:brexit: Brexit - Deal or no deal

Hmm, let’s sift through this shit…

  • Dystopian predictions
  • False accusations
  • Hints of racism
  • Needs more paragraphs. Again.
  • Semi-rousing conclusion
  • Mostly speculation and bollocks presented as fact

Seriously mate, the central argument is never going away. The majority of people in this country do not want a super-state that they cannot elect governing their lives,

You do, and fucking fair play to you. You can emigrate, which you already do for a good part of the year. If you went to Europe instead of further afield you could bask in the rules of Brussels, gently tipping your flute of champagne in the direction of that dirty island you hate so much.

See I can do speculation and bollocks too :smiley:

To be fair, better than most…

The big difference where we will never agree is that its too simple to say ‘The majority of people do not want a super-state…’’

Because there is a huge swathe of reasons for voting Brexit, including:

  1. Those that do not want to live in a superstate/sovereignty is priority over anything else (I do not believe that to be largest group)

  2. The BIG immigration issue which for many is never differentiated between, Economic migration (non-EU), commonwealth heritage, EU freedom of movement, asylum seekers, refugees… all conveniently bundled by many Brexit campaigners as they know it was a big issue, confuse and play on ignorance… scare that jobs, services would be stretch to ‘breaking point’

  3. Racist and bigoted wankers

  4. Ignorant folks who believed the red bus slogan (Symbolic of those who did not even see it was the wrong amount, let alone utter bollocks)

  5. 10 years of austerity and desperation to ‘try something new’ - blaming EU for UK austerity

  6. Daily Mail readers

So we will not agree, as you refuse to accept that the above matters - that the REASONS behind the vote do actually matter, which is almost zealot like, in the belief that if you keep pumping out the 'majority dont want a superstate and Brussels blah blah, it will make it true…

When we see the economic carnage and the ‘people’ see that we are not heading towards the economic miracle that was promised now we have our ‘freedom’, they will turn as quickly as they did listening to utter shite spouted by Farage, Gove, Rees-cunt and Fuckwit Boris…

Problem with your version of democracy is that this will be met with ‘‘tough shit - we had EU for 40 years, now it our turn… na na nana na… campaign to rejoin and hold another ref in 30 years’’ (and fuck the poor and worse off who will ultimately suffer most - but that is obviously ‘removers’ fault for not getting with program of shit’)

Why not?

There was a public vote, in which the majority of people said precisely that.

You and your latter day Remainer useful idiots have got no place calling anyone ignorant.

You got Boris elected, remember.

Hang on, didn’t you campaign for Corbyn for years?

Yes, but I left as soon as the EU U-Turn was adopted as policy. Corbyn had his issues, but he did a lot better when promising to uphold the result than when he allowed Keir Starmer and pals to stick two fingers up to 17.4m voters.

I will always blame the sore losers, assorted Quislings and in particular, Starmer and Hillary Benn, for utterly wrecking Labour’s chances and almost destroying Parliamentary democracy.

The Remainer Parliament was in many senses, a reflection of the “we know best” attitude that unbelievably, still permeates here.

Whilst hindsight is a wonderful thing, if May had gone straight to Parliament and said “OK, what type of Brexit do you want me to negotiate?” she would have got a big green light to negotiate the softest of soft brexit’s and it would all be sorted now. This hard brexit wank only came about after the Flagshaggers and Spitfire Lickers had time to stoke their fires and harden their stance towards Brussels being the purveyor of all ills. That, and the fact she fucked up pretty much everything she touched and let the robbers and stabbers in the back door.

3 Likes

I fundamentally disagree.

The question on the ballot was clear, and it was always Hard Brexit.

No-one was talking about Soft Brexit before the referendum because quite frankly, few expected Leave to win.

And for the record, May was going for a Hard Brexit until she lost her majority in the 2017 election.

Hannan, Gove, Paterson, et al were all banging on about it during the campaign “No one is saying we should leave the single market” was one of their loudest chants.

Even fucking Johnson wrote in the Torygraph on 26th June 2016 that with leaving the UK would “continue to have free trade and access to the single market”, after the result and before the fuckfest started. If Cameron hadn’t been a flaky cunt or May hadn’t been a narcissist and they had cracked on with the job properly, they could have easily got MP’s to green light a soft brexit.

2 Likes

Define “access to the single market”.

I’d say we have “access” to the US market, the Chinese market. Just means the intent is still to trade with that market.

I think May wanted nothing more than a soft Bexit - her problem was than too many MPs didnt want any kind of Brexit

1 Like

Good interview with Nick Timothy on Spiked, one of May’s special advisers. The other was Fiona Hill.

According to him, and you’d think he’d know, she was going for a hard Brexit all along, saw the lack of enthusiasm among her own MPs when invoking Article 50. This is why she called the election.

That is not inconsistent with the words that May said herself in the early days.

No, go back and read the ballot question, its never mentioned ‘do you want to be part of a superstate’ if you make assumptions about the reason you have to be precise in all things…’’

A sentence that means fuck all…

In your ridiculous and frankly moronic definition of democracy maybe… but usually its the folks that vote for someone that get them elected. The same easily swung idiots who believe in the bus, or were concerned about migrants and switched to Boris to ‘get it done’ got him elected… not those sickened by him and all he stands for… so get of your high horse and engage in rational thought a opposed to indoctrinated philosophy…

Democracy. Now there’s another term you can’t credibly use anymore.

Tbf, the Labour members who got Corbyn elected, got Johnson elected.

It’s obvious they are references to the existing free trading arrangements the UK had with the EU, as part of the EU? I do not understand your point?

Of course we have access to all markets across the world, either in or out of the EU. But that doesn’t mean it’s the best, the most reliable or the most advantageous access. That’s as obvious as the hole in my arse.

Neither is a “free trade arrangement” where you have to adopt a principle of EU law being superior to your own.

1 Like

I’d disagree strongly with that assertion. Corbyn, despite being hugely unpopular with the press and the blairites in his party, was actually very popular indeed in the country. If he hadn’t been railroaded by the blairites away from his natural trajectory of offering a straightforward, no ifs/buts brexit as Johnson did, the election result could easily have been different.

1 Like

:joy::joy::joy:

You’re welcome to disagree. I venture that you are very wrong, but I respect your right to have an opinion.

1 Like

Uhm… I suspect that listening to 3/4 of all labour voters who were remainers may have had something to do with it… not all Blairites either… folks not hung up on ideological dogma, but smart enough to recognise the pros and cons of all ‘big’ political decisions. I think what many forget is you DONT have to believe in everything the EU stands for to be a remainer, just like you dont have to be a racist bigot to be a Brexiteer…