EU referendum are you in or out

[matt303]

Does anyone else think that Ben Bradley looks like the Pub Landlord in this article?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44785797

[Harlequin]

An interesting tactic - "you are not doing what we want, so we'll step down from positions of influence unless you change what you are doing".

Is that not the entire rationale behind Brexit in the first place?

Does anyone else think that Ben Bradley looks like the Pub Landlord in this article?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44785797

Does anyone know if he is any relation to Al Murray?

[tufty]

at least one resignation a day … An interesting tactic

Oh, it's pretty transparent. Resign, resign, resign, motion of no confidence, force a General Election after the recess, with Labour supporting Brexit and the soft option "obviously" "not tenable" snatch the reigns of power 4 to 6 months from the cutoff date, shove two fingers up to Europe and force the hardest of hard Brexits with no opposition.

Because it's "what the people want".

[Rhythm]

The point there about Labour offering no opposition is key. It's meant that since the last GE, the Tories have been able to use the "overwhelming support for Brexit" line unopposed as well as hiding from the fact that the parties behind the Leave campaign cheated.

Referendum = cheaty but 52/48 split

General Election = minority government but 80% voters supported Lab and Tory and therefore 80% voters "support Brexit".

Cunts, the lot of them

[Dio]

and force the hardest of hard Brexits with no opposition.

Actually it's been pointed out now that hard Brexit has fundamental legal issues over Ireland. We registered the Good Friday Agreement with the UN and signed it into international law. So by international law there cannot be a hard border in Ireland. That seems a very difficult circle to square.

[korruptor]

They can do a hard brexit if they kick the DUP into touch and put the border in the sea. That forces a GE, but if the GE comes after Brexit...

No right-minded politician would do that, but the Ultras aren't exactly right-minded.

[Little stoned kiwi]

I'm not familiar with the intricacies in detail but my 2 Euros...the government are being difficult about solutions to see if they can manipulate the EU into accepting the UK in the single market.
Which, if that's correct, is very, very twatish.

[Harlequin]

They can do a hard brexit if they kick the DUP into touch and put the border in the sea. That forces a GE, but if the GE comes after Brexit...

Would it be properly hard if a large chunk of the U.K. were still in or closely aligned with the EU?

[gilesgoat]

They can do a hard brexit if they kick the DUP into touch and put the border in the sea. That forces a GE, but if the GE comes after Brexit...

Would it be properly hard if a large chunk of the U.K. were still in or closely aligned with the EU?

"Abstracting" we could say that "all this proves" that even a democratic system based on voting has its own "failure points".

I think one thing that "should be really enforced very well" and as he we all know, sadly, it's all the contrary nowadays is that "when you make a decision it has to be VERY CLEAR what you are about to decide/do".

In a thing like Brexit , which is a quite serious/important life/impacting decision, it should be very clear what you really are voting for and what are the consequences.

Instead you got "murky information" which was more about "getting votes for one party or another" rather than really "vote for brexit" also what makes all this "even more mega idiotic" this was a referendum NO ONE was expecting to go that way and everyone was completely unprepared for all the consequences ( i.e. for example I think they completely forgot the story about Ireland in that moment ).

So even making a referendum about such an important thing with "but if something we did not expect happen we did not even know what to do" is almost criminal "so wtf are you making people vote for if you don't even know what to do about the consequences of the voting ?".

I think also "keep scaring people with stuff like NHS and promising you'll give them money if you vote for" .. is shit basically "almost a home made terrorism act" AND "you did not keep the promise at all" and I am sure quite some people voted FOR THAT that AGAIN was NOT "a vote for Brexit" because they had no idea what Brexit really meant.

It could be still to day "highly open to discussion" if that was "a legit informed referendum or not", it was .. "pretty dodgy" to say the least, a bit like those loan sharks or shady insurance companies pressing you with "it's all good it's all nice we are here to help you" to put your signature on a piece of paper or say "yes" .. to then ruin all the rest of your life ..

Same thing.

Now "It's the will of the people" .. no that's Theresa May trying to cover her arse/face with "legality" but even if that is partially true remains the fact that is "the biggest failure of voting systems" when you reach a situation that is very nearly 50% 50%.

I mean when you get a 51%, 49% or let's say even 53% 47% .. "it's not good enough" .. ok "where you put a limit" .. but .. it's still not "good enough" especially when this turns almost like a "one class of population VS another" when you get something like that MAYBE one should say "hang hold, let's hold things a minute, let's try to understand a bit better what's going on".

I don't say "you should immediately cancel results" what I am saying is "ok we see this is happening, is any better way we can get more consent ?" .. because then you end up with a nation split in 2

Anyway .. personally I got VERY DISAPPOINTED about Labour for in all this literally "not having good leaders at all and not having balls" and I am still disappointed with it, it's in a complete shambles and there really seems like "there are no good people to restore it to something that works better"

I am very disappointed that in all this talk and talk and blah fundamentally "there's lot of political talk crap but it's not clear at all how things will going to be" ( probably the shittest possible outcome one can not even think of ).

Since beginning all this thing it's not really been done "for Brexit" but "to get political advantage there and there for this and that", starting from Cameron

Overall sounds "as bad as" "let's make America great again" and I don't think "needs more to be said" besides I remember when May say saying "our best friend Mr Trump" and see now "how big friend" he is with his "America first".

I don't mind if a nation wants to have "more control" or "more determination" on its things, but I think it should could have been done the same still within the EU, you lost really big in there by all this Brexit this is a thing that will remain in history for very long time.

[merman]

Facebook finder £500,000 over the Cambridge Analytica data breach.

A tiny amount to a huge corporation, especially when you compare it with the damage being done by Brexit.

There are CLEAR links between Leave and Russia, just as there are clear links between Trump and Russia. Both results should be overturned, stopped, erased from the history books...

[gilesgoat]

Facebook finder £500,000 over the Cambridge Analytica data breach.

A tiny amount to a huge corporation, especially when you compare it with the damage being done by Brexit.

There are CLEAR links between Leave and Russia, just as there are clear links between Trump and Russia. Both results should be overturned, stopped, erased from the history books...

Which if it's really correct what you say opens an interesting question as I'd be inclined to believe ( ok it's a "bilateral damage" ) that Brexit is going to hurt UK more than it's going to overall hurt EU as the rest - still bad for BOTH sides.

The question is "so was it all a grand plan of Putin to destabilize/destroy USA and UK ?"

"Put them both in such bad situation" that at SOME point in the future they'll have to come to Russia asking for help and/or allow Russia to proceed with some "other plans" ?

Like "we can't directly attack them, but we can fuck them up by fucking up their leaders and systems ?"

Well by putting Trump as USA president they certainly scored "really big" in there ...

[Little stoned kiwi]

Putin is a lot of things, but I don't think he's a Bond villain. He's be sitting in his chair with a smug smirk because he hasn't had to do anything...while still getting all the credit for it.

[gilesgoat]

Putin is a lot of things, but I don't think he's a Bond villain. He's be sitting in his chair with a smug smirk because he hasn't had to do anything...while still getting all the credit for it.

We'll see about that in 10 years time .. there were many conspiracy theories that were believed to be just that .. and then be proved wrong ( i.e. they were correct ).

[gravy]

Putin is a lot of things, but I don't think he's a Bond villain. He's be sitting in his chair with a smug smirk because he hasn't had to do anything...while still getting all the credit for it.

It's pretty well documented, to the point of successful conviction, that Russian groups spent a lot of effort trying to influence the US election.

Efficacy is arguable though.

Putting election rigging aside Putin is pretty much a bona fide Bond villain. I'd argue Ian Flemming's estate would have a solid case against him for copyright infringement

[KlaxonCow]

(And it's worth noting that Adam Curtis was pointing this out before Trump or Brexit, and Russia's involvement in those things to create confusing "fake news", happened. Basically, Russia's internal strategy of "confuse the enemy, so they have no idea how to respond (which, in effect, paralyses your enemies, like rabbits in a headlight)" has now been turned outward to other countries.)