A Political Thread

[Which Tyler]

So a No Deal Brexit will cost this country £240B a year - let's spend that on the NHS instead.
May's deal will cost a "mere" £100Bn a year.

For comparison, the NHS costs £125B a year
Our EU contribution was £8.6B

 

[ncurd]

So a No Deal Brexit will cost this country £240B a year - let's spend that on the NHS instead.
May's dealmwill cost a mere £100Bn a year.

For comparison, the NHS costs £125B a year

Its not about the money!

Sure ******* helps though.....

 

[Which Tyler]

Jebus, she really just said (PMQs) that finding out the current will of the people is to ignore the will of the people.
Corbyn really is terrible at holding her to account on this (yes, I know, but this is by far the biggest political issue ofmour time).

She followed that up by claiming that the analysis doesn't show that we'll be poorer, despite the analysis saying the precise opposite.

 

[ncurd]

And her own chancellor...

 

[Thingimubob]

Jebus, she really just said (PMQs) that finding out the current will of the people is to ignore the will of the people.
Corbyn really is terrible at holding her to account on this (yes, I know, but this is by far the biggest political issue ofmour time).

She followed that up by claiming that the analysis doesn't show that we'll be poorer, despite the analysis saying the precise opposite.

...wat

I feel this sums up the mess she's wading through right now...

 

[Reiser99]

Jebus, she really just said (PMQs) that finding out the current will of the people is to ignore the will of the people.
Corbyn really is terrible at holding her to account on this (yes, I know, but this is by far the biggest political issue ofmour time).

She followed that up by claiming that the analysis doesn't show that we'll be poorer, despite the analysis saying the precise opposite.

Nick Clegg said it best on LBC. He said that it completely new to him that you have one democratic vote and then that decision in final. Democracy is about discussion and changing points of view as situations change, not voting once, carving it in stone and never deviating from it all.

As for the poorer bit, she say she is technically correct as the economy will still grow even after Brexit, therefore people will not be poorer than they are now. (This of course does not take into account all of the shitty policies the conservatives are yet to implement that don't even relate to Brexit.) However we will be poorer off than we would have been if we were in the E.U., which she will conveniently ignore.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

So I guess they were right about giving the Brexit money to the NHS then.
The Tories want to kill it so giving it negative £100bn a year will be right up their street.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

So Mississippi elect a Senator who was proud of the Confederate history of the state (the worst for lynching since the civil rights movement began), said she'd happily attend public hangings and is an all around typical southern Confederate lover.

Interesting how nearly all the poorest states are also the ones that have been Republican longest.

Nick Clegg said it best on LBC. He said that it completely new to him that you have one democratic vote and then that decision in final. Democracy is about discussion and changing points of view as situations change, not voting once, carving it in stone and never deviating from it all.

As for the poorer bit, she say she is technically correct as the economy will still grow even after Brexit, therefore people will not be poorer than they are now. (This of course does not take into account all of the shitty policies the conservatives are yet to implement that don't even relate to Brexit.) However we will be poorer off than we would have been if we were in the E.U., which she will conveniently ignore.

But on the flip side what is the point of a referendum if you just keep asking if you don't get the answer you want?

 

[ncurd]

But on the flip side what is the point of a referendum if you just keep asking if you don't get the answer you want?

The first referendum was poorly thought out (nobody thought remain would lose). There should of always been a 'are you sure' referendum once the details had been hashed out. Its always been quite clear leave never had particular singular vision for Brexit once we had clarity on what that looked like we should have always have been to back out once reality kicked in.

 

[Reiser99]

The first referendum was poorly thought out (nobody thought remain would lose). There should of always been a 'are you sure' referendum once the details had been hashed out. Its always been quite clear leave never had particular singular vision for Brexit once we had clarity on what that looked like we should have always have been to back out once reality kicked in.

Agreed. Also both sides lied and misled the public so that no one truly knew what they were voting for. We elect politicians because ordinary people don't have time to go into detail for every subject and therefore it is their job to do so and make decisions. They decided in this case to ask the people and barely gave them any accurate facts, mainly to try and win votes, but also because they were clueless themselves. 95% of the public never had a hope of making an informed decision, because they relied on the politicians to tell them the facts and they all had their own agenda. A second referendum should be held because it would reflect the will of the people more accurately. Problem is even if you did give everyone the facts some people would still vote to be poorer and less financially secure just to get out of the E.U. What gets me though is they moan about selfish bureaucrats in Brussels, but are happy to listen to the ones in their own country.

 

[Which Tyler]

@Reiser99 - Are you saying that selfish bureaucrats are like gobshite scrum halves?
"He maybe a selfish bureaucrat; but he's OUR selfish beaurocrat!"





FTR - I was a gobshite scrum half

 

[General Melchett]

Agreed. Also both sides lied and misled the public so that no one truly knew what they were voting for. We elect politicians because ordinary people don't have time to go into detail for every subject and therefore it is their job to do so and make decisions. They decided in this case to ask the people and barely gave them any accurate facts, mainly to try and win votes, but also because they were clueless themselves.

This.
They should never had gone to the public unless they were able to provide more substance/facts behind the arguments supporting leave and remain which would have allowed people to make an informed choice. There should be a public enquiry into the way the referendum was run because it was flawed on so many levels with politicians telling outright lies. The findings and lessons learned from the enquiry should ensure that campaigns are more regulated and properly run in future. At least with General Elections parties can be held to their manifestos but not in this case - it was like the wild west.

 

[Reiser99]

This.
They should never had gone to the public unless they were able to provide more substance/facts behind the arguments supporting leave and remain which would have allowed people to make an informed choice. There should be a public enquiry into the way the referendum was run because it was flawed on so many levels with politicians telling outright lies. The findings and lessons learned from the enquiry should ensure that campaigns are more regulated and properly run in future. At least with General Elections parties can be held to their manifestos but not in this case - it was like the wild west.

I remember people at the time saying things like, 'It is a great exercise in British Democracy.' I honestly think it will go down as one of the worst examples of democracy in action. Another issue has always been the simple majority. Most other countries require somewhere between 60-70% to change a constitution/situation that drastically. That way it is clearly supported by the public with no room for debate.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

Agreed. Also both sides lied and misled the public so that no one truly knew what they were voting for. We elect politicians because ordinary people don't have time to go into detail for every subject and therefore it is their job to do so and make decisions. They decided in this case to ask the people and barely gave them any accurate facts, mainly to try and win votes, but also because they were clueless themselves. 95% of the public never had a hope of making an informed decision, because they relied on the politicians to tell them the facts and they all had their own agenda. A second referendum should be held because it would reflect the will of the people more accurately. Problem is even if you did give everyone the facts some people would still vote to be poorer and less financially secure just to get out of the E.U. What gets me though is they moan about selfish bureaucrats in Brussels, but are happy to listen to the ones in their own country.

I disagree. The public were uninformed for a reason, they had no interest in being informed. That hasn't changed. The uninformed still won't make any effort to get informed, the nationlists will still want it regardless of what's happened, the gullible are still gullible, the politicians will all still lie, the country is still divided and what happens if we vote to remain this time but Brexiters demand another referendum? You cannot then deny them that without being a massive hypocrite and so it goes on forever.

The vast majority of people in this country are severely uninformed about a whole range of serious topics and they really don't care to be informed. Emotion is what drives people, not facts and a future referendum would again boil down to hyperbole and appeals to emotion guaranteed.

Also this ignores a big point, huge swathes of people could not be bothered to even vote on one of the biggest decisions this generation could make.

 

[Reiser99]

I disagree. The public were uninformed for a reason, they had no interest in being informed. That hasn't changed. The uninformed still won't make any effort to get informed, the nationlists will still want it regardless of what's happened, the gullible are still gullible, the politicians will all still lie, the country is still divided and what happens if we vote to remain this time but Brexiters demand another referendum? You cannot then deny them that without being a massive hypocrite and so it goes on forever.

The vast majority of people in this country are severely uninformed about a whole range of serious topics and they really don't care to be informed. Emotion is what drives people, not facts and a future referendum would again boil down to hyperbole and appeals to emotion guaranteed.

Also this ignores a big point, huge swathes of people could not be bothered to even vote on one of the biggest decisions this generation could make.

Well I tried to pretend that we're still not a stuck up, ignorant country who are far too arrogant and only care about ourselves...
Honestly I do think some people genuinely wanted to be informed and they couldn't be, however you are right, most nationalists would have voted for Brexit even if God came down and said it would trigger the apocalypse.

 

[General Melchett]

It's all David Cameron's fault. I read an article which said that Michael Gove (as Machiavellian as he was with BoJo) pleaded with him not to agree to the referendum because it would divide the party and the country and it turned out that he called it absolutely right. Cameron may have had polished media skills but he was a terrible PM who has thrown the country into turmoil.

 

[Reiser99]

It's all David Cameron's fault. I read an article which said that Michael Gove (as Machiavellian as he was with BoJo) pleaded with him not to agree to the referendum because it would divide the party and the country and it turned out that he called it absolutely right. Cameron may have had polished media skills but he was a terrible PM who has thrown the country into turmoil.

Cameron's legacy is shot to hell. He'll be remembered as a coward who sold his country out for votes.

 

[General Melchett]

Cameron's legacy is shot to hell. He'll be remembered as a coward who sold his country out for votes.

He should have told the right wing Euro-sceptic toffs like JRM to F-off and join UKIP. Instead he tried to appease them and in the process made a monumental misjudgement.

 

[Reiser99]

He should have told the right wing Euro-sceptic toffs like JRM to F-off and join UKIP. Instead he tried to appease them and in the process made a monumental misjudgement.

Definitely, but I think it was more the loss of voters to UKIP that scared the conservatives and, that while UKIP wouldn't get into power, the loss of voters would open the door for Labour or more minority governments. He completely misread the public, organised a poor campaign based on fear, instead of highlighting the benefits of the E.U, while Farage and co used typical demagogue tactics to mobilise the masses.

 

[DumbAmerican]

I have a question regarding Brexit, and my apologies if it has been discussed already.

Will there be a border crossing area between The Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland when Brexit is done?

I'm sure both the British establishment and the EU would love to screw over the pro-British people who live in Ireland. Low class patriotism and such.

So Mississippi elect a Senator who was proud of the Confederate history of the state (the worst for lynching since the civil rights movement began), said she'd happily attend public hangings and is an all around typical southern Confederate lover.

Interesting how nearly all the poorest states are also the ones that have been Republican longest.

She was a Democrat Clinton voter until recently, and is a moderate Republican by voting record.

She was joking about public hangings. The lynching history of the South between the end of Reconstruction and the 1950s is about 1/3rd white and 2/3rds black. Not much different than would be the jail population under a Rule of Law scenario. We execute and imprison innocent men today, just like back then. Almost everybody lynched was guilty, and a few weren't. The ratio's aren't much different from today. And the black murder death rate back then pails in comparison to the post Civil Rights murder rate for blacks in this country.

I live in the poorest state, and perhaps the most Republican state, in the country. When I was growing up things were much different. You didn't admit to being a Republican in public. That was before identity politics. The same thing will happen in Britain eventually. I know you have the class history that stops working class whites from voting Tory, but as you become as diverse as America the working class whites will start voting for whatever right wing, patriotic party emerges.