Brexited | the worst threads live the longest

Do you think there will be a Deal or No Deal?

  • Total voters
    194
  • Poll closed .
Classical Mechanic said:
Remaining in a customs union means that the UK will not become an independent trading nation which is pretty much the key reason for leaving. The 'credible' deal that Corbyn wants to negotiate is levels of bullshit.
Click to expand...
The key reason for leaving is to kick out all the migrates have controls on migration and to bring back the empire, thats actually the reason people vote to leave.

Corbyn deal which is to negation a Labour deal and put it to a referendum(While also possibly giving EU citizens and 16 years old the vote). Is not only completely fine and ideal but guarantees Remain the win.

So stop with these bizarre political fantasies of revoking the 2016 result and British self hated/''self sacrifice''.
 
Sweet Square said:
The key reason for leaving is to kick out all the migrates have controls on migration and to bring back the empire, thats actually the reason people vote to leave.

Corbyn deal which is to negation a Labour deal and put it to a referendum(While also possibly giving EU citizens and 16 years old the vote) is not only completely fine and ideal but guarantees Remain the win.

So stop with these bizarre political fantasies of revoking the 2016 result and British self hated/''self sacrifice''.
Its really stupid.
Click to expand...

You're trying to tell me to stop fantasising whilst acknowledging that Corbyn's plan is going to guarantee that we remain! How will that unite the nation, how stupid do you think people are?
 
Sweet Square said:
Corbyn deal which is to negation a Labour deal and put it to a referendum(While also possibly giving EU citizens and 16 years old the vote). Is not only completely fine and ideal but guarantees Remain the win.

.
Click to expand...
sorry... thats completly fine... to put a false choice to the public because you have guaranteed one side wins

FFS your echo chamber is a strange place
 
Beachryan said:
Can anyone articulate a coherent argument against a referendum on the actual deal that would take Britain out of the EU?

If you want Brexit, great, vote for it now that you know precisely what it means.
If you don't want Brexit, great, vote against it now that you know precisely what it means.
If you were unsure, now you have the actual terms so you can make an educated decision.

If it passes, there can be no doubt in parliament and it will move ahead much more smoothly. If it fails, we can all move on and get back to actually doing something.
Click to expand...

Leavers don't want a 2nd referendum because they know they won't win it.
 
Classical Mechanic said:
Don't labour want to put it in a referendum anyway so you'd have pretend Brexit vs Remain, hows that going to unite the nation?
Click to expand...

They expect no one to notice that the remain option has already been rejected in the first referendum and shouldn't be on the second ballot at all; or, that these leave voters are so stupid, that they will think it is a real Brexit, despite what Farage will be shouting from the roof tops! Or possibly they think a majority of Leave voters will have a sudden conversion to the remain cause overnight because of project fear Mk 2, 3, or is it 4 has won them over?

The EU have probably, or soon will, run out of patience. Macron it seems may have already come to a decision that in fact 'No deal' is better that continuing purgatory for everyone. Even if by some miracle the UK decided to stay, do the other countries really want to face this kind of torture every few years, by a member who is not really a fully committed member, who still demands opt outs, rebates, etc. who will vote against further integration, against a EU army, and will have 29 recalcitrant MEPS in the EU Parliament, carrying out a guerrilla campaign of disruption?

Nothing will now reunite the nation, (soon anyway) indeed the very existence of the UK itself is in danger of breaking up, Brexit is a wound that cuts very deep on both sides. The EU should wash its hands of us now, before we bring the whole house down... bet that's what Boris has been telling Macron!
 
Any expectations on "uniting the nation" are pointless. That ship sailed as soon as Cameron called the referendum. Now on Brexit it comes down to what you prefer more, less damage as you can on the economy or more controls over migrants coming in.
 
Maticmaker said:
They expect no one to notice that the remain option has already been rejected in the first referendum and shouldn't be on the second ballot at all; or, that these leave voters are so stupid, that they will think it is a real Brexit, despite what Farage will be shouting from the roof tops! Or possibly they think a majority of Leave voters will have a sudden conversion to the remain cause overnight because of project fear Mk 2, 3, or is it 4 has won them over?

The EU have probably, or soon will, run out of patience. Macron it seems may have already come to a decision that in fact 'No deal' is better that continuing purgatory for everyone. Even if by some miracle the UK decided to stay, do the other countries really want to face this kind of torture every few years, by a member who is not really a fully committed member, who still demands opt outs, rebates, etc. who will vote against further integration, against a EU army, and will have 29 recalcitrant MEPS in the EU Parliament, carrying out a guerrilla campaign of disruption?

Nothing will now reunite the nation, (soon anyway) indeed the very existence of the UK itself is in danger of breaking up, Brexit is a wound that cuts very deep on both sides. The EU should wash its hands of us now, before we bring the whole house down... bet that's what Boris has been telling Macron!
Click to expand...

I disagree on your first point. I think the only options you can have on a referendum are Remain and a real leave option.

I know nothing will unite the nation but gaming a referendum with no real leave option would massively inflame tensions in my opinion.

If the EU really felt they were better off bouncing us out then shouldn't they, errr - gerronwitttt?
 
Classical Mechanic said:
You're trying to tell me to stop fantasising whilst acknowledging that Corbyn's plan is going to guarantee that we remain! How will that unite the nation, how stupid do you think people are?
Click to expand...
Firstly your idea of ''uniting the nation'' is just revoking the last result or going out on Boris deal thus increasing suffering and inequality. Both of these options don't ''united the nation'' .

But more importantly uniting the nation is meaningless term. Its an impossible act to perform. It's at best just a nice sounding sound bite. Britain is a capitalist nation etc etc etc. You get the point!

So with that, what are the best options available. The answer is remaining in the EU and the great thing is the best way to get this result is making Britain a more democratic nation - letting 16 years old and EU citizen have the vote(Also gives a massive boost for left parties in the future).



sun_tzu said:
sorry... thats completly fine... to put a false choice to the public because you have guaranteed one side wins

FFS your echo chamber is a strange place
Click to expand...
Wtf are you about ? Its no different than when non property owners won the right to vote(After seeing your views on i.d cards I'm not sure to ask your views on this) it caused a massive boost for the labour movement.

If Labour win the next election with a manifesto that contains giving 16 year olds and EU nationals the right to vote and these two groups vote massively in favour of Remain(Which they would)in another referendum , that isn't a ''false choice'' but democracy.
 
Sweet Square said:
:wenger:
Click to expand...

Labour's insistence on a customs union means we will be on the menu for any future EU trade deals with no say. Labour are trying to get around this by saying their position is a CU with a seat around the table for any future trade deals, the EU aren't going to give a non member veto rights over their trade deals so either they'll say no or it will literally be a seat around the table where we can watch our economy being sold by the EU for it's benefit.

There are only 2 positions that make even the remotest sense, being in and a full member or being out negotiating on our own.

Unfortunately for the Brexiteers the latter means we'll be screwed by everyone because we'll be in such a weaker position than the huge economies out there like the EU, US, China and in the future India, and we could never hope to replace the trade we do with EU with trade with those far off places anyway.
 
Classical Mechanic said:
I disagree on your first point. I think the only options you can have on a referendum are Remain and a real leave option.

I know nothing will unite the nation but gaming a referendum with no real leave option would massively inflame tensions in my opinion.

If the EU really felt they were better off bouncing us out then shouldn't they, errr - gerronwitttt?
Click to expand...

Yes, my first point was 'tong in cheek' in the context of re-uniting everyone. However if a team beat a rival, but then had the losers complaining that the winners didn't know what they were doing when they scored more goals than them, we would all be splitting our sides laughing. I suppose 'consent of the 'losers' was missing first time around and I suspect so it would be in any second or third or fourth ballot!

As you say gaming a referendum beyond the boundaries of what caused the argument in the first place would not only inflame tensions, but would have no value whatsoever, and as above the consent of the losers would be the issue.

There will come a point for some EU countries where 'bouncing us' even without a deal will start to apply as a preferred option, if not now, then certainly some time in 2020, if the members states veto is still in place, then we will be out on our ear! I suspect this is one reason Boris himself hasn't given up on the 31st Oct, even though everyone else including members of his cabinet, seem to have done so. For once (the one and only time) Boris and Macron might be in the same corner?
 
Last edited:
Honest John said:
I think there's a school of thought that suggests that if you removed government in all its forms, the initial turmoil would eventually settle into harmony and equilibrium.

Someone on here will know better than me regarding that theory.
Click to expand...

Actually Belgium was almost 600 days without a government and I read back in the day that the economic figures were better than the last year with government
 
4bars said:
Actually Belgium was almost 600 days without a government and I read back in the day that the economic figures were better than the last year with government
Click to expand...

Depends totally on what you mean by "without a government", there would still have been the infrastructure of a modern state such as civil servants to administer and police/army/hospitals etc doing their jobs.

The idea that no government leads to a paradise of equality and freedom is a right wing nut job fantasy espoused by gun toting morons.
 
NWRed said:
Depends totally on what you mean by "without a government", there would still have been the infrastructure of a modern state such as civil servants to administer and police/army/hospitals etc doing their jobs.

The idea that no government leads to a paradise of equality and freedom is a right wing nut job fantasy espoused by gun toting morons.
Click to expand...

I thought that was the anarchists?
 
I've always said anything Corbyn does on here will be opposed by some on here and this just proves it.

We have apparent remainers arguing that Boris deal is now better than a deal involving staying in the custom union? Because leavers will get upset or one of several tory parroted lines about independence or unity or blah blah.
 
Smores said:
I've always said anything Corbyn does on here will be opposed by some on here and this just proves it.

We have apparent remainers arguing that Boris deal is now better than a deal involving staying in the custom union? Because leavers will get upset or one of several tory parroted lines about independence or unity or blah blah.
Click to expand...

You do understand that staying in a CU is just a different version of leaving, something remainers are opposed to.
 
Last edited:
Smores said:
I've always said anything Corbyn does on here will be opposed by some on here and this just proves it.

We have apparent remainers arguing that Boris deal is now better than a deal involving staying in the custom union? Because leavers will get upset or one of several tory parroted lines about independence or unity or blah blah.
Click to expand...

The problem with that is Corbyn hasn't proposed staying in the custom's union.

In fact Corbyn hasn't proposed anything sensible. He's proposed nonsense.
 
Last edited:
NWRed said:
You do understand that staying in a CU is just a different version of leaving, something remainders are opposed to.
Click to expand...
Yep. As a remainer I could have settled for Norway or something like that. Staying in the single market was key and my red line. The customs union alone is a hard brexit and I can’t support that.
 
Classical Mechanic said:
I don't think a pretend Brexit is a compromise at all, it simply isn't Brexit. It's just drastically reducing our terms within the EU, not becoming an independent trading nation and becoming a rule taker instead of maker. I guess it would cap off the ludicrous stupidity that has been Brexit and might be fitting in that sense.

Don't labour want to put it in a referendum anyway so you'd have pretend Brexit vs Remain, hows that going to unite the nation?
Click to expand...

It is though - the referendum was simply asking whether or not we would be a member of the European Union or not. If Brexiteers wanted something more concrete they should've put forward a more concrete, hardline question in the referendum vote - they didn't because they knew it'd have failed, and because the only way for Brexit to happen was to make things vague enough that people could project their own desires onto leaving the EU.

I'm struggling to see a reason to pander to Brexiteers when they've had years to formulate a coherent plan that can command a majority in the parliament they proclaim they wanted to restore sovereignty to. If they end up with a neutered Brexit then that's their fault.
 
Classical Mechanic said:
Remaining in a customs union means that the UK will not become an independent trading nation which is pretty much the key reason for leaving. The 'credible' deal that Corbyn wants to negotiate is levels of bullshit.
Click to expand...
It is the best possible deal by which we leave the EU. We shouldn't leave but if we do it should be on terms that have the least detrimental effect on the economy.
 
Smores said:
I've always said anything Corbyn does on here will be opposed by some on here and this just proves it.

We have apparent remainers arguing that Boris deal is now better than a deal involving staying in the custom union? Because leavers will get upset or one of several tory parroted lines about independence or unity or blah blah.
Click to expand...

Ultimately Brexiteers will be unhappy whatever happens - even if they get their ideal Brexit, they'll inevitably be pissed off when it doesn't lead to the economic or social paradise they've been promised - in such situations Remainers who didn't believe hard enough or whatever will be blamed. Pandering to the most extreme Brexiteers assumes they're logical and rational and reasonable - a lot of them aren't, and understand that in politics you can gain quite a lot by pushing things as far in your own direction as possible.

On the issue of Brexit I'm just not sure people in general can be united at this stage. Remainers as well have become increasingly polarised and insistent on their own (sometimes unreasonable) demands. Once it's all over and done with the best means toward reconciliation at a national level will be just trying to move on - although I imagine the issue itself will continue to fester in various forms for years.
 
Classical Mechanic said:
I don't think a pretend Brexit is a compromise at all, it simply isn't Brexit. It's just drastically reducing our terms within the EU, not becoming an independent trading nation and becoming a rule taker instead of maker. I guess it would cap off the ludicrous stupidity that has been Brexit and might be fitting in that sense.

Don't labour want to put it in a referendum anyway so you'd have pretend Brexit vs Remain, hows that going to unite the nation?
Click to expand...
You should have told us what your ideal brexit was before we voted so you had a mandate for it. You didn’t, and you now refuse to try to find a consensus brexit because you refuse to compromise, so you have to try to bully through this preferred version instead. That’s the root of this mess.
 
nickm said:
You should have told us what your ideal brexit was before we voted so you had a mandate for it. You don’t, and you refuse to try to find a consensus brexit because you refuse to compromise, so you have to try to bully through this preferred version instead. That’s the root of this mess.
Click to expand...

Yeah that's what annoys me the most about this whole farce - Brexiteers could've had a more concrete version of Brexit if they'd demanded distinct terms on which we would leave in the initial vote - i.e. whether we'd leave the single market etc. But doing so would've inevitably reduced the appeal of their campaign from the start and so they went for vagueness instead.
 
Paul the Wolf said:
Very apt.
Click to expand...

autocorrect knows...

nickm said:
Shame hardly anyone mentioned that in the referendum.
Click to expand...

that link concludes that generally there were calls for the UK to have an independent trade policy, that can’t exist in a CU. Are you saying that the three key reasons for Brexit were not understood to be immigration, trade and the sovereignty of Parliament during the referendum?

Cheesy said:
It is though - the referendum was simply asking whether or not we would be a member of the European Union or not. If Brexiteers wanted something more concrete they should've put forward a more concrete, hardline question in the referendum vote - they didn't because they knew it'd have failed, and because the only way for Brexit to happen was to make things vague enough that people could project their own desires onto leaving the EU.

I'm struggling to see a reason to pander to Brexiteers when they've had years to formulate a coherent plan that can command a majority in the parliament they proclaim they wanted to restore sovereignty to. If they end up with a neutered Brexit then that's their fault.
Click to expand...

How would having a real Brexit option pitted against remain on a referendum be pandering to Brexiteers? It give the only two real options.

@Sweet Square

I know the nation can’t be united but I believe such a disingenuous referendum as the one you propose would be exceptionally divisive.
 
Last edited:
nickm said:
Yep. As a remainer I could have settled for Norway or something like that. Staying in the single market was key and my red line. The customs union alone is a hard brexit and I can’t support that.
Click to expand...
Yup, leaving the single market was what was regarded as "hard brexit" at the start of all this. Complete and utter victory for the right that staying in a customs union is the softest version available, and even that's a pipe dream.
 
Ubik said:
Yup, leaving the single market was what was regarded as "hard brexit" at the start of all this. Complete and utter victory for the right that staying in a customs union is the softest version available, and even that's a pipe dream.
Click to expand...

I can never decide if collectively brexiteers knew they were talking shit at that point or they've didn't and steadily moved the goalposts as they've realised the remainers were right about what it meant.

I'm not even sure which is worse.
 
> Are you saying that the three key reasons for Brexit were not understood to be immigration, trade and the sovereignty of Parliament during the referendum

The link concludes: “as far as we’ve seen, Leave campaigners hardly mentioned the customs union in explicit terms at all, so there was generally little clarity about what leaving might mean in that regard.

“Campaigners did often say the UK should be able to set its own trade policy, and this could imply leaving the customs union as well... At the same time, though, certain sectors of an economy can be left out of a customs agreement, so it’s not a straightforward in or out issue.”

And of course, this rather unemotive summary leaves out all the context, where a remainer would say x means y, eg Brexit could mean leaving the single market, and leave would deny it and call it project fear.

I think the reasons for Brexit, as you put it, were in the eyes of the beholder. In my view, the reasons for Brexit boil down to English nationalism but you can put fancier labels on that if it makes you feel better. Not that you will get a consistent answer from different Brexiters, BTW. For some it, it might have been all these things. For some, it might have been only one or two. For many I expect, it was about winding the clock back to the 1950s.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.