle may I introduce you to Mr Pot.

[Erasmus]

To GodIsaDeeJay 81. In the event of a no-deal Brexit we may not want to accept the lower US food standards, but we will be isolated in the world and will be in a weak position when negotiating with the US. By that I mean that we will need the trade deal much more than the US does. It was made pretty clear that from the US side accepting imports of US food at a lower standard would be an essential part of any deal and I fear we wouldn't be in a strong enough position to resist that pressure.

As for the NHS, a couple of points. The limited degree of privatisation that has taken place under both Conservative and Labour governments is not what the US is looking for. They want the entire service to be opened up to US health companies. Secondly, the privatisation that has so far taken place has been entirely under the control of the British government which knows it cannot push the trend too far because of hostility from the electorate. Under the terms of a US trade deal those limitations would be partially set by US negotiators and again it would be hard for us to resist those demands from the weakened position we would be in.

I find all this deeply disturbing as the US influence would undoubtedly be far more pernicious than any of the limited controls the EU has over our economy.

[Damo]

Its not though is it?

I mean, I know you are willing to sacrifice everything you believe in to vote for him on the off chance that leads to a lexit (NOT a criticism or having a go, just what it is) but the majority want this sorting, get back to normal with as little disruption to their daily lives as possible.

Proper scrutingy will blow holes in his plans (just like they do in everyone elses plans) and people will have a choice to ignore that if they wish.

At the moment, it isn't being done, and thats not how a fair and proper democracy works.

I'll tell you how a fair and proper democracy works.
People vote for the things they want to see happen. When the things they voted to happen dont happen, then they vote for the people who refused to make it happen out of power.
They then vote for someone who they think will make happen, what they want to happen.
Check the latest polls. You are seeing democracy in action

[Devils_Advocate]

By this do you mean far left wing Remoaner makes something up and his idiot followers swallow it up and triumphantly repeat it as fact because it is what they want to hear? If so then yes devil's aardvark you are spot on for once.

Mr Kettle may I introduce you to Mr Pot.

Burnley Ace summed you up so i've nothing more to add

I was going to stay out of this as there are enough people pointing out your ignorance. I can’t be bothered to reiterate the facts, you are just boring now.

[RingoMcCartney]

I'll tell you how a fair and proper democracy works.
People vote for the things they want to see happen. When the things they voted to happen dont happen, then they vote for the people who refused to make it happen out of power.
They then vote for someone who they think will make happen, what they want to happen.
Check the latest polls. You are seeing democracy in action

Message, from The People who believe democracy is only democracy when it's implemented, to the MPs conspiring to thwart it.






" IF WE DO NOT LEAVE .









YOU WILL. "

[aggi]

This is my worry: everyone backing the 2nd ref is remain, and they assume they will win. However, it will only happen IMO if no-deal is on the ballot (perhaps as a 'negotiate a deal and, if that fails, leave with no deal' option) because reluctant MPs will only back it if they can sell it to their constituents.

Soft Brexit would make everyone happy, which would mean it is the definition of a compromise. I think that ship has sailed though.

I'd agree that a soft Brexit would have been the best plan. Unfortunately no account was made of the closeness of the result and May, I assume mainly to pander to the ERG and try and keep the party together, went straight for red lines which could only lead to a hard Brexit.

This has resulted in the polarised positions we have now and the chances of a compromise receding in the distance.

We could have left the EU by now but those who are most responsible for us still being in are those who want to leave most which is a bit ironic.

[RingoMcCartney]

Burnley Ace summed you up so i've nothing more to add

Full length mirror phobic....

[Erasmus]

These problems have arisen not because of a rejection of democracy but because of the inherent tension between the two forms of democracy that are in play. We are normally a representative, parliamentary democracy, but in this case politicians opted for a referendum form of democracy and the two forms can be very difficult to reconcile. The rather unpalatable truth is that this change of democracy was enacted for narrow party political ends rather than for the good of the country.

The referendum democracy gave us a broad verdict whilst the detailed enactment has been left up to the parliamentary democracy. So it's not that there is a rejection of democracy on anyone's part, but it is a real struggle when these two forms of democracy are in tension with each other, which is why referendums are not a good idea in a representative democracy.

[Imploding Turtle]

Prove we have.

I don't need to, all I need to do is prove that there's a significant chance that we have, which i have already done. But you're the one making definitive statements so you should be able to demonstrate their accuracy. But you can't, because you're full of ****, and you don't mind if we leave the EU against the will of the people because your claims to respect what the people want is just another one of your lies.

[Imploding Turtle]

I'll tell you how a fair and proper democracy works.
People vote for the things they want to see happen. When the things they voted to happen dont happen, then they vote for the people who refused to make it happen out of power.
They then vote for someone who they think will make happen, what they want to happen.
Check the latest polls. You are seeing democracy in action

Have you lot settled on what the referendum result meant yet? It's been three years and you're all still not decided on whether the campaign that promised we'd get a deal if we leave, and convinced millions of voters to vote Leave on that basis, wanted us to leave with a deal or not.

If the only way we can leave is with no deal then we should have another referendum because Leaving with no deal is not what was campaigned for by the leave campaigns. If we can't have a deal then we should ask the public again, "do you want to remain in the EU or do you want to leave without a deal?" And the very next day the result can be implemented.

[GodIsADeeJay81]

To GodIsaDeeJay 81. In the event of a no-deal Brexit we may not want to accept the lower US food standards, but we will be isolated in the world and will be in a weak position when negotiating with the US. By that I mean that we will need the trade deal much more than the US does. It was made pretty clear that from the US side accepting imports of US food at a lower standard would be an essential part of any deal and I fear we wouldn't be in a strong enough position to resist that pressure.

As for the NHS, a couple of points. The limited degree of privatisation that has taken place under both Conservative and Labour governments is not what the US is looking for. They want the entire service to be opened up to US health companies. Secondly, the privatisation that has so far taken place has been entirely under the control of the British government which knows it cannot push the trend too far because of hostility from the electorate. Under the terms of a US trade deal those limitations would be partially set by US negotiators and again it would be hard for us to resist those demands from the weakened position we would be in.

I find all this deeply disturbing as the US influence would undoubtedly be far more pernicious than any of the limited controls the EU has over our economy.

Whichever party is in charge will make the choice i suppose to lower standards of goods in and have to deal with any fall out from businesses that could raise an objection to having higher standards for their exports.

We can be as strong as we want to be in regards to negotiations, although admittedly we have been fairly weak with the EU

[Mala591]

Our politicians have rejected May's deal but the public haven't. So the obvious referendum CLARIFICATION vote should be:

1. Leave the EU with May's deal/withdrawal agreement
2. Leave the EU without a deal on WTO trading terms

I suspect May's deal would win and we could move forward with democracy still intact.

[Imploding Turtle]

...

We can be as strong as we want to be in regards to negotiations, although admittedly we have been fairly weak with the EU

******* hell. 3 years and people still think we can pick our own strength. How ******* stupid is this country?

[JohnMcGreal]

Whichever party is in charge will make the choice i suppose to lower standards of goods in and have to deal with any fall out from businesses that could raise an objection to having higher standards for their exports.

We can be as strong as we want to be in regards to negotiations, although admittedly we have been fairly weak with the EU

There won't be any choice to make. If we want a trade deal with the U.S. lowering food standards and opening up our public services will be the costs.

One of the main reasons we're in such an almighty mess is because too many people have absolutely no understanding of our size, power and place in the world.

This 'we can be as strong as we want to be' is complete guff. We will get taken to the cleaners in any negotiation with a more powerful nation. We will be significantly weaker outside of the EU. No amount of positive thinking and Brit spirit will change that.

[Imploding Turtle]

Our politicians have rejected May's deal but the public haven't. So the obvious referendum CLARIFICATION vote should be:

1. Leave the EU with May's deal/withdrawal agreement
2. Leave the EU without a deal on WTO trading terms

I suspect May's deal would win and we could move forward with democracy still intact.

utterly desperate to avoid having Remain as an option and you're willing to throw out democracy to do it.

Let's imagine leaving with no deal wins your hypothetical referendum. What then for people who voted to leave in 2016 on the expectation that a deal would be reached, but would have voted for Remain if they had known that their Leave vote meant we will leave without a deal?

Your suggestion is even less democratic than just revoking article 50 because you're deliberately ignoring the fact that there will be a lot of people who only voted to leave in the first place because they were promised there would be a deal.

All this does is prove to me that you're not remotely interested in the will of the people being enacted. You're willing to risk going against ti to get what you want.

[taio]

utterly desperate to avoid having Remain as an option and you're willing to throw out democracy to do it.

Let's imagine leaving with no deal wins your hypothetical referendum. What then for people who voted to leave in 2016 on the expectation that a deal would be reached, but would have voted for Remain if they had known that their Leave vote meant we will leave without a deal?

Your suggestion is even less democratic than just revoking article 50 because you're deliberately ignoring the fact that there will be a lot of people who only voted to leave in the first place because they were promised there would be a deal.

All this does is prove to me that you're not remotely interested in the will of the people being enacted. You're willing to risk going against ti to get what you want.

There would be nothing more undemocratic than simply revoking A50.

[Imploding Turtle]

There would be nothing more undemocratic than simply revoking A50.

Of course there would. The Leave campaign campaigned on Leaving with a deal. If no such deal is possible then the result cannot be carried out. You can't just change what the campaign was about just because what it was about cannot be delivered.

The Leave campaign promised there'd be a deal. They cannot deliver on that promise, therefore their campaign is democratically invalid and so is the result.

[Damo]

Have you lot settled on what the referendum result meant yet? It's been three years and you're all still not decided on whether the campaign that promised we'd get a deal if we leave, and convinced millions of voters to vote Leave on that basis, wanted us to leave with a deal or not.

If the only way we can leave is with no deal then we should have another referendum because Leaving with no deal is not what was campaigned for by the leave campaigns. If we can't have a deal then we should ask the public again, "do you want to remain in the EU or do you want to leave without a deal?" And the very next day the result can be implemented.

https://youtu.be/9fDn0MvcHQ4" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
There you go Charlie. This is what we were told by prominent remainers before the referendum.
I know I have posted that video plenty of times before. And that you and the other hard core remainers will just ignore it, and carry on claiming that we didnt know what leave meant, but there you go

[Damo]

We dont need another referendum. We can all just vote for the Brexit party at the next GE and leave the way we want to.
Or everyone will vote Lib Dem and we can put leaving to bed.
Not sure what you think is undemocratic about that

[taio]

Of course there would. The Leave campaign campaigned on Leaving with a deal. If no such deal is possible then the result cannot be carried out. You can't just change what the campaign was about just because what it was about cannot be delivered.

The Leave campaign promised there'd be a deal. They cannot deliver on that promise, therefore their campaign is democratically invalid and so is the result.

52% voted to leave the EU. Revoking A50 to stop that happening would therefore be the most undemocratic of decisions. Lots of complexities with Brexit. This isn't one of them.

[Imploding Turtle]

And by the way, this is exactly how we handle general elections. the campaigns promise to form a government and which ever party gains the most MPs goes ahead and tries to form a government. If the cannot form a government then they cannot fulfil their promise, and so we have another general election.

The government tried to deliver brexit on the terms on which it achieved a majority vote share in 2016, but they can't do it. So it's only right that we be asked again if we want to remain or to leave without a deal. The reason the brextremists don't want that to happen is because they know they only got 52% because people who were going to vote remain were convinced to vote leave because of the campaign for a soft brexit, and they don't think that a no deal option can achieve a majority when it goes up against a remain option. And if they refuse to let us be asked again then revoking A50 is the only democratic alternative.

[Imploding Turtle]

52% voted to leave the EU. Revoking A50 to stop that happening would therefore be the most undemocratic of decisions. Lots of complexities with Brexit. This isn't one of them.

How many of those 52% voted leave instead of remain because the Leave campaign promised something that cannot be delivered? if it's more than 2% of all votes then Remain wins. And if Leave MPs won't let us measure that fact then it wouldn't be democratic to leave with no deal.

In democracy you don't get to redefine what it was you campaigned for after you win. Leave campaigned on there being a deal. That can't be delivered. Leaving with no deal would be just as undemocratic as remaining since no campaign for a no deal brexit won the referendum.

[taio]

How many of those 52% voted leave instead of remain because the Leave campaign promised something that cannot be delivered? if it's more than 2% of all votes then Remain wins. And if Leave MPs won't let us measure that fact then it wouldn't be democratic to leave with no deal.

In democracy you don't get to redefine what it was you campaigned for after you win. Leave campaigned on there being a deal. That can't be delivered. Leaving with no deal would be just as undemocratic as remaining since no campaign for a no deal brexit won the referendum.

I don't know. What I do know is that I know more people who voted Leave than Remain. Of those Leave voters I don't know a single person who voted on the basis of a soft brexit - they said then and say now that they voted to leave the EU regardless of the terms and conditions upon which the UK leaves. That's all I have to go off.

Now you're saying equally as undemocratic.

[Imploding Turtle]

I don't know. What I do know is that I know more people who voted Leave than Remain. Of those Leave voters I don't know a single person who voted on the basis of a soft brexit - they said then and say now that they voted to leave the EU regardless of the terms and conditions upon which the UK leaves. That's all I have to go off.

Now you're saying equally as undemocratic.

Why do you think the Leave campaign campaigned on getting a deal if it wasn't to persuade otherwise Remain voters into voting Leave?
Why didn't they campaign on a No Deal Brexit in the first place?

I won't wait for your answer, we both know what it is. It's because they wanted to persuade Remain voters that Leaving with a deal wouldn't be much different to Remaining.

There is absolutely no excuse for not making sure that the public wants a no deal brexit over Remaining in the EU. None at all. And if we leave with no deal after being denied that right then it will be deliberaly done to avoid carrying out what is really the will of the people and that is why it would be more undemocratic than remaining a member. All else being equal then yes, remain and leave no deal are equally undemocratic, but when you couple leaving with no deal AND refusing to check that it's what we really want, THEN it becomes may more undemocratic than remaining. It would be a deliberate and obvious subversion of democracy.

[taio]

Why do you think the Leave campaign campaigned on getting a deal if it wasn't to persuade otherwise Remain voters into voting Leave?
Why didn't they campaign on a No Deal Brexit in the first place?

I won't wait for your answer, we both know what it is. It's because they wanted to persuade Remain voters that Leaving with a deal wouldn't be much different to Remaining.

There is absolutely no excuse for not making sure that the public wants a no deal brexit over Remaining in the EU. None at all. And if we leave with no deal after being denied that right then it will be deliberaly done to avoid carrying out what is really the will of the people and that is why it would be more undemocratic than remaining a member. All else being equal then yes, remain and leave no deal are equally undemocratic, but when you couple leaving with no deal AND refusing to check that it's what we really want, THEN it becomes may more undemocratic than remaining. It would be a deliberate and obvious subversion of democracy.

I've said on here before I would prefer another referendum over no deal, although I respect the view of those who wish to avoid a second referendum at all costs. I disagree about which approach would be most undemocratic and you won't be able to change my view on that in relation to revoking A50.

[Imploding Turtle]

I've said on here before I would prefer another referendum over no deal, although I respect the view of those who wish to avoid a second referendum at all costs. I disagree about which approach would be most undemocratic and you won't be able to change my view on that in relation to revoking A50.

See how much better it is to disagree with me without being a **** about it?

[taio]

See how much better it is to disagree with me without being a **** about it?

Also I can't imagine any circumstances in which I would take advice from you on the best approach to take when disagreeing with you to avoid bickering.

[Imploding Turtle]

Also I can't imagine any circumstances in which I would take advice from you on the best approach to take when disagreeing with you to avoid bickering.

Well, that didn't last long now, did it?
Normal service resumed.

[Damo]

https://youtu.be/9fDn0MvcHQ4" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Brexit means leaving the customs union and leaving the single market.
Watch the video. The proof is all there

[Imploding Turtle]

https://youtu.be/9fDn0MvcHQ4
Brexit means leaving the customs union and leaving the single market.
Watch the video. The proof is all there

That's the Remain campaign. Why are you posting what the Remain campaign said when their campaign didn't win? The campaign that won was the one saying Remain were lying. But now you're saying Remain were right all along. lol. OK. Then let's vote again and give them the credit they deserve by voting for them.

[taio]

Well, that didn't last long now, did it?
Normal service resumed.

But you couldn't help yourself and you can't the see the hypocrisy. I actually thought it was funny - immediate thought was cricky that's more than a bit rich coming from him.

In terms of revoking A50 it will be interesting to see if any party adopts that position - if they don't it's clear why.

[Damo]

Watch the video Charlie.
Boris, gove and leadsom are on there saying the same thing in the first minute or so