Brexit #2

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: DMcG
Date: 10 Nov 18 - 11:31 AM

I don't agree, Nigel. The Soubry proposal for a ranked voting system does not split the leave vote- despite what some claim - but does allow a vote for leave to express the type of Brexit that is preferred.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Nov 18 - 11:54 AM

"Yet again gentlemen can I ask that you keep to the subject matter."
Ask away Rag...
You have my full compliance
Wouldn't miss Nigels explanation of how many of the Leavers now seem to be of the opinion that they were conned and how it can be [possibly democratic to crash out without consulting them again (though I doubt if one is forthcoming)
Even Cris Tarrant has to get hi competitors to say "final aswer" before the answer becomes final
Jim

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 10 Nov 18 - 12:04 PM

Don't forget the Brexiteers' Mantra Jim - "We won, get over it".
It's a real shame they don't have the faintest understanding of the UK democratic process.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 10 Nov 18 - 12:26 PM

Am I the only one who suspects that, despite his claim to be a Remainer, Baby Johnson's resignation is an attempt at further destabilising May in the hope that she will fall, and his Big Bro can be shoehorned in as PM - thus opening the door for a crash-out Hard Brexit?

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 10 Nov 18 - 02:23 PM

Bring it on!

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 10 Nov 18 - 03:41 PM

From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Nov 18 - 11:54 AM
"Yet again gentlemen can I ask that you keep to the subject matter."
Ask away Rag...
You have my full compliance
Wouldn't miss Nigels explanation of how many of the Leavers now seem to be of the opinion that they were conned and how it can be [possibly democratic to crash out without consulting them again (though I doubt if one is forthcoming)

Jim.
Would you care to explain where I have "explained that the opinion of the leavers is that they have been conned"?
This seems to be another claim of yours with no basis, used to put forward your own baseless arguments.
Either respond to what has actually been said, or leave the discussion to those who can.
I do not try to prevent you expressing your own opinion, but wish you would do so without misquoting others.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 11 Nov 18 - 03:56 AM

THe evidence is plain - even within your own party
The British people would have to be extremely stupid to see that what started as a move to keep immigrants out into something that is breaking up the UK and, according to the economist, has placed a huge question mark ofver Britain's future
I didn't say that you said that, I said that that is the present situation
Even your own party is at each other's throats on the issue
An interesting article in our 'Times' yesterday suggested that not even Mad Boris is committed to Brexit but is using it as a career move to grab May's job- an inter-party attempt at a coup

My stance is a simple one - in the circumstances iot would be totally undemocratic not to have a second referendum to confirm that the British people believe it right to leave Europe
It has been noticable here in Ireland that referenda on major issues that are repeats of previous ones have shown a marked rise in numbers voting - that has also been the case in the U.S. mid-terms
Increased involvement by the electorate is a major step towards real democracy
Brexit, Trump, Orban, Peru and the horrific swing to the extreme right has sfa to do with democracy - it is a step towards fascism
Jim Carroll
By the way, I may mistake what people say on occasion - I do not deliberately misrepresent anybody - it would be an incredibly stupid thing to do on a public forum
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 11 Nov 18 - 04:11 AM

"By the way, I may mistake what people say on occasion - I do not deliberately misrepresent anybody - it would be an incredibly stupid thing to do on a public forum"

On occasion? more like monotonous regularity. The proof is archived for all to discover.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 11 Nov 18 - 04:13 AM

Remember that the 2016 referendum was an advisory one. It was the government of the day, IE David Cameron's Tory administration, that took the decision to act on that advice and press ahead with the cataclysmic departure from the EU. Cameron knew what a disaster leaving would be but instead of staying to face the consequences he washed his hands of it. Bastard.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 11 Nov 18 - 04:40 AM

Should the government of the day or opposition ignore the wishes of the electorate they know full well what would happen to them come election time. How else to explain Corbyn and the Labour part behaviour. As has been pointed out here, had they gone against the wishes of the electorate they would have been toast.

From Labour's manifesto:

Negotiating Brexit

Labour accepts the referendum result and a Labour government will put the national interest first.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 11 Nov 18 - 05:08 AM

Jim as by your own admission you have lived in Ireland for 20 years, this means you lost your right to vote in the UK 5 years ago. As you are disenfranchised I fail to see why you insist on contributing to UK political threads. With no vote to contribute, what are your opinions worth?

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 11 Nov 18 - 05:14 AM

The party that has the majority in government has the responsibility for legislation regardless of what the opposition says. The blame for this debacle lies entirely with Cameron's administration.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 11 Nov 18 - 05:33 AM

"Labour accepts the referendum result and a Labour government will put the national interest first."

Oxymoron.

"Should the government of the day or opposition ignore the wishes of the electorate they know full well what would happen to them come election time."

So the government of the day and the opposition should get their heads together and do what's blatantly obviously in the national interest: declare that they are both opposed to brexit and ditch it forthwith.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 11 Nov 18 - 05:38 AM

"I fail to see why you insist on contributing to UK political threads. With no vote to contribute, what are your opinions worth?"
How dare anybody suggest a Brit living abroad cannot comment on what's happening in his birthplace - how narrow-mindedly 'Little-Brit' can you get?
My roots are in Britain, py political understanding was formed in Britain, my family still live there - a nephew stands to lose his job with Westland once this shit slithers under Britain's door
A state that only represents those who vote (by choice or circumstance) is as far from a democratic one as you can get

The racist nature of Brexit affects the world anyway - the Populism it let out of the bottle gavce us Trump and Orban... and the neo-fascist revolution that is now taking place

"The proof is archived for all to discover."
It most certainly is, and very reluctant to show its face, just as is the accusations of lying
I've shown you my lists, you show me yours
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 11 Nov 18 - 05:42 AM

Brexit should have been a Cross-Party endeavour right from the outset. If we have to accept 'the will of a minority of the people', it is far too important and complex an issue to be left to an incompetent and self-serving Tory government to handle.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 11 Nov 18 - 06:07 PM

Brexit should have been a Cross-Party endeavour right from the outset. If we have to accept 'the will of a minority of the people', it is far too important and complex an issue to be left to an incompetent and self-serving Tory government to handle.

Where do you get this idea of 'the will of a minority of the people'? have you been listening to Steve Shaw too much?

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 11 Nov 18 - 06:59 PM

"Where do you get this idea of 'the will of a minority of the people'? have you been listening to Steve Shaw too much?"
A moinority of the British people voted for it
If the vote was called again that would probably be no longer be the case you well know as is obvious from your refusal to respond to that fact Nigel
Jim carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 11 Nov 18 - 08:35 PM

38% of the electorate voted for brexit, Nigel. That is not just a minority of the electorate, it's a minority of the people. 62% of the electorate did not vote for brexit. With a result like that in a trade union strike ballot you and your fellow Tories would be down on us like a ton of bricks. You should listen to Steve Shaw more often, Nigel. He'll do your sums for you.

And yes I do know how democracy works. It works a million times better when we're told the truth, instead of the pack of lies we were told by both sides.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Stanron
Date: 11 Nov 18 - 09:02 PM

A smaller minority voted against it. Steve Shaw's posting is a perfect example of using statistics to tell lies.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 11 Nov 18 - 09:09 PM

Nope. Every statement in my post is completely truthful.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 12 Nov 18 - 02:11 AM

"Where do you get this idea of 'the will of a minority of the people'? have you been listening to Steve Shaw too much?"

Stop being a thick twunt, Nigs - even a nit-picking simpleton like you should be able to realise that, of a population of 64 million, with an electorate of 45 million, the 17 million who voted to plunge the country into catastrophe is a small minority of those numbers.

However you try to pretend otherwise, 47 million of the total population or, put another way, 28 million of the electorate, are being led down the road to wrack and ruin by 17 million 'Take are cuntry back', flag-waving, Nationalistic nit-wits.

Now knock off the 'thick as a plank' act.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 12 Nov 18 - 02:15 AM

"If the vote was called again that would probably be no longer be the case you well know as is obvious from your refusal to respond to that fact Nigel"

Yes Jim, and he also nit-picked the 'minority' thing, whilst refusing to comment on the real point I was making - that the entire Brexit negotiation and planning process should have been a Cross-Party endeavour.

He's a lightweight, just ignore him.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 12 Nov 18 - 03:09 AM

It boils down to this - if these people believe yjey could win a second vote they'd be breaking their necks to hold one - why wouldn't they ?
It can't possibly be more expensive than bungning the DUP to vote in their favour again
That is the regard in which they hold democracy
Jim

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: DMcG
Date: 12 Nov 18 - 04:14 AM

I think, Jim, part of the reluctance lies in this earlier post of mine:

The Soubry proposal for a ranked voting system does not split the leave vote- despite what some claim - but does allow a vote for leave to express the type of Brexit that is preferred.

As anyone who looks into it will confirm, the ranked voting system does not split the vote, if people who wanted leave were in the majority leave would win.

But - and I think this is where the problem for leave lies - the 'deal' Brexiteers would have to be explaining why the 'no deal' was such a bad idea and vice versa, which would end up with both leave groups showing why the other had problems. And those voters for leave who were content with empty 'leave means leave' rhetoric - which may be a minority of those who voted leave, who can say? - would have to take their ideas to a deeper level. Which risks some saying, "you know what? Both leave routes sound bad."

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 12 Nov 18 - 04:52 AM

"It boils down to this - if these people believe yjey could win a second vote they'd be breaking their necks to hold one - why wouldn't they ?"

Why would a brexiteer want to repeat a vote already won? What arrant nonsense!

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 12 Nov 18 - 05:08 AM

"Why would a brexiteer want to repeat a vote already won? "#
Because it was an obvious crap decision that was taken not knowing the consequences
Now those consequences are known, the vote needs to be confirmed - that is how democracy workd - a little different from populism
What is nonsensical about that ?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 12 Nov 18 - 05:25 AM

Members of my family voted for Brexit - now they know what it entails they wish they hadn't
Brexit isn't a philosophy - it's a political decision and, as such, can b reversed if it is found to be unsitable
Now we have the ludicrous position of members of the opposition and Brexiteers uniting to oppose May - this has turned into a classic political farce to rival 'The Resistible Rise of Arturo Ui'
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 12 Nov 18 - 05:55 AM

The consequences will not be known until after the event. Until then it is only conjecture, and frequently hysterical from the remainers.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 12 Nov 18 - 06:13 AM

"The consequences will not be known until after the event."
What a crass way to run a country - leap off the cliff - we won't know what happens until we hit th ground
The consequences are already being felt
Even the economists say that the damage will take at least twenty years to recover from the damage that is now being done
It was a crass narrow-minded decision taken on Xenophobic promises that will not and cannot be met
The first reactions made that obvious - the low-foreheads approaching those obviously not indigenous and asking them when they are going back to where they came from
Since then, racist incidents have spiralled upwards
It was a decision based on hate, economic and social consequences be damned
Maybe these people should be told something similar to:
"As you are disenfranchised I fail to see why you insist on contributing to UK political threads. With no vote to contribute, what are your opinions worth?"
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 12 Nov 18 - 09:19 AM

In the same interview with Der Spiegel we have from his masters voice:
Corbyn: I think a lot of people have been totally angered by the way in which their communities have been left behind. We had high Leave votes in the most left-behind areas of the country. In a lot of deprived areas, working conditions have deteriorated over the decades, protected by European legislation. Indeed, we would enhance workers' rights, where the Conservative Party wants to go in another direction of a largely deregulated economy.

Stunning doublespeak! High leave votes in the most left behind parts of the country.I wonder what that means? The industrial labour heartlands voted for out, resoundingly. Where and what are these most left behind parts? A meaningless concept unless defined.
He also says:In a lot of deprived areas, working conditions have deteriorated over the decades, protected by European legislation.
Does he realise what he said? or perhaps this is why he supports brexit, so the tories can protect working conditions with positive legislation? Where the conservative party wants to go in fact.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 12 Nov 18 - 09:37 AM

None of this addresses the fact that Brexit is now considered a disaster on all sides of the political divide
To gop ahead without a second referendum would te totally undemocratic - nearly as bad as the fact that no exit plan was devised before it was put to the people - a fundamental flaw
Sort of setting out on a long journey in strange territory without taking maps   
As you say - all bluster
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 12 Nov 18 - 11:04 AM

WHAT COSY CORNER OF the PLANET ZOG do you INHABIT ?

WHAT AREAS ARE LIKELY TO BE WORST EFFECTED BY BREXIT
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 12 Nov 18 - 11:30 AM

Of the towns you list from planet Zog:
Barnsley voted leave
Peterborough voted leave
Sunderland voted leave
Harlepool voted leave
Rotherham voted leave
Wolverhampton voted leave
Bolton voted leave
Leeds a narrow remain vote
Kingston-upon-Hull voted leave
Stoke uon Trent votd leave

Notice a pattern here.
Labour heartlands detest the EU.Perhaps tis you on planet Zog( a place you must be intimately acquainted with)
The message I would take from this is that these areas feel betrayed by the EU and your second link is but merely opinion.
I know you like to bluster through opinion as fact, a miserable trait shared by most on the left, but let us stick to facts.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 12 Nov 18 - 12:00 PM

My point exactly
The British people were conned into believing this shit on a promise that it would stop immigration - it won't
Do you think the British peole are so stupid as to vote for this shit if they'd had relised what would happen
It was sold on a racist package - nothing to do with hating Europe - try asking them to vote again and see what happens
FURTHER PROOF
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 12 Nov 18 - 12:02 PM

There are nearly one and a half million Brits living and working in Europpe - tat's how much they hate it
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 12 Nov 18 - 12:03 PM

"Why would a brexiteer want to repeat a vote already won? What arrant nonsense!"

"The People have spoken..."

And he claims that it's Remainers who don't understand the meaning of 'democracy'! Bwaaaaaaahahahaaa!

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 12 Nov 18 - 12:10 PM

Interesting article, Jim.
Did you get as far as the part which says:
Mark Hamilton, the NPCC lead for hate crime, said that the reductions in the rate of increase meant they were no longer going to require weekly updates from police forces in England, Wales and Northern Ireland.

“We have seen continued decreases in reports of hate crimes to forces and these reports have now returned to formerly seen levels for 2016. For this reason, we will return to our previous reporting procedures and will no longer be requiring weekly updates from forces,” he said.

“This doesn’t mean that hate crime is no longer a priority. We know that divisions still exist in our society and that tensions could rise again. Police forces will continue with their robust response and we will react swiftly to any future signs of tension.”


Of course, it's easy just to read the headline, and assume that the following report confirms that headline.
Just look at the headline. It proclaims a "Lasting rise in hate crime". The section I've just quoted appears to show that the rise isn't 'lasting', and anyway, all the figures quoted relate to a rise in 'reported' hate crime. It should be clear that there is not necessarily any direct correlation between the level of crime reported, and the level of the actual crime.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 12 Nov 18 - 12:32 PM

"Of course, it's easy just to read the headline, "
Go read the other headlines instead of quoting a lone voice
Hate crimes have escalated beyond belief - they have brought the Klan out on the streer=ts of Northern Ireland and ex-army Nazis are being jailed for their hate crimes in Britain
Britain supposedly fought a war against fascism and now it is rife on BRITISH STREETS
AND MORE
I've never seen scul like Robinson on the streets of Britain to this extent - have y
About time you fellers took responsibilit for your behaviour ou ?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 12 Nov 18 - 01:11 PM

I've never seen scul like Robinson on the streets of Britain to this extent - have y
About time you fellers took responsibilit for your behaviour ou ?

Care to explain yourself? preferably in english.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Raggytash
Date: 12 Nov 18 - 01:45 PM

Just a thought about the democracy of the Brexit vote.

If the public elect a Labour or a Conservative Government a few years down the line they will be given another choice and another vote will be held.

If the sitting Government has done what the people expected they may well be re-elected.

If the population decide that now, that they have more information, that the Government has not delivered what was promised they may de-select that Government.


The current situation is akin to saying you voted for a Conservative/Labour government then you are now stuck with it for perpetuity.

We now ALL have far more information than we did 30 months ago.

Democracy would indicate we should be given another choice.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 12 Nov 18 - 01:50 PM

Amen, Raggy.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 12 Nov 18 - 02:26 PM

"Care to explain yourself? preferably in english."
if you don't understand simple sentences you have no place here - go buy a book
If yhou have to rely on tipos (written in haste) you have nothing to offer
Pa-the-tic, as ever
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Nov 18 - 02:38 PM

"Steve Shaw's posting is a perfect example of using statistics to tell lies."

Another thought on this disgraceful assertion that I used statistics to tell lies. We have yet to see Stanron comment on the mantra that the leave side hurled at us for over two years that "the British people have spoken." As Stanron is so concerned that statistics should be used only honestly, I ask myself why he didn't rush to correct that assertion. As I'm ever-helpful, I'll suggest a more honest version, thus: "38% of the British people have spoken in the way Stanron wanted, whereas 62% either spoke in the way Stanron didn't want or didn't speak at all."

Now if Stanron isn't too thoroughly ashamed of his slur, perhaps he'd tell me which bit of either of my last two posts contained a lie and why he hasn't attacked that "people have spoken" pile of dishonesty. Well, as if I don't already know.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 12 Nov 18 - 02:55 PM

"Another thought on this disgraceful assertion that I used statistics to tell lies"
If you're not used to this dishonest tactic by now Steve, you never will be
I've asked our serial abuser to back up his accusations - nothing so far
They're like Billy Connolly's suggestion "If you want to confuse a policemen, ask him a question'
Works every time
Jim

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Nov 18 - 03:02 PM

I'm well used to it, Jim. After all, we're being infested by brexiteers all the time in threads like this. I'm not too keen on being called a liar by people who are really good at pulling the wool over their own eyes when every statement in my previous two posts is the unvarnished truth.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Stanron
Date: 12 Nov 18 - 03:41 PM

Wiggle as you wish, more people voted for Brexit than against. To group non voters with either side is dishonest.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 12 Nov 18 - 05:02 PM

To claim that to leave is 'the will of the people', when only a small minority of 17 million out of a total population of 65 million (which is what 'the people' actually means), is dishonest. Spin it however you wish, it won't change that fact.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 12 Nov 18 - 05:04 PM

To claim that to leave is 'the will of the people', when only a small minority of 17 million out of a total population of 65 million (which is what 'the people' actually means) expresses the wish to leave, is dishonest. Spin it however you wish, it won't change that fact.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 12 Nov 18 - 05:04 PM

The votes of a mere 38% of the electorate cannot be described as "the will of the people". It is that term that is dishonest.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Nov 18 - 05:22 PM

It's you wriggling, Stanron. You called me a liar when I typed nothing but the unvarnished truth. You get to demonstrate where you think I lied. You do not get to accuse me of wriggling. What I said was plain, straightforward and truthful. Think before you post in future and just behave yourself.