UK Politics & Brexit Discussion

[Dr. Gonzo]

Honestly though, what an absolute shit show. Less than a year before we’re supposed to have our house in order re: Brexit and we have no clue what the deal will be AND there’s a leadership bid on the cards.

The state of the UK’s leadership is an absolute shambles.

[God is Haaland]

1 hour ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Boris Johnson has just resigned.

Did business tell him to fuck off?

[RandoEFC+]

Nobody can be surprised by this after that election result. She had some cheek thinking she was still in a position to lead the Conservative party in these negotiations and in general after that, but then again the alternative was almost certainly going to be more absolute chaos.

The best parallel universe for us is probably the one where there was never any snap election.

What an absolute shambles but this is a product of two decades (arguably more) of ineptitude from 10 Downing Street. The amount of poor leadership we've seen from both Labour and Conservative has been incredible - Blair, Brown, Miliband, May. The coalition with Nick Clegg made the Lib Dems into a laughing stock, and the most successful politician of the last 10 years at least is Nigel Farage.

I didn't like David Cameron at the time but when you look back over the prime ministers I'm old enough to remember, and the opposition leaders they've each faced, he is looking head and shoulders above the rest right now. And this is the man who promised the country a referendum to get re elected then should have done a stronger job on the Remain campaign at the time.

Glad I've escaped England at least .

[God is Haaland]

Who will resign next? Peter Bone or Rees-Mogg?

[Kowabunga]

 

[Inverted]

4 hours ago, Fairy In Boots said:

 

I reckon you’re the type that calls people gammons 😂

I reckon you're the type that it strikes a nerve with. 

[Fairy In Boots]

1 hour ago, Inverted said:

I reckon you're the type that it strikes a nerve with. 

Not at all I’m early 30’s from a single parent family raised on a notorious council estate in Central Birmingham, I’d bet good money I grew up harder than 90% of this board. I’m very much a blue collar Tory. 

[Honey Honey]

Probably all a necessary process for May. My Tory contacts have been saying that a very willing purge is going on. May will face a vote of no confidence but the numbers won't be there to actually depose her. The end result being Tory backbench rebels are left with no choice but to accept May's deal. This Tory collision has been brewing for a couple of months and must meet its end, at least in producing a workable result.

[Batard]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44772804

BoJos resignation letter. Makes interesting reading 

[Inverted]

1 hour ago, Batard said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44772804

BoJos resignation letter. Makes interesting reading 

May’s acceptance letter does also. Fairly scathing tone considering the limits of what you can say in such a letter.

[Inverted]

Just a reminder that Brexit was the result of the establishment media in England falling for the act of lying, fascistic upper-class slime like Farage.

That's all there was to it. 

[Inverted]

Greening' come out in favour of another referendum.

There's a part of me that hopes that we might actually somehow get another referendum and that the country might suddenly regain its senses briefly enough to give up on Brexit and cut our losses on this ludicrous project.

But there's just so much in the way.

May for now insists it's not happening. So either 1: she flip-flops very dramatically, or 2: she is somehow booted out in time for someone amenable to a second referendum to come in (and for now there are not many such people close to major leadership positions).

Then, we'd somehow need to set-up a referendum, which means passing the legislation required to do so, which even with a sudden swell of support for ref2 would likely take months. If there has been an election, the timescale is already virtually impossible. Even with the May flop scenario, it's still ludicrously difficult to imagine another ref being planned and completed before Brexit Day.

This means we'd need to somehow receive an extension. And I don't even know how the legal or political aspects of that would work, but I assume it'd be difficult, because everything to do with Brexit inevitably is.

Finally, assuming the Prime Minister accedes to ref2, that we somehow have or we get enough time to set-up the legal basis for a ref, and then hold it, we don't even know what the question is. Public opinion afaik is pro-ref2 but split on what that means - is it pro or anti-deal, or pro or anti-Brexit? Do we have a 3-way vote for Deal v No Deal v Remain?

If it's pro or anti-deal, does rejection mean Hard Brexit or No Brexit? What happens if in a 3-way vote there's a pro-Brexit majority split between 2 options and Remain wins?

And if it's a two way vote on Brexit itself, what happens if we've achieved all of these Herculean feats of political and legal wrangling just to have people vote for Brexit again?

And ofc all of this has been quietly assuming that were the outcome to be that we agree to give up on Brexit, that the EU would accept it, though I actually am at least confident that they would.

[RandoEFC+]

Said it a dozen times, why the public were given responsibility to decide on Leave or Remain is beyond me. Don't see the point in electing hundreds of MPs if they can't make decisions like that for the country, it's sort of their job that they're paid to do.

The Scottish referendum makes more sense because it's more about national identity (though I imagine like Brexit when you get past that and into the actual practicalities of leaving the UK you end up realising how stupid it was to make what is in reality an economical decision based on the public's feelings of emotion and identity).

Back to Brexit though, everything Remainers said (too quietly) is turning out to be true. Leaving the EU isn't as simple as it sounds, we have a weak position from which to bargain and we are getting absolutely nowhere because all Brussels have to do is sit there and make next to no compromises, the politicians have no idea what the fuck is going on and even those committed to the Leave campaign can't agree on what we should be negotiating for almost two years after the referendum. Again, when the people in Westminster have no idea how to negotiate Brexit, why was this decision handed to the public that know a fuck load less than they do (which is saying something)?

Meanwhile those who backed the Leave campaign in the hope of filling the post-referendum power vacuum out of personal interest and not because they actually think Brexit is a good idea continue to squabble over positions within the cabinet, Theresa May continues to concentrate more on shoring up key positions with people that are on her side while Boris has detached himself and looks likely to be plotting a leadership challenge from the shadows. I mean, who cares about butchering the credibility of our negotiating team by undermining the leadership again if it means Boris gets a shot at becoming PM? Then you've got Farage, Daddy Brexit himself, who seems to have swanned off into the sunset whilst occasionally popping his head back up to criticise May's approach to Brexit and further portraying the UK as a country divided (which it is).

From the start, the people managing Brexit have been in it for themselves. I think at this stage it would definitely be worth having a second referendum. You'd hope that the small margin of people needed to change their mind and vote Remain this time would have had their eyes opened by the absolute travesty that this process has been over the last two years. It wouldn't be shocking to see us still vote to Leave though given how little attention people seem to pay to what's actually going on beyond "yeah we want Snickers to be called Marathon bars again" in which case we'd deserve whatever mess we get left with when Brexit goes ahead.

TL;DR we are a fucking stupid country.

[SirBalon]

4 minutes ago, RandoEFC said:

Said it a dozen times, why the public were given responsibility to decide on Leave or Remain is beyond me. Don't see the point in electing hundreds of MPs if they can't make decisions like that for the country, it's sort of their job that they're paid to do.

The Scottish referendum makes more sense because it's more about national identity (though I imagine like Brexit when you get past that and into the actual practicalities of leaving the UK you end up realising how stupid it was to make what is in reality an economical decision based on the public's feelings of emotion and identity).

Back to Brexit though, everything Remainers said (too quietly) is turning out to be true. Leaving the EU isn't as simple as it sounds, we have a weak position from which to bargain and we are getting absolutely nowhere because all Brussels have to do is sit there and make next to no compromises, the politicians have no idea what the fuck is going on and even those committed to the Leave campaign can't agree on what we should be negotiating for almost two years after the referendum. Again, when the people in Westminster have no idea how to negotiate Brexit, why was this decision handed to the public that know a fuck load less than they do (which is saying something)?

Meanwhile those who backed the Leave campaign in the hope of filling the post-referendum power vacuum out of personal interest and not because they actually think Brexit is a good idea continue to squabble over positions within the cabinet, Theresa May continues to concentrate more on shoring up key positions with people that are on her side while Boris has detached himself and looks likely to be plotting a leadership challenge from the shadows. I mean, who cares about butchering the credibility of our negotiating team by undermining the leadership again if it means Boris gets a shot at becoming PM? Then you've got Farage, Daddy Brexit himself, who seems to have swanned off into the sunset whilst occasionally popping his head back up to criticise May's approach to Brexit and further portraying the UK as a country divided (which it is).

From the start, the people managing Brexit have been in it for themselves. I think at this stage it would definitely be worth having a second referendum. You'd hope that the small margin of people needed to change their mind and vote Remain this time would have had their eyes opened by the absolute travesty that this process has been over the last two years. It wouldn't be shocking to see us still vote to Leave though given how little attention people seem to pay to what's actually going on beyond "yeah we want Snickers to be called Marathon bars again" in which case we'd deserve whatever mess we get left with when Brexit goes ahead.

TL;DR we are a fucking stupid country.

The campaigning was a shambles too and that’s also the government and all parties fault. The thing is that it’s now totally understandable as to why the remain campaign was so crap and that’s because none of them knew what was going to happen beforehand and why we have this total mess. 

What’s curious is that the constituencies with the highest margin of leave voters are the constituencies with the lowest number of immigrants living in them.   Maybe having straight bananas and as you say, calling Snickers a Marathon bar was a principle on the whole matter. 

[RandoEFC+]

9 minutes ago, Cannabis said:

Imagine being against the people having their say. 

What's the point in the government if they don't want to run the country? Should every change in tax laws, interest rates, benefits, immigration rules, building new airports, train lines, changing bus timetables be put to a public vote too?

The people have their say by voting for who they want to run the country. After that those people are paid a fucking lot of money to run the country so they should do it. There are plenty of exceptions but if we're realistic 90% of the people who voted in the referendum (for both Leave and Remain) have no idea which one is better for the country.

It's like if Moshiri and Kenwright asked the entire population of Merseyside to vote for the next Everton manager. 

[Dr. Gonzo]

7 minutes ago, SirBalon said:

The campaigning was a shambles too and that’s also the government and all parties fault. The thing is that it’s now totally understandable as to why the remain campaign was so crap and that’s because none of them knew what was going to happen beforehand and why we have this total mess. 

What’s curious is that the constituencies with the highest margin of leave voters are the constituencies with the lowest number of immigrants living in them.   Maybe having straight bananas and as you say, calling Snickers a Marathon bar was a principle on the whole matter. 

I think part of the campaigning problem was Brexiters had very carefully crafted emotional messages, either scapegoating immigrants - which we know plays well to certain crowds, or telling outright lies - like the EU killing the British fishing industry & all of that money that will flow into NHS. But these messages, even though they're emotional scapegoating or just blatantly lying... they work with people.

Much of what remainers were campaigning on was "we have a net benefit to being in the UK and voting on something we don't really know will cause instability which can lead to x, y, and z." A lot of people that wanted us to remain were wanting the UK to remain in the EU for economic stability.

Economic stability vs. compelling lies and emotional arguments is a tough battle to win. Especially when for a lot of people, there isn't a whole lot of "economic stability" - a lot of people have experienced either a rough start to their careers or have had some shit experiences with economic downturns in the last few decades. However that's a bit missing point of how Brexit would impact the biggest contributor to the UK's GDP... or failing to really understand how leaving the EU can impact British trade - and the ripple effects in our economy of fucking with these things.

It's not a winning argument for most people, in all honesty. You can say "well it's really very complicated and we don't know how it will work out, but it will have major impacts to major parts of the British economy and we shouldn't be voting on a Brexit without a clear and concrete plan for Brexit because of x, y and z" when the counterpoint is a mix of "LOOK HOW MUCH MONEY THE NHS WILL HAVE," "THIS WILL RESTORE FAILING INDUSTRIES," and "FUCK OFF YOU FUCKING POLES AND FILTHY MUSLIMS."  And the fact the referendum was to trigger Article 50 with no real fucking plan for Brexit just shows how fucking stupid our political leadership and voters are. At a minimum, the referendum should have been "are we going to plan for Brexit or not" rather than just trigger Article 50 and think we can just fucking bumble our way through negotiations with the EU when they've got all of the fucking leverage.

[Dr. Gonzo]

7 minutes ago, RandoEFC said:

What's the point in the government if they don't want to run the country? Should every change in tax laws, interest rates, benefits, immigration rules, building new airports, train lines, changing bus timetables be put to a public vote too?

The people have their say by voting for who they want to run the country. After that those people are paid a fucking lot of money to run the country so they should do it. There are plenty of exceptions but if we're realistic 90% of the people who voted in the referendum (for both Leave and Remain) have no idea which one is better for the country.

It's like if Moshiri and Kenwright asked the entire population of Merseyside to vote for the next Everton manager. 

They did ask the fans if Fat Sam should get sacked though... That's more Brexit than giving you a choice of Fat Sam or another manager - because the "new manager" option was (technically) an unknown, even though it was likely to be Silva... technically we didn't know.

[RandoEFC+]

3 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

They did ask the fans if Fat Sam should get sacked though... That's more Brexit than giving you a choice of Fat Sam or another manager - because the "new manager" option was (technically) an unknown, even though it was likely to be Silva... technically we didn't know.

I get what you're saying but I thought the way they did the survey was pretty unprofessional because it asked for public opinion on one of their employees and I'd be pretty disgusted if my school put out a survey to parents or students asking if they had confidence in my ability to teach them maths.

However in different circumstances, I'd be delighted for the club to put out a survey asking "should the capacity of our new stadium be 56,000 or 58,000 or 60,000" or "do you think it's beneficial for the club to enter the U23 team into the Johnstones Paint Trophy/whatever it's called this season?". What I wouldn't like to see AT ALL though is for the club to make those decisions based entirely on a fan survey. Taking into account, fine, brilliant, but they're there to run the club because they have the know how (well they're supposed to, it's debatable whether that is actually the case as it is with the British government and running the country but anyway) and the figures behind everything, the means to get advice from qualified experts etc. Using all of this together they can make a decision.

Relating that back to the topic, I think it's a pretty clear analogy. Letting people have their say is an excellent idea but asking the public to make what is potentially the biggest economic decision the country has to make in our lifetimes and framing it as such an emotion-based decision is retarded. The public as a whole aren't qualified. The government might not be either but they have a better chance of being and are paid to make these decisions. How they get public opinion in a reliable way is difficult admittedly. Having an opinion only referendum is risky as if 52% of voters say YES BREXIT and the government go against that then people will be all over them screaming well why did you fucking ask, so yes they'd have to reframe this somehow. Perhaps the pressure of that outcome though would encourage the government to actually educate and inform the public properly about what they're voting for and against. We can dream.

[Dr. Gonzo]

Just now, RandoEFC said:

I get what you're saying but I thought the way they did the survey was pretty unprofessional because it asked for public opinion on one of their employees and I'd be pretty disgusted if my school put out a survey to parents or students asking if they had confidence in my ability to teach them maths.

However in different circumstances, I'd be delighted for the club to put out a survey asking "should the capacity of our new stadium be 56,000 or 58,000 or 60,000" or "do you think it's beneficial for the club to enter the U23 team into the Johnstones Paint Trophy/whatever it's called this season?". What I wouldn't like to see AT ALL though is for the club to make those decisions based entirely on a fan survey. Taking into account, fine, brilliant, but they're there to run the club because they have the know how (well they're supposed to, it's debatable whether that is actually the case as it is with the British government and running the country but anyway) and the figures behind everything, the means to get advice from qualified experts etc. Using all of this together they can make a decision.

Relating that back to the topic, I think it's a pretty clear analogy. Letting people have their say is an excellent idea but asking the public to make what is potentially the biggest economic decision the country has to make in our lifetimes and framing it as such an emotion-based decision is retarded. The public as a whole aren't qualified. The government might not be either but they have a better chance of being and are paid to make these decisions. How they get public opinion in a reliable way is difficult admittedly. Having an opinion only referendum is risky as if 52% of voters say YES BREXIT and the government go against that then people will be all over them screaming well why did you fucking ask, so yes they'd have to reframe this somehow. Perhaps the pressure of that outcome though would encourage the government to actually educate and inform the public properly about what they're voting for and against. We can dream.

Get what you're saying re: the Everton stuff better now & agree with it.

And actually agree with all of your post.

[SirBalon]

41 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

I think part of the campaigning problem was Brexiters had very carefully crafted emotional messages, either scapegoating immigrants - which we know plays well to certain crowds, or telling outright lies - like the EU killing the British fishing industry & all of that money that will flow into NHS. But these messages, even though they're emotional scapegoating or just blatantly lying... they work with people.

Much of what remainers were campaigning on was "we have a net benefit to being in the UK and voting on something we don't really know will cause instability which can lead to x, y, and z." A lot of people that wanted us to remain were wanting the UK to remain in the EU for economic stability.

Economic stability vs. compelling lies and emotional arguments is a tough battle to win. Especially when for a lot of people, there isn't a whole lot of "economic stability" - a lot of people have experienced either a rough start to their careers or have had some shit experiences with economic downturns in the last few decades. However that's a bit missing point of how Brexit would impact the biggest contributor to the UK's GDP... or failing to really understand how leaving the EU can impact British trade - and the ripple effects in our economy of fucking with these things.

It's not a winning argument for most people, in all honesty. You can say "well it's really very complicated and we don't know how it will work out, but it will have major impacts to major parts of the British economy and we shouldn't be voting on a Brexit without a clear and concrete plan for Brexit because of x, y and z" when the counterpoint is a mix of "LOOK HOW MUCH MONEY THE NHS WILL HAVE," "THIS WILL RESTORE FAILING INDUSTRIES," and "FUCK OFF YOU FUCKING POLES AND FILTHY MUSLIMS."  And the fact the referendum was to trigger Article 50 with no real fucking plan for Brexit just shows how fucking stupid our political leadership and voters are. At a minimum, the referendum should have been "are we going to plan for Brexit or not" rather than just trigger Article 50 and think we can just fucking bumble our way through negotiations with the EU when they've got all of the fucking leverage.

The minimum that should’ve been implemented in a deciding factor for a referendum as important as this one was a winning margin for either choice as having a split nation is absolutely insane and counterproductive.

I must say that I voted to leave although my vote didn’t really mean much as I live in London. My vote was totally emotional which I recognised early on after the result and I know for a fact that I wouldn't vote that way now as I have hindsight to play with and know all the lies I fell for. It’s the stupidest I’ve felt in my whole life. 

[Honey Honey]

2 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

I think part of the campaigning problem was Brexiters had very carefully crafted emotional messages, either scapegoating immigrants - which we know plays well to certain crowds, or telling outright lies - like the EU killing the British fishing industry & all of that money that will flow into NHS. But these messages, even though they're emotional scapegoating or just blatantly lying... they work with people.

Much of what remainers were campaigning on was "we have a net benefit to being in the UK and voting on something we don't really know will cause instability which can lead to x, y, and z." A lot of people that wanted us to remain were wanting the UK to remain in the EU for economic stability.

Economic stability vs. compelling lies and emotional arguments is a tough battle to win. Especially when for a lot of people, there isn't a whole lot of "economic stability" - a lot of people have experienced either a rough start to their careers or have had some shit experiences with economic downturns in the last few decades. However that's a bit missing point of how Brexit would impact the biggest contributor to the UK's GDP... or failing to really understand how leaving the EU can impact British trade - and the ripple effects in our economy of fucking with these things.

It's not a winning argument for most people, in all honesty. You can say "well it's really very complicated and we don't know how it will work out, but it will have major impacts to major parts of the British economy and we shouldn't be voting on a Brexit without a clear and concrete plan for Brexit because of x, y and z" when the counterpoint is a mix of "LOOK HOW MUCH MONEY THE NHS WILL HAVE," "THIS WILL RESTORE FAILING INDUSTRIES," and "FUCK OFF YOU FUCKING POLES AND FILTHY MUSLIMS."  And the fact the referendum was to trigger Article 50 with no real fucking plan for Brexit just shows how fucking stupid our political leadership and voters are. At a minimum, the referendum should have been "are we going to plan for Brexit or not" rather than just trigger Article 50 and think we can just fucking bumble our way through negotiations with the EU when they've got all of the fucking leverage.

The Remain campaign on the whole was nothing like what you portrayed. It was heavily fuelled by a gross exaggeration of the danger and the shouting of over the top economic forecasts. That is what made the news. There was also a leaflet from the government through the door of every household in the country with assertions designed to worry.

The bus was exposed before the referendum and by leave figures after it. Despite that the polls didn't move. The crazy economic forecasts were exposed. Despite that the polls didn't move. That is because this was a referendum about values and the slogans are largely noise.

Research of both gen pop and graduate students, highly intelligent and educated people (I know some people are obssesed with those labels as approval of opinion), show that once people have identified a side they feel they belong to they will judge what they say to be true and repeat it if it is a topic they have no prior knowledge to know any better about. When the topic is ambigious and there is no right answer they will give a more favourable rating to a policy if it has their sides name attached to it and a more negative rating if it has their opponents name on it.

You will see immigrant haters suddenly portray themselves as democracy lovers for example. Or you will often see those who are anti-Farage suddenly become worried about the current formation of the economy but then vote for John McDonnell 6 months later.

The core of politics has never been about reason, the trick is to find out what people really value and appeal from there.

 

[RandoEFC+]

Bottom line is two years after the referendum Theresa May is going to have to pull some Houdini act out of her wrinkly fanny to secure any sort of positive deal and get Brexit off to any sort of successful start.

[Fairy In Boots]

I do think Remainers have some kind of Stockholm syndrome with the EU. I just can’t fathom why you would want to surrender democratic sovereignty, it just baffles me entirely. 

[SirBalon]

1 hour ago, RandoEFC said:

Bottom line is two years after the referendum Theresa May is going to have to pull some Houdini act out of her wrinkly fanny to secure any sort of positive deal and get Brexit off to any sort of successful start.

The EU simply aren't going to accept. It's as simple as that and I know it's been overused as a statement which has now become a cliché. but when you no longer are a member of a club, you don't get the access of benefits of that club. What's so strange about that scenario?  I really can't understand and it's like some here in England being bemused as to why a governnet in Scotland who's ideology is that of independence then goes out seeking at every seeming gap in a moment in history to push forward for what they believe in. 

Life really isn't that complicated to be honest. The EU seems to be but then again when you're a member of a complicated club you should be intelligent enough to know this and not put a separatist question to people that know less than you about those complexities and understanding (through hindsight) That you yourself (the politicians) knew nothing beforehand.  Never witnessed such arrogance to be honest.  It's like asking my son if he would prefer ice cream to what he should be eating.  We all know what type of people actually live their lives in that manner are like.

Sometimes words seem harsh but harshness is sometimes very just and required.

[Dr. Gonzo]

1 hour ago, Fairy In Boots said:

I do think Remainers have some kind of Stockholm syndrome with the EU. I just can’t fathom why you would want to surrender democratic sovereignty, it just baffles me entirely. 

If the alternative is a soft Brexit, then we end like Norway. Beholden to EU law without having a say in policy. I don’t see the point in leaving for that. That’s just symbolicly saying we support sovereignty while losing actual power. If we have a hard Brexit, we run the risk of all sorts of trade issues, a return to WTO rules (which doesn’t seem like preserving democratic sovereignty to me), and probably a pretty dire economic situation.

If Britain’s interests weren’t being fought for by MEP Nigel Farage not ever taking his job seriously, they certainly aren’t being fought for with this absolute shitshow of a government fumbling about to craft a deal to take to the EU (and with these new amendments, for the EU to tell us to fuck off).

It’s shambolic, before the referendum they knew if the UK voted leave we’d have 2 years. And instead of having a fucking plan and getting to fucking work we’ve had no fucking progress towards probably Britain’s biggest political moment since we joined the fucking EU.

David Cameron is such a fucking cunt for getting us into this fucking mess.