UK Politics Thread IX: The Masses Against the Classes

[Greed and Death]

The UK should leave. The second vote idea is rubbish governments should not play vote until the result the govnerment wants happen.

[Neu Leonstein]

The UK should leave. The second vote idea is rubbish governments should not play vote until the result the govnerment wants happen.

That's too simplistic. The UK government has wanted Brexit to happen since May took over after in 2016. The problem has never been lack of motivation within the government, no matter what Brexiteers outside have been moaning about.

The problem is that it has proven impossible to find a way of leaving that satisfies the promises made during the referendum campaign. The refusal to acknowledge this is the reason Brexit still hasn't happened and the government ultimately fell apart.

So now it's a matter of choosing which of the promises made during the referendum campaign to keep, and which ones to break. That's a political question, and it's not that unreasonable to ask for the voters' input into which tradeoff they ultimately prefer.

[Greater vakolicci haven]

The UK should leave. The second vote idea is rubbish governments should not play vote until the result the govnerment wants happen.

That's too simplistic. The UK government has wanted Brexit to happen since May took over after in 2016. The problem has never been lack of motivation within the government, no matter what Brexiteers outside have been moaning about.

The problem is that it has proven impossible to find a way of leaving that satisfies the promises made during the referendum campaign. The refusal to acknowledge this is the reason Brexit still hasn't happened and the government ultimately fell apart.

So now it's a matter of choosing which of the promises made during the referendum campaign to keep, and which ones to break. That's a political question, and it's not that unreasonable to ask for the voters' input into which tradeoff they ultimately prefer.

If the second referendum was between different versions of Brexit it probably wouldn't receive the same level of opposition.

[Slongs]

That's too simplistic. The UK government has wanted Brexit to happen since May took over after in 2016. The problem has never been lack of motivation within the government, no matter what Brexiteers outside have been moaning about.

The problem is that it has proven impossible to find a way of leaving that satisfies the promises made during the referendum campaign. The refusal to acknowledge this is the reason Brexit still hasn't happened and the government ultimately fell apart.

So now it's a matter of choosing which of the promises made during the referendum campaign to keep, and which ones to break. That's a political question, and it's not that unreasonable to ask for the voters' input into which tradeoff they ultimately prefer.

If the second referendum was between different versions of Brexit it probably wouldn't receive the same level of opposition.

I'm sure more people would find brexit more appealing if it was possible to get it through easier than it's been so far

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

That's too simplistic. The UK government has wanted Brexit to happen since May took over after in 2016. The problem has never been lack of motivation within the government, no matter what Brexiteers outside have been moaning about.

The problem is that it has proven impossible to find a way of leaving that satisfies the promises made during the referendum campaign. The refusal to acknowledge this is the reason Brexit still hasn't happened and the government ultimately fell apart.

So now it's a matter of choosing which of the promises made during the referendum campaign to keep, and which ones to break. That's a political question, and it's not that unreasonable to ask for the voters' input into which tradeoff they ultimately prefer.

If the second referendum was between different versions of Brexit it probably wouldn't receive the same level of opposition.

It would (rightly) receive criticism for not including a viable and well-liked option.

[Vassenor]

The UK should leave. The second vote idea is rubbish governments should not play vote until the result the govnerment wants happen.

So you only like democracy when it's in your favour?

[Neu Leonstein]

If the second referendum was between different versions of Brexit it probably wouldn't receive the same level of opposition.

The question is, and always has been, about what people want the relationship between the UK and the EU to be. Full membership is one such option, and there's a now better understood menu of alternatives to that to also choose from.

The problem is that the choice has never been presented as a fair representation of the tradeoffs. The reason I'm not convinced of a second referendum is mostly that I see no evidence that this has changed in any way. There is still no reporting with any substance in British media, and there are still no leaders in the Tory or Labour parties who are honest with the people about the choice that they're having to make.

In the first referendum people made a dumb decision because they didn't have the information they needed. In Switzerland, that'd be sufficient grounds to dismiss the whole thing.

The UK doesn't have these safeguards, so the result is what it is. The sad thing is that I don't think anything has been learned since the first time around. The second referendum campaign would still be the absence of substance and a torrent of lies. One way or the other, about half the public would feel like they were robbed or at least ignored. And the issue will ultimately remain unsettled either way.

From the EU's perspective, it really is a case of 'good riddance' now. The UK cannot be a reliable member state, or really negotiating partner, the way it will be now. That's why the EU's negotiating team has wrapped up. Barnier is shooting for higher honours, his second in command already has a new job. It's over. Now it's just a question of how long it'll take the UK to catch on.

[Vassenor]

Meanwhile Hammond has declared Boris' Brexit plan "difficult or impossible".

Plus in general we're not ready for a No Deal exit.

[Philjia]

Electoral Commission concludes Brexit Party at "high risk" of receiving illegal donations.

The Electoral Commission, which visited the party's headquarters last month, said it had made a series of recommendations to help it meet its "legal responsibilities".

If it did not comply, the regulator said it could take enforcement action.

I'm shocked, shocked, I tell you.

[Greater vakolicci haven]

If the second referendum was between different versions of Brexit it probably wouldn't receive the same level of opposition.

The question is, and always has been, about what people want the relationship between the UK and the EU to be. Full membership is one such option, and there's a now better understood menu of alternatives to that to also choose from.

The problem is that the choice has never been presented as a fair representation of the tradeoffs. The reason I'm not convinced of a second referendum is mostly that I see no evidence that this has changed in any way. There is still no reporting with any substance in British media, and there are still no leaders in the Tory or Labour parties who are honest with the people about the choice that they're having to make.

In the first referendum people made a dumb decision because they didn't have the information they needed. In Switzerland, that'd be sufficient grounds to dismiss the whole thing.

The UK doesn't have these safeguards, so the result is what it is. The sad thing is that I don't think anything has been learned since the first time around. The second referendum campaign would still be the absence of substance and a torrent of lies. One way or the other, about half the public would feel like they were robbed or at least ignored. And the issue will ultimately remain unsettled either way.

From the EU's perspective, it really is a case of 'good riddance' now. The UK cannot be a reliable member state, or really negotiating partner, the way it will be now. That's why the EU's negotiating team has wrapped up. Barnier is shooting for higher honours, his second in command already has a new job. It's over. Now it's just a question of how long it'll take the UK to catch on.

I don't think I voted in a dumb way at all. I think I voted in the way that would be best for everybody, pretty sure the vast majority of people who voted either side would agree with me that they voted in the way they thought was best.

[Ifreann]

The question is, and always has been, about what people want the relationship between the UK and the EU to be. Full membership is one such option, and there's a now better understood menu of alternatives to that to also choose from.

The problem is that the choice has never been presented as a fair representation of the tradeoffs. The reason I'm not convinced of a second referendum is mostly that I see no evidence that this has changed in any way. There is still no reporting with any substance in British media, and there are still no leaders in the Tory or Labour parties who are honest with the people about the choice that they're having to make.

In the first referendum people made a dumb decision because they didn't have the information they needed. In Switzerland, that'd be sufficient grounds to dismiss the whole thing.

The UK doesn't have these safeguards, so the result is what it is. The sad thing is that I don't think anything has been learned since the first time around. The second referendum campaign would still be the absence of substance and a torrent of lies. One way or the other, about half the public would feel like they were robbed or at least ignored. And the issue will ultimately remain unsettled either way.

From the EU's perspective, it really is a case of 'good riddance' now. The UK cannot be a reliable member state, or really negotiating partner, the way it will be now. That's why the EU's negotiating team has wrapped up. Barnier is shooting for higher honours, his second in command already has a new job. It's over. Now it's just a question of how long it'll take the UK to catch on.

I don't think I voted in a dumb way at all. I think I voted in the way that would be best for everybody, pretty sure the vast majority of people who voted either side would agree with me that they voted in the way they thought was best.

I imagine you could find a fairly substantial cohort of people who'd say that they voted for what was best for a specific subset of people(Britons), to the detriment of other people(immigrants).

[Neu Leonstein]

I don't think I voted in a dumb way at all. I think I voted in the way that would be best for everybody, pretty sure the vast majority of people who voted either side would agree with me that they voted in the way they thought was best.

No, don't take it personally, that's not what I meant. I said the decision was dumb, not the voters or the way they voted. They, like you, didn't have the information needed. The withdrawal process, the legal practicalities and the challenge of handling the GFA... all of these things, which together create the tradeoffs that Brexit is about, were basically not known by the voting public.

[Vassenor]

The question is, and always has been, about what people want the relationship between the UK and the EU to be. Full membership is one such option, and there's a now better understood menu of alternatives to that to also choose from.

The problem is that the choice has never been presented as a fair representation of the tradeoffs. The reason I'm not convinced of a second referendum is mostly that I see no evidence that this has changed in any way. There is still no reporting with any substance in British media, and there are still no leaders in the Tory or Labour parties who are honest with the people about the choice that they're having to make.

In the first referendum people made a dumb decision because they didn't have the information they needed. In Switzerland, that'd be sufficient grounds to dismiss the whole thing.

The UK doesn't have these safeguards, so the result is what it is. The sad thing is that I don't think anything has been learned since the first time around. The second referendum campaign would still be the absence of substance and a torrent of lies. One way or the other, about half the public would feel like they were robbed or at least ignored. And the issue will ultimately remain unsettled either way.

From the EU's perspective, it really is a case of 'good riddance' now. The UK cannot be a reliable member state, or really negotiating partner, the way it will be now. That's why the EU's negotiating team has wrapped up. Barnier is shooting for higher honours, his second in command already has a new job. It's over. Now it's just a question of how long it'll take the UK to catch on.

I don't think I voted in a dumb way at all. I think I voted in the way that would be best for everybody, pretty sure the vast majority of people who voted either side would agree with me that they voted in the way they thought was best.

Read: They voted the way I wanted and I don't want that taken away from me by reality.

[The Nihilistic view]

The biggest problem with a 2nd referendum has nothing to do with the EU or Brexit or Fararge. It's the prospect of a 2nd indyref. Why does anybody think the SNP are so keen? It's the back door to their own independence vote much sooner than any should be considered.

[Juristonia]

I'm sure more people would find brexit more appealing if it was possible to get it through easier than it's been so far

I mean, maybe.
So?

I'm sure I'd find jumping off a building more appealing if it was possible to do it without splattering on the pavement.
But it's not, so I don't.

[The Nihilistic view]

Also poor Rory Stewart. He seems like such a nice chap.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics ... l-leave-eu

[The Nihilistic view]

I'm sure more people would find brexit more appealing if it was possible to get it through easier than it's been so far

I mean, maybe.
So?

I'm sure I'd find jumping off a building more appealing if it was possible to do it without splattering on the pavement.
But it's not, so I don't.

Rubbish it 100% is!

Stop chatting nonsense

[Juristonia]

Rubbish it 100% is!

Stop chatting nonsense

I mean, feel free to, but I'm still gonna pass.

[Souseiseki]

The biggest problem with a 2nd referendum has nothing to do with the EU or Brexit or Fararge. It's the prospect of a 2nd indyref. Why does anybody think the SNP are so keen? It's the back door to their own independence vote much sooner than any should be considered.

if you're still supporting hard brexit at this point then you need to accept the possibility of northern ireland and scotland leaving the union as collateral. of course the SNP are going to capitalize on it as hard as they can.

[Greater vakolicci haven]

I don't think I voted in a dumb way at all. I think I voted in the way that would be best for everybody, pretty sure the vast majority of people who voted either side would agree with me that they voted in the way they thought was best.

No, don't take it personally, that's not what I meant. I said the decision was dumb, not the voters or the way they voted. They, like you, didn't have the information needed. The withdrawal process, the legal practicalities and the challenge of handling the GFA... all of these things, which together create the tradeoffs that Brexit is about, were basically not known by the voting public.

You misunderstand:

I like to be sure of what I voted for. I actually did a lot of research into the GFA when someone pointed it out to me, and still concluded to vote the way I did. I never believed any of the 'turkey will soon join the EU' nonsense, and still voted the way I did; I also had managed to go through the whole campaign without knowing anything about that bus. In addition, I knew that we would probably be liable for a large bill at the end of it, but that didn't dissuade me from the way I voted. I researched the issues and came to a judgement as to how I should vote, given all of them; I decided to vote to leave. I wasn't poorly informed.

[Souseiseki]

No, don't take it personally, that's not what I meant. I said the decision was dumb, not the voters or the way they voted. They, like you, didn't have the information needed. The withdrawal process, the legal practicalities and the challenge of handling the GFA... all of these things, which together create the tradeoffs that Brexit is about, were basically not known by the voting public.

You misunderstand:

I like to be sure of what I voted for. I actually did a lot of research into the GFA when someone pointed it out to me, and still concluded to vote the way I did. I never believed any of the 'turkey will soon join the EU' nonsense, and still voted the way I did; I also had managed to go through the whole campaign without knowing anything about that bus. In addition, I knew that we would probably be liable for a large bill at the end of it, but that didn't dissuade me from the way I voted. I researched the issues and came to a judgement as to how I should vote, given all of them; I decided to vote to leave. I wasn't poorly informed.

viewtopic.php?p=35531265#p35531265

did you ever respond to this? you're on record saying that you don't think our trading relationship will change and then supporting no deal and maximum chaos. it seems very likely that you have been tricked into the "you always wanted no deal!" narrative of the hard brexiters, that you have at some point told porkies or that you do not realize that no deal is going to change our trading relationships quite a bit.

e: or maybe you changed from "it'll be fine" to "burn it all" within a few months. i guess that also works?

[Greater vakolicci haven]

You misunderstand:

I like to be sure of what I voted for. I actually did a lot of research into the GFA when someone pointed it out to me, and still concluded to vote the way I did. I never believed any of the 'turkey will soon join the EU' nonsense, and still voted the way I did; I also had managed to go through the whole campaign without knowing anything about that bus. In addition, I knew that we would probably be liable for a large bill at the end of it, but that didn't dissuade me from the way I voted. I researched the issues and came to a judgement as to how I should vote, given all of them; I decided to vote to leave. I wasn't poorly informed.

viewtopic.php?p=35531265#p35531265

did you ever respond to this? you're on record saying that you don't think our trading relationship will change and then supporting no deal and maximum chaos. it seems very likely that you have been tricked into the "you always wanted no deal!" narrative of the hard brexiters, that you have at some point told porkies or that you do not realize that no deal is going to change our trading relationships quite a bit.

e: or maybe you changed from "it'll be fine" to "burn it all" within a few months. i guess that also works?

My 'burn it all' philosophy wasn't a thing at the time of the referendum campaign. A genuine wish for the end of the world is something that has emerged in recent months, I was a normal ukipper (minus the racism) 3 years ago.

[The Blaatschapen]

viewtopic.php?p=35531265#p35531265

did you ever respond to this? you're on record saying that you don't think our trading relationship will change and then supporting no deal and maximum chaos. it seems very likely that you have been tricked into the "you always wanted no deal!" narrative of the hard brexiters, that you have at some point told porkies or that you do not realize that no deal is going to change our trading relationships quite a bit.

e: or maybe you changed from "it'll be fine" to "burn it all" within a few months. i guess that also works?

My 'burn it all' philosophy wasn't a thing at the time of the referendum campaign. A genuine wish for the end of the world is something that has emerged in recent months, I was a normal ukipper (minus the racism) 3 years ago.

Wanting the whole world to burn is hardly worth debating

[Dumb Ideologies]

My 'burn it all' philosophy wasn't a thing at the time of the referendum campaign. A genuine wish for the end of the world is something that has emerged in recent months, I was a normal ukipper (minus the racism) 3 years ago.

Wanting the whole world to burn is hardly worth debating

But the giggling flames do so love a good argument.

[Thanatttynia]

Not seen much about Pompeo's comments on Corbyn... even as someone who does think Labour currently has an anti-semitism problem, this type of reveal of the intention to meddle in the UK's democratic process is rare from our special friend and I fear indicative of the collapse of our international power in the wake of Brexit "negotiations"

Should probably ready ourselves for more of this kind of treatment