European Union Referendum

Renegade said:

Definitely jt.

Click to expand...

TractorBoys really should ban monkey and his many alts. Any traffic fudging he may bring is surely cancelled out by drivel he creates.

Renegade said:

Click to expand...

I did wonder if he is trolling or those are genuine views. I went with the latter out of respect but maybe I was naive.

Renegade said:

PR would have given UKIP an 11% share of the seats in the Commons half a decade ago. Change your mind?

Coalition governments would become the default in PR, so it's a case of having more representatives from smaller parties in a position of power (good) vs the government not being able to enact a clear plan for the country because of disparate interests in power (bad). Kind of a pick your poison scenario for me, I don't think PR would really solve anything, though I'm not averse to trying it out.

Click to expand...

I'm more than happy with that. Maybe if UKIP had a good representation in parliament we could avoided the ERG.

Are we really saying PR would have less of a defined plan than anything that this government has done? We're the definition of an undefined plan. Maybe if there had been a wider representation in the House of Commons from Green to BNP there would have been more pressure to address the issues underlying the Brexit vote.

I presume it's Mudhuts talking, I have him on ignore. Pretty sure he's real though - didn't he meet JJH?

Look Out There Are Llamas said:

I presume it's Mudhuts talking, I have him on ignore. Pretty sure he's real though - didn't he meet JJH?

Click to expand...

Please say this is true.

Look Out There Are Llamas said:

I'm more than happy with that. Maybe if UKIP had a good representation in parliament we could avoided the ERG.

Are we really saying PR would have less of a defined plan than anything that this government has done? We're the definition of an undefined plan. Maybe if there had been a wider representation in the House of Commons from Green to BNP there would have been more pressure to address the issues underlying the Brexit vote.

I presume it's Mudhuts talking, I have him on ignore. Pretty sure he's real though - didn't he meet JJH?

Click to expand...

Ha, you're right about this government having no plan, but I think any potentially good government with a plan might be hampered in the future if they are forced into multi-party coalitions by the polling method. Though Scandinavia suggests otherwise, probably depends on the country.

Laker said:

I did wonder if he is trolling or those are genuine views. I went with the latter out of respect but maybe I was naive.

Click to expand...

Nice that the cynicism hasn't been kicked out of you yet, he's derailed a few threads with the same inane bollocks, even when it isn't relevant.

Jesus.

Fucking.

Christ.

What.

A.

Fucking.

Shitshow.

Look Out There Are Llamas said:

Jesus.

Fucking.

Christ.

What.

A.

Fucking.

Shitshow.

Click to expand...

I hope our ration books are blue.

We won't. We will have blue passports, white ration books and something else red so we can really have a red white and blue Brexit.

Faces?

Rees Mogg not actually prepared to risk his own future with Brexit then, it seems.

He is an unmitigated prick, and I can't believe idiots are fooled by his act.

.V. said:

Rees Mogg not actually prepared to risk his own future with Brexit then, it seems.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1020671636524191745

Click to expand...

I don't see how abandoning his post (like Cameron) if things don't go his way would be any more noble than staying put and letting the public decide whether he keeps his job or not. This is a cheap shot if ever there was one.

Ahahahaha. "You're proposing a very simple question on a very complex set of circumstances." Remind you of anything, JRM?!

If you campaign for something voceriferly and then it turns out to be a shitstorm; then you should go.

Obviously.

PuB said:

If you campaign for something voceriferly and then it turns out to be a shitstorm; then you should go.


Obviously.

Click to expand...

Theres an argument that his constituents won't be caught up in any shitstorm or will at least have the capability to absorb it until their boy Mogg deregulates and rejigs the economy that suits the movers & shakers of his constituency where the average house price is over £600k.

PuB said:

If you campaign for something voceriferly and then it turns out to be a shitstorm; then you should go.

Obviously.

Click to expand...

This ^^^.

You remoaners make me laugh,do you really think you'll stop us leaving just because you make a lot of noise? We all had our chance to vote to leave or not and 17.4 million of us voted to leave so as the mad old bat Sourby said "Suck it up" How many Mp's from Labour and The Tories are campaigning against what their constituents voted for in the referendum? The majority of constituents in The North voted to leave yet Labour MP's ignore their vote as they think they know better.

Damn you're dumb.

Abertawe said:

Damn you're dumb.

Click to expand...

A well thought out answer well done!

mowgli said:

A well thought out answer well done!

Click to expand...

No mate you are thick AF. Carry on supporting your team though sweetheart.

In defence of Abertawe, it is sort of difficult to respond to a post with more bad points that sentences.

So it turns out paying pensions to retired Brits abroad would be illegal under a no-deal Brexit.

DON'T WORRY EVERYTHING IS FINE

mowgli said:

You remoaners make me laugh,do you really think you'll stop us leaving just because you make a lot of noise? We all had our chance to vote to leave or not and 17.4 million of us voted to leave so as the mad old bat Sourby said "Suck it up" How many Mp's from Labour and The Tories are campaigning against what their constituents voted for in the referendum? The majority of constituents in The North voted to leave yet Labour MP's ignore their vote as they think they know better.

Click to expand...

I mean...

That's all well and good, but can we stop pretending that Brexit was won by a colossal margin which crushed the "saboteurs" who are merely a gnat on the ass of the great proud bull or that it provided anything close to a clear mandate which dictated an immediate triggering of Article 50 without anything close to a debate in parliament or indeed the country at large to establish what Brexit should look like now we had the referendum.

We've spent the entire period we should have been negotiating from an established position with a fairly solid policy actually arguing about what the policy should be. Plenty of "remoaners" are thus because all they see is the country collapsing politically and the entire fiasco being handled atrociously, it isn't a immovable loyalty to the EU. I voted Remain because there was no plan, not because I love the EU and think it is perfect. There is still no plan, when they present a plan is gets ripped to bits and we spin our wheels because the reality is all the referendum did was needlessly divide the country.

There was no reason why we couldn't have taken our time to digest the results and have a proper, mature, debate on how we move forward with Brexit, you'd likely find a large percentile of the "Remoaners" who are so often derided would back of a well structured and thought out Brexit. We went through an entire Enlightenment to toss off the shackles of believing in something through blind faith, I'm sorry if the argument that we should "believe in Brexit" with no substance doesn't really register.

I don't care if we stay or leave, I care that we don't fuck up the entire country for decades to come (essentially my working life) because for some reason we decided we had to immediately rush to trigger Article 50 to satisfy people that we were "really going to leave" when we could have had a proper discussion about it, formed our negotiating position and then entered negotiations to leave.

Call me a hypocrite if you want but had the referendum been 52/48 in Remains favour I would have still said that we need to evaluate our relationship with Europe based on such a clear volume of people having reservations, quite why Brexiteers can't accept you shouldn't flippantly ignore people in the reverse is beyond me.

Nah, if it was 52/48 for remain we'd have immediately joined the euro and schengen. Obviously.

Leavers like to claim that the EU need us more than we need them.

So how come we’re the only ones stockpiling food and medicines?

TheMinsterman said:

Call me a hypocrite if you want but had the referendum been 52/48 in Remains favour I would have still said that we need to evaluate our relationship with Europe based on such a clear volume of people having reservations, quite why Brexiteers can't accept you shouldn't flippantly ignore people in the reverse is beyond me.

Click to expand...

I won’t dwell on the conflation of Europe and the EU (as moaning about that for 15-20 years has done fuck all to stop people doing it) but, seriously, what does ‘evaluate our relationship with Europe’ mean in this context?

You posit a counterfactual in which Remain wins 52-48 and appear to suggest there should be some concessions to Brexity tossers like me – some generosity in victory in recognition of the closeness of the result. And, your implied point here, of course, is that Leavers should be doing that now instead of persisting with their unreasonable, dogmatic insistence that leaving the EU should actually mean withdrawing from the political institutions, systems and agreements that define it.

But what do you have in mind? People often preach the virtues of compromise and generosity when they’ve lost. It’s usually insincere. You’ve always struck me as a likeable chap. I’d like to believe you’re being sincere, but you’re giving me nothing to go on. And since I have something like 15-20 years of hearing pro-EU folk pay lip service to EU-sceptic concerns (e.g. every time UKIP surpassed expectation in EP elections) and then follow it up with the square root of fuck all, I’m pretty sceptical. Convince me.

Also, if we do entertain this rather charming idea that a narrow 52-48 win for Remain would have resulted in an improved respect for EU-sceptic concerns, what difference would that make vis-à-vis intra-EU politics? As I wrote on here before the referendum, the EU’s intended integrationist course is clear. Its unwillingness to deviate from that course is a well-documented historical fact. So even if you were to suggest, say, significant reforms to FoM (to assuage Leaver concerns about weak immigration control), do you think they’d budge on that?

silkyman said:

Leavers like to claim that the EU need us more than we need them.

Click to expand...

I honestly don't think I've ever seen anyone utter those words beyond Remainers paraphrasing faceless Leavers who probably, maybe, possibly exist.

Lol, you know when Brexit tit heads are losing the argument when they blame remainers and ask them to solve the inevitable shitstorm themselves.

No thanks, you outdated, imperialist, deluded, pile of wank-socks.

This is your mess, you deal with it.

If only. It's not just them this is gonner impact though.

PuB said:

Lol, you know when Brexit tit heads are losing the argument when they blame remainers and ask them to solve the inevitable shitstorm themselves.

No thanks, you outdated, imperialist, deluded, pile of wank-socks.

This is your mess, you deal with it.

Click to expand...

You seem very confused.