Why on earth bring someone's children into the political/twitter domain? They should be wholly out of bounds, unless paraded on the running board of a 1925 Rolls Royce phantom by their parents for some kind of intended political gain.
I have no idea whether she meant well but I read it as passive/aggressive.
Probably because the Telegraph had done so (and named them) the day before ?
Why would her Parliamentary colleagues want revenge for that?
Because some of them are Remainers?
Just look at the reaction on here. “I hate her because Brexit”. “She deserves to go for Brexit” etc etc
I don’t believe there is some vast blob Remoaner conspiracy to destroy brexiteer ministers. I do believe the Westminster civil service is very Remainery (how can it not be?) and will take the chance to enact revenge on prominent Leavers if given an opportunity. It’s a big cultural division
There are STILL people who think Brexit was a bad idea. They just can’t let go
" I do believe the Westminster civil service is very Remainery (how can it not be?) and will take the chance to enact revenge on prominent Leavers if given an opportunity. It’s a big cultural division"
While, being largely London-dwelling the Westminster civil service probably will skew remain, the idea that they'll corporately seek to wreak 'revenge' on Brexit-supporting ministers is nonsense. I knew we'd start getting snakes like Wootton creeping out and trying to shift the blame onto public servants rather than actually looking at the facts. It is far more likely that her fellow MPs are manoeuvring against her than civil servants (who after all, are well aware that there's hardly much likelihood of a liberal remainer being moved into Home Sec).
Have to say as well, the general thrust of 'she has to go' motivation I've seen on here seems to coalesce around her being thick, entitled and bonkers, rather than her being a brexiter.
Anyone who uses the ludicrous term “brexiter” is a tragic Remoaner fuck, so you can be politely ignored on this point
Genuinely not sure I understand what you mean? What's the proper word for someone who supported Brexit that is any more/less ludicrous than 'Brexiter'? As opposed to 'Remainer', which it's the counterpart to? Seems pretty innocuous to me.
Brexiter is a term invented to avoid using the word “brexiteer” as that was seen as making Brexit sound glamorous and dashing - like buccaneer or mountaineer
Even now the FT will ONLY use the word Brexiter for exactly this reason, even tho the rest of the world uses Brexiteer
It’s a dead giveaway if anyone uses it (consciously or not)
I suspect that Brexit will be a cultural fault line in our politics for generations, even when we’ve forgotten all the original issues that caused it. Like the Guelphs and Ghibellines in Renaissance Florence
Brexiter is a term which reminds Brexiters of their idiocy and place in the pecking order (low, very low).
Like w***er. In fact the two are synonymous.
The bitterness of the middle class Londoner at full employment for working class northerners is a delight to see.
On a day when Leon is up early I would have thought he was a shoo in for the most absurd post before lunchtime, but congratulations it's not even 10.30 and you win.
So there'll be a settled view on Brexit good or bad in about 30-40 years. Whether it will be the right one is debatable
Except not really.
Before the vote, lot's of people said it be a bad thing, and bad things would happen.
Since the vote, bad things have happened.
The number of people who agree it's been a bad thing has monotonically risen since the event.
There is no Universe in which it turns out not have been a bad thing.
Yet still the cultists cling on...
Yes, two bad things have happened since Brexit: covid and Ukraine. Occasionally some on the fringes attempt to blame these things on Brexit. But these people are maniacs.
I tend to disregard those who see no universes in which Brexit is a good thing, because they are clearly not thinking through all the possible futures...
We're certainly not currently in one of those.
Some of us have argued, rather persistently, since the vote as to how the position might have been, and might be improved.
Why would her Parliamentary colleagues want revenge for that?
Because some of them are Remainers?
Just look at the reaction on here. “I hate her because Brexit”. “She deserves to go for Brexit” etc etc
I don’t believe there is some vast blob Remoaner conspiracy to destroy brexiteer ministers. I do believe the Westminster civil service is very Remainery (how can it not be?) and will take the chance to enact revenge on prominent Leavers if given an opportunity. It’s a big cultural division
There are STILL people who think Brexit was a bad idea. They just can’t let go
" I do believe the Westminster civil service is very Remainery (how can it not be?) and will take the chance to enact revenge on prominent Leavers if given an opportunity. It’s a big cultural division"
While, being largely London-dwelling the Westminster civil service probably will skew remain, the idea that they'll corporately seek to wreak 'revenge' on Brexit-supporting ministers is nonsense. I knew we'd start getting snakes like Wootton creeping out and trying to shift the blame onto public servants rather than actually looking at the facts. It is far more likely that her fellow MPs are manoeuvring against her than civil servants (who after all, are well aware that there's hardly much likelihood of a liberal remainer being moved into Home Sec).
Have to say as well, the general thrust of 'she has to go' motivation I've seen on here seems to coalesce around her being thick, entitled and bonkers, rather than her being a brexiter.
Anyone who uses the ludicrous term “brexiter” is a tragic Remoaner fuck, so you can be politely ignored on this point
Genuinely not sure I understand what you mean? What's the proper word for someone who supported Brexit that is any more/less ludicrous than 'Brexiter'? As opposed to 'Remainer', which it's the counterpart to? Seems pretty innocuous to me.
Brexiter is a term invented to avoid using the word “brexiteer” as that was seen as making Brexit sound glamorous and dashing - like buccaneer or mountaineer
Even now the FT will ONLY use the word Brexiter for exactly this reason, even tho the rest of the world uses Brexiteer
It’s a dead giveaway if anyone uses it (consciously or not)
I suspect that Brexit will be a cultural fault line in our politics for generations, even when we’ve forgotten all the original issues that caused it. Like the Guelphs and Ghibellines in Renaissance Florence
Brexiter is a term which reminds Brexiters of their idiocy and place in the pecking order (low, very low).
Like w***er. In fact the two are synonymous.
The bitterness of the middle class Londoner at full employment for working class northerners is a delight to see.
If the press is be believed theyre screwing up London as a financial centre becuase theyre all too busy introducing rules and non jobs rather than doing any actual work. At this rate theyll be overtaken by Stoke,
On the other hand, it will take a lot for London to get as bad as San Francisco.
The difference between the San Francisco I visited in the 1990s and the one I visited in 2019 was one of the most shocking things I've ever seen in the developed world. (And I've lived in Baltimore for a benchmark!)
A friend of mine, from India, described SF as being a bit like Bangalore - which must also be a pretty terrible benchmark!
Why on earth bring someone's children into the political/twitter domain? They should be wholly out of bounds, unless paraded on the running board of a 1925 Rolls Royce phantom by their parents for some kind of intended political gain.
I have no idea whether she meant well but I read it as passive/aggressive.
Probably because the Telegraph had done so (and named them) the day before ?
Which means that if he wants to sue the Telegraph for a breach of privacy, he has now found himself a co-defendant.
So there'll be a settled view on Brexit good or bad in about 30-40 years. Whether it will be the right one is debatable
Except not really.
Before the vote, lot's of people said it be a bad thing, and bad things would happen.
Since the vote, bad things have happened.
The number of people who agree it's been a bad thing has monotonically risen since the event.
There is no Universe in which it turns out not have been a bad thing.
Yet still the cultists cling on...
Yes, two bad things have happened since Brexit: covid and Ukraine. Occasionally some on the fringes attempt to blame these things on Brexit. But these people are maniacs.
I tend to disregard those who see no universes in which Brexit is a good thing, because they are clearly not thinking through all the possible futures. There is a highly plausible future, for example, in which the Euro goes to shit and the less attached we are to the EU the better. I think that future is quite likely. Now you might think, like kinabalu, that future probably won't happen. That would be fair enough. But to say there is no future in which Brexit was the right move is insane.
Excellent post. I am an avid remainer, but I would really like to be proved wrong and I accept I could be. Even though I feel strongly it is unlikely I would really like it to be so.
Thank you. Although I think my position is that I don't necessarily want to be proved right. There are two (non-exclusive) possible futures in which Brexit turns out to be the right decision: - Brexit turns out to be a good opportunity and the UK can grow more outside the EU. - Bremain would have turned out to be a bad option.
I think the first is reasonably possible, but my vote for Leave was more based in expectation of the second. I think there is a lot which could go wrong with the EU. (The two most prominent ones being the Euro going to shit and the integration ratchet winding ever tighter). I don't really want to be proved right on this though!
Leave/Remain was a really complex balancing act of imagining hundreds of different futures of Brexit and hundreds of different futures of Bremain, and coming to some sort of judgement of the likelihood of each. Even the really expensive analyses barely scratched the surface on this, tending to assume many things would not change, when in reality any change of circumstance causes people to make different decisions. And none of them assumed a global pandemic or the biggest European war in 75 years. It was impossible to know how it would turn out. There are futures in which Brexit > Bremain, and there are futures in which Bremain > Brexit. My judgement was that Bremain was the higher risk option - but I would be very happy with a future in which the risks I feared do not come to pass, and in which Britain and Europe co-operate and both continue to prosper and Brexit turns out not to have really mattered much either way.
Leave/Remain was a really complex balancing act of imagining hundreds of different futures of Brexit and hundreds of different futures of Bremain, and coming to some sort of judgement of the likelihood of each.
If only that were true
For a very large number of voters, Brexit was a simple act of voting Leave if you hate immigrants.
Why would her Parliamentary colleagues want revenge for that?
Because some of them are Remainers?
Just look at the reaction on here. “I hate her because Brexit”. “She deserves to go for Brexit” etc etc
I don’t believe there is some vast blob Remoaner conspiracy to destroy brexiteer ministers. I do believe the Westminster civil service is very Remainery (how can it not be?) and will take the chance to enact revenge on prominent Leavers if given an opportunity. It’s a big cultural division
There are STILL people who think Brexit was a bad idea. They just can’t let go
" I do believe the Westminster civil service is very Remainery (how can it not be?) and will take the chance to enact revenge on prominent Leavers if given an opportunity. It’s a big cultural division"
While, being largely London-dwelling the Westminster civil service probably will skew remain, the idea that they'll corporately seek to wreak 'revenge' on Brexit-supporting ministers is nonsense. I knew we'd start getting snakes like Wootton creeping out and trying to shift the blame onto public servants rather than actually looking at the facts. It is far more likely that her fellow MPs are manoeuvring against her than civil servants (who after all, are well aware that there's hardly much likelihood of a liberal remainer being moved into Home Sec).
Have to say as well, the general thrust of 'she has to go' motivation I've seen on here seems to coalesce around her being thick, entitled and bonkers, rather than her being a brexiter.
Anyone who uses the ludicrous term “brexiter” is a tragic Remoaner fuck, so you can be politely ignored on this point
Genuinely not sure I understand what you mean? What's the proper word for someone who supported Brexit that is any more/less ludicrous than 'Brexiter'? As opposed to 'Remainer', which it's the counterpart to? Seems pretty innocuous to me.
Brexiter is a term invented to avoid using the word “brexiteer” as that was seen as making Brexit sound glamorous and dashing - like buccaneer or mountaineer
Even now the FT will ONLY use the word Brexiter for exactly this reason, even tho the rest of the world uses Brexiteer
It’s a dead giveaway if anyone uses it (consciously or not)
I suspect that Brexit will be a cultural fault line in our politics for generations, even when we’ve forgotten all the original issues that caused it. Like the Guelphs and Ghibellines in Renaissance Florence
Brexiter is a term which reminds Brexiters of their idiocy and place in the pecking order (low, very low).
Like w***er. In fact the two are synonymous.
The bitterness of the middle class Londoner at full employment for working class northerners is a delight to see.
If the press is be believed theyre screwing up London as a financial centre becuase theyre all too busy introducing rules and non jobs rather than doing any actual work. At this rate theyll be overtaken by Stoke,
On the other hand, it will take a lot for London to get as bad as San Francisco.
The difference between the San Francisco I visited in the 1990s and the one I visited in 2019 was one of the most shocking things I've ever seen in the developed world. (And I've lived in Baltimore for a benchmark!)
I visited SF with my dad in 1999 and remember being struck at the number of homeless people. I wasn't fond of the place generally; it seemed like a small, grimy and uninteresting city with a few tourist attractions tacked on.
Contrast with LA which felt incredibly vibrant and exhilarating; I've been fascinated by the place ever since (though have never returned).
Why on earth bring someone's children into the political/twitter domain? They should be wholly out of bounds, unless paraded on the running board of a 1925 Rolls Royce phantom by their parents for some kind of intended political gain.
I have no idea whether she meant well but I read it as passive/aggressive.
Because Raab cited the pressures on his young family as the reason for his standing down as MP and shared this with the press. Jess Phillips said, I agree these pressures are tough on politicians families.
People here are making this into a vile threat by Phillips rather than she's showing empathy.
On the Rebublican side, they need to quickly work out who is the challenger to Trump, and whittle the field down as quickly as possible. This is where the betting value might lie. Someone mentioned Tim Scott upthread, who could come from nowhere as Obama did in 2008. You’ll probably need a few good value losers to pick the right person though!
It might be good to have a thread on each of the other contenders, even if the header was just a link to their wikipedia page and a video of them arguing with someone.
Why would her Parliamentary colleagues want revenge for that?
Because some of them are Remainers?
Just look at the reaction on here. “I hate her because Brexit”. “She deserves to go for Brexit” etc etc
I don’t believe there is some vast blob Remoaner conspiracy to destroy brexiteer ministers. I do believe the Westminster civil service is very Remainery (how can it not be?) and will take the chance to enact revenge on prominent Leavers if given an opportunity. It’s a big cultural division
There are STILL people who think Brexit was a bad idea. They just can’t let go
" I do believe the Westminster civil service is very Remainery (how can it not be?) and will take the chance to enact revenge on prominent Leavers if given an opportunity. It’s a big cultural division"
While, being largely London-dwelling the Westminster civil service probably will skew remain, the idea that they'll corporately seek to wreak 'revenge' on Brexit-supporting ministers is nonsense. I knew we'd start getting snakes like Wootton creeping out and trying to shift the blame onto public servants rather than actually looking at the facts. It is far more likely that her fellow MPs are manoeuvring against her than civil servants (who after all, are well aware that there's hardly much likelihood of a liberal remainer being moved into Home Sec).
Have to say as well, the general thrust of 'she has to go' motivation I've seen on here seems to coalesce around her being thick, entitled and bonkers, rather than her being a brexiter.
Anyone who uses the ludicrous term “brexiter” is a tragic Remoaner fuck, so you can be politely ignored on this point
Genuinely not sure I understand what you mean? What's the proper word for someone who supported Brexit that is any more/less ludicrous than 'Brexiter'? As opposed to 'Remainer', which it's the counterpart to? Seems pretty innocuous to me.
Brexiter is a term invented to avoid using the word “brexiteer” as that was seen as making Brexit sound glamorous and dashing - like buccaneer or mountaineer
Even now the FT will ONLY use the word Brexiter for exactly this reason, even tho the rest of the world uses Brexiteer
It’s a dead giveaway if anyone uses it (consciously or not)
I suspect that Brexit will be a cultural fault line in our politics for generations, even when we’ve forgotten all the original issues that caused it. Like the Guelphs and Ghibellines in Renaissance Florence
Brexiter is a term which reminds Brexiters of their idiocy and place in the pecking order (low, very low).
Like w***er. In fact the two are synonymous.
The bitterness of the middle class Londoner at full employment for working class northerners is a delight to see.
If the press is be believed theyre screwing up London as a financial centre becuase theyre all too busy introducing rules and non jobs rather than doing any actual work. At this rate theyll be overtaken by Stoke,
On the other hand, it will take a lot for London to get as bad as San Francisco.
The difference between the San Francisco I visited in the 1990s and the one I visited in 2019 was one of the most shocking things I've ever seen in the developed world. (And I've lived in Baltimore for a benchmark!)
I visited SF with my dad in 1999 and remember being struck at the number of homeless people. I wasn't fond of the place generally; it seemed like a small, grimy and uninteresting city with a few tourist attractions tacked on.
Contrast with LA which felt incredibly vibrant and exhilarating; I've been fascinated by the place ever since (though have never returned).
I remember wandering around the Tenderloin in about 1998 and hearing a guy shout up to a woman in his apartment “and bring my gun with you”
It was quite freaky then. Oddly so for such a rich city. The idea it has declined to a startling extent does not entice me back
Why on earth bring someone's children into the political/twitter domain? They should be wholly out of bounds, unless paraded on the running board of a 1925 Rolls Royce phantom by their parents for some kind of intended political gain.
I have no idea whether she meant well but I read it as passive/aggressive.
Probably because the Telegraph had done so (and named them) the day before ?
Which means that if he wants to sue the Telegraph for a breach of privacy, he has now found himself a co-defendant.
I don't see her as a co-defendant, the Telegraph made it public knowledge, Jess simply spoke about her family's personal experience.
Why on earth bring someone's children into the political/twitter domain? They should be wholly out of bounds, unless paraded on the running board of a 1925 Rolls Royce phantom by their parents for some kind of intended political gain.
I have no idea whether she meant well but I read it as passive/aggressive.
Because Raab cited the pressures on his young family as the reason for his standing down as MP and shared this with the press. Jess Phillips said, I agree these pressures are tough on politicians families.
People here are making this into a vile threat by Phillips rather than she's showing empathy.
Yes, I take it back, I hadn't seen Raab had mentioned this too.
Why on earth bring someone's children into the political/twitter domain? They should be wholly out of bounds, unless paraded on the running board of a 1925 Rolls Royce phantom by their parents for some kind of intended political gain.
I have no idea whether she meant well but I read it as passive/aggressive.
Probably because the Telegraph had done so (and named them) the day before ?
Which means that if he wants to sue the Telegraph for a breach of privacy, he has now found himself a co-defendant.
I don't see her as a co-defendant, the Telegraph made it public knowledge, Jess simply spoke about her family's personal experience.
Surely Raab wouldn't be stupid enough to draw more attention to his children and their identities by sueing?
So there'll be a settled view on Brexit good or bad in about 30-40 years. Whether it will be the right one is debatable
Except not really.
Before the vote, lot's of people said it be a bad thing, and bad things would happen.
Since the vote, bad things have happened.
The number of people who agree it's been a bad thing has monotonically risen since the event.
There is no Universe in which it turns out not have been a bad thing.
Yet still the cultists cling on...
Yes, two bad things have happened since Brexit: covid and Ukraine. Occasionally some on the fringes attempt to blame these things on Brexit. But these people are maniacs.
I tend to disregard those who see no universes in which Brexit is a good thing, because they are clearly not thinking through all the possible futures...
We're certainly not currently in one of those.
Some of us have argued, rather persistently, since the vote as to how the position might have been, and might be improved.
Well 'how might we improve things' seems an entirely reasonable question however things are. Clearly neither Brexit nor Bremain was, or would have been, an end state: the world moves on, just as our relationship with all other countries moves on. Those arguments don't strike me as unreasonable to have, just as they wouldn't have been unreasonable had we remained. My view is still that we are better off not part of the EU but with a good working relationship with it. But the working relationship will require constant work, just as it would as a member of the EU, and just as it does with other countries. That's why we have a foreign office.
So there'll be a settled view on Brexit good or bad in about 30-40 years. Whether it will be the right one is debatable
Except not really.
Before the vote, lot's of people said it be a bad thing, and bad things would happen.
Since the vote, bad things have happened.
The number of people who agree it's been a bad thing has monotonically risen since the event.
There is no Universe in which it turns out not have been a bad thing.
Yet still the cultists cling on...
Yes, two bad things have happened since Brexit: covid and Ukraine. Occasionally some on the fringes attempt to blame these things on Brexit. But these people are maniacs.
I tend to disregard those who see no universes in which Brexit is a good thing, because they are clearly not thinking through all the possible futures...
We're certainly not currently in one of those.
Some of us have argued, rather persistently, since the vote as to how the position might have been, and might be improved.
Well 'how might we improve things' seems an entirely reasonable question however things are. Clearly neither Brexit nor Bremain was, or would have been, an end state: the world moves on, just as our relationship with all other countries moves on. Those arguments don't strike me as unreasonable to have, just as they wouldn't have been unreasonable had we remained. My view is still that we are better off not part of the EU but with a good working relationship with it. But the working relationship will require constant work, just as it would as a member of the EU, and just as it does with other countries. That's why we have a foreign office.
Switzerland seems to manage this quite well. It’s not impossible it’s just irritating. But that is the price the Swiss are prepared to pay - to maintain their sovereignty. And this sovereignty is no “illusion”. The Swiss have it and they want to keep it. There is almost zero desire to join the EU
Why on earth bring someone's children into the political/twitter domain? They should be wholly out of bounds, unless paraded on the running board of a 1925 Rolls Royce phantom by their parents for some kind of intended political gain.
I have no idea whether she meant well but I read it as passive/aggressive.
Probably because the Telegraph had done so (and named them) the day before ?
Which means that if he wants to sue the Telegraph for a breach of privacy, he has now found himself a co-defendant.
I don't see her as a co-defendant, the Telegraph made it public knowledge, Jess simply spoke about her family's personal experience.
Hasn't Raab implicitly cited "more time with his family" as a justification for not standing?
Leave/Remain was a really complex balancing act of imagining hundreds of different futures of Brexit and hundreds of different futures of Bremain, and coming to some sort of judgement of the likelihood of each.
If only that were true
For a very large number of voters, Brexit was a simple act of voting Leave if you hate immigrants.
For a large number of both sides the act of voting for their chosen side was, shall we say, a bit tribal. That's democracy. I don't think it's obvious that one side was any guiltier of this than the other.
So there'll be a settled view on Brexit good or bad in about 30-40 years. Whether it will be the right one is debatable
Except not really.
Before the vote, lot's of people said it be a bad thing, and bad things would happen.
Since the vote, bad things have happened.
The number of people who agree it's been a bad thing has monotonically risen since the event.
There is no Universe in which it turns out not have been a bad thing.
Yet still the cultists cling on...
Yes, two bad things have happened since Brexit: covid and Ukraine. Occasionally some on the fringes attempt to blame these things on Brexit. But these people are maniacs.
I tend to disregard those who see no universes in which Brexit is a good thing, because they are clearly not thinking through all the possible futures...
We're certainly not currently in one of those.
Some of us have argued, rather persistently, since the vote as to how the position might have been, and might be improved.
Well 'how might we improve things' seems an entirely reasonable question however things are. Clearly neither Brexit nor Bremain was, or would have been, an end state: the world moves on, just as our relationship with all other countries moves on. Those arguments don't strike me as unreasonable to have, just as they wouldn't have been unreasonable had we remained. My view is still that we are better off not part of the EU but with a good working relationship with it. But the working relationship will require constant work, just as it would as a member of the EU, and just as it does with other countries. That's why we have a foreign office.
Switzerland seems to manage this quite well. It’s not impossible it’s just irritating. But that is the price the Swiss are prepared to pay - to maintain their sovereignty. And this sovereignty is no “illusion”. The Swiss have it and they want to keep it. There is almost zero desire to join the EU
Yes - and I'd note that managing a relationship with the EU when you are a member of the EU is also irritating.
Why on earth bring someone's children into the political/twitter domain? They should be wholly out of bounds, unless paraded on the running board of a 1925 Rolls Royce phantom by their parents for some kind of intended political gain.
I have no idea whether she meant well but I read it as passive/aggressive.
Probably because the Telegraph had done so (and named them) the day before ?
Which means that if he wants to sue the Telegraph for a breach of privacy, he has now found himself a co-defendant.
Eh ? Wikipedia states that's he's got two kids (as is also the case for her), which wouldn't be the case if he were bothered about it.
https://twitter.com/MattLightCrim/status/1660862035314311168 Recent events are focusing attention on Russia's Belgorod oblast, a region with a strong connection to Ukraine that I visited for doctoral dissertation research in 2005 and 2006. A few thoughts on Belgorod and another Russian region with links to Ukraine, Krasnodarskii Krai.
...Belgorod has an interesting past on the margins between the Muscovite state and historically Ukrainian regions. Its population has a mixed Russian and Ukrainian background. When I visited, I met a few people from rural backgrounds who spoke a Ukrainian dialect.
...I don't know how many people there are now; presumably many fewer than in the past. Belgorod was nearly included in modern Ukraine but was ultimately assigned to the Russian Federation, where (at least after the 1920s) Ukrainian was not taught in schools and was stigmatized...
...A somewhat similar pattern prevails in Krasnodarskii Krai, with the significant difference that the region's original inhabitants, the Circassian people, were largely massacred and ethnically cleansed during Russian imperial conquest in the 19th century...
Worth reading the whole thread, as it gives another context to the claims about eastern Ukraine being "essentially Russian" etc.
The Circassian genocide was something I didn't know about. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circassian_genocide The Circassian genocide, or Tsitsekun, was the Russian Empire's systematic mass murder, ethnic cleansing, and expulsion of 80–97% of the Circassian population, around 800,000–1,500,000 people, during and after the Russo-Circassian War (1763–1864)...
I often …. well, sometimes, in an idle moment…… wondered what happened to the Circassians. Apparently the women were very beautiful and prized by the Turks for harems.
On the Rebublican side, they need to quickly work out who is the challenger to Trump, and whittle the field down as quickly as possible. This is where the betting value might lie. Someone mentioned Tim Scott upthread, who could come from nowhere as Obama did in 2008. You’ll probably need a few good value losers to pick the right person though!
It might be good to have a thread on each of the other contenders, even if the header was just a link to their wikipedia page and a video of them arguing with someone.
I might actually have a go at that in the next week or so, and submit it as a header.
As of now, we have declared candidates:
Donald Trump (76, former President) Nikki Haley (51, former gov of South Carolina) Asa Hutchinson (72, gov of Arkansas) Tim Scott (57, US Senator from South Carolina) Vivek Ramaswarmy (37, businessman from Ohio) Larry Elder (71, radio host, former candidate for governor of California)
Possibly - Ron DeSantis (44, governor of Florida)
A dozen or more maybes, including Chris Christie, Tucker Carlson, Mike Pence, Glenn Youngkin, Gregg Abbott, Liz Cheney, Ted Cruz…
I think Phillips would have been better saying something like ", but I can understand why a politician would want to put their family first". Her comment is just a little bit specific and not sure it would be much comfort to Raab.
Eddie Marsan @eddiemarsan · May 21 I had to do a speed awareness course and, as a famous actor, it was really humiliating…no one recognised me.
James Blunt
@JamesBlunt Mine was on Zoom, and I thought I’d got away with not being recognised, till the instructor asked people if they could think of ways to keep calm whilst driving. Someone suggested listening to some James Blunt, and everyone pissed themselves.
Why would her Parliamentary colleagues want revenge for that?
Because some of them are Remainers?
Just look at the reaction on here. “I hate her because Brexit”. “She deserves to go for Brexit” etc etc
I don’t believe there is some vast blob Remoaner conspiracy to destroy brexiteer ministers. I do believe the Westminster civil service is very Remainery (how can it not be?) and will take the chance to enact revenge on prominent Leavers if given an opportunity. It’s a big cultural division
There are STILL people who think Brexit was a bad idea. They just can’t let go
" I do believe the Westminster civil service is very Remainery (how can it not be?) and will take the chance to enact revenge on prominent Leavers if given an opportunity. It’s a big cultural division"
While, being largely London-dwelling the Westminster civil service probably will skew remain, the idea that they'll corporately seek to wreak 'revenge' on Brexit-supporting ministers is nonsense. I knew we'd start getting snakes like Wootton creeping out and trying to shift the blame onto public servants rather than actually looking at the facts. It is far more likely that her fellow MPs are manoeuvring against her than civil servants (who after all, are well aware that there's hardly much likelihood of a liberal remainer being moved into Home Sec).
Have to say as well, the general thrust of 'she has to go' motivation I've seen on here seems to coalesce around her being thick, entitled and bonkers, rather than her being a brexiter.
Anyone who uses the ludicrous term “brexiter” is a tragic Remoaner fuck, so you can be politely ignored on this point
Genuinely not sure I understand what you mean? What's the proper word for someone who supported Brexit that is any more/less ludicrous than 'Brexiter'? As opposed to 'Remainer', which it's the counterpart to? Seems pretty innocuous to me.
Brexiter is a term invented to avoid using the word “brexiteer” as that was seen as making Brexit sound glamorous and dashing - like buccaneer or mountaineer
Even now the FT will ONLY use the word Brexiter for exactly this reason, even tho the rest of the world uses Brexiteer
It’s a dead giveaway if anyone uses it (consciously or not)
I suspect that Brexit will be a cultural fault line in our politics for generations, even when we’ve forgotten all the original issues that caused it. Like the Guelphs and Ghibellines in Renaissance Florence
Brexiter is a term which reminds Brexiters of their idiocy and place in the pecking order (low, very low).
Like w***er. In fact the two are synonymous.
The bitterness of the middle class Londoner at full employment for working class northerners is a delight to see.
If the press is be believed theyre screwing up London as a financial centre becuase theyre all too busy introducing rules and non jobs rather than doing any actual work. At this rate theyll be overtaken by Stoke,
On the other hand, it will take a lot for London to get as bad as San Francisco.
The difference between the San Francisco I visited in the 1990s and the one I visited in 2019 was one of the most shocking things I've ever seen in the developed world. (And I've lived in Baltimore for a benchmark!)
I visited SF with my dad in 1999 and remember being struck at the number of homeless people. I wasn't fond of the place generally; it seemed like a small, grimy and uninteresting city with a few tourist attractions tacked on.
Contrast with LA which felt incredibly vibrant and exhilarating; I've been fascinated by the place ever since (though have never returned).
When I spent time there back in the 80s, it was great. Though perhaps that was just because I was young. Never really took to LA.
@nicholascecil Labour's lead over the Tories close to 16 points..Lab 44 per cent, down five points on March, Conservatives 28 per cent, up two points, the Lib-Dems 13 per cent, up two points, and the Greens unchanged on six per cent, @IpsosUK poll for @EveningStandard
Why on earth bring someone's children into the political/twitter domain? They should be wholly out of bounds, unless paraded on the running board of a 1925 Rolls Royce phantom by their parents for some kind of intended political gain.
I have no idea whether she meant well but I read it as passive/aggressive.
Because Raab cited the pressures on his young family as the reason for his standing down as MP and shared this with the press. Jess Phillips said, I agree these pressures are tough on politicians families.
People here are making this into a vile threat by Phillips rather than she's showing empathy.
The Telegraph says that it "has seen an exchange of letters" between him and his CA chairman. Doesn't immediately look like "shared with the press".
@nicholascecil Labour's lead over the Tories close to 16 points..Lab 44 per cent, down five points on March, Conservatives 28 per cent, up two points, the Lib-Dems 13 per cent, up two points, and the Greens unchanged on six per cent, @IpsosUK poll for @EveningStandard
This "email trail" seems from the reporting to be emails sent to the Cabinet Office by concerned parties (including the Home Secretary herself?), not emails from her ordering civil servants to arrange her course
I'd guess the leak is from the Cabinet Office
In wholly unrelated Cabinet Office news, the current Director General of the Economic and Domestic Affairs Secretariat is one Nicholas Joicey
"The Economic and Domestic Affairs Secretariat (EDS) is a secretariat in the United Kingdom Cabinet Office.
It supports the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom and Minister for the Cabinet Office develop, co-ordinate and agree the UK government's domestic policy across the departments of state; with foreign and security policy co-ordinated by the separate National Security Secretariat (NSS). Together these two secretariats form the core what is the Cabinet Secretariat, and are the traditional redoubts of high fliers in the UK civil service. Being appointed to roles in EDS are highly coveted by talented civil servants, and competition is intense.
The head of EDS, who reports directly to the Cabinet Secretary, is a director general (or, before the mid-'90s renaming, a deputy secretary). It is widely regarded as one of the most powerful roles in the Civil Service due to having regular access to the prime minister, other cabinet-level ministers and their private secretaries, as well as the most senior officials in Whitehall to ensure 'collective agreement'. Without collective agreement and the issuing of a 'clearance' from EDS, departments cannot progress with policy announcements or take forward high profile and significant projects. In order to fulfil its duties, EDS officials work very closely with their counterparts in HM Treasury, 10 Downing Street and other teams in the Cabinet Office such as the Prime Minister's Implementation Unit.
The head of EDS (and more recently the head of the Cabinet Secretariats) is sometimes referred to as the Deputy Cabinet Secretary, due to running Cabinet and its subcommittees, as well as brokering policy decisions across government on behalf of the prime minister and his senior advisers. The head of EDS has a secure pass through the door that connects their office in 70 Whitehall to 10 Downing Street."
You think a politically-biased civil servant is risking his career to try and weaken a government that all the polls say will soon be swept away in any case? Sounds more like a desperate smear. Cui bono?
I didn't say any of that. Was the "In wholly unrelated Cabinet Office news" the particularly smeary bit of my post?
Just read that Truss gave the job with a No 10 pass to the Shadow Chancellor's husband in her first week as PM
So there'll be a settled view on Brexit good or bad in about 30-40 years. Whether it will be the right one is debatable
Except not really.
Before the vote, lot's of people said it be a bad thing, and bad things would happen.
Since the vote, bad things have happened.
The number of people who agree it's been a bad thing has monotonically risen since the event.
There is no Universe in which it turns out not have been a bad thing.
Yet still the cultists cling on...
Yes, two bad things have happened since Brexit: covid and Ukraine. Occasionally some on the fringes attempt to blame these things on Brexit. But these people are maniacs.
I tend to disregard those who see no universes in which Brexit is a good thing, because they are clearly not thinking through all the possible futures. There is a highly plausible future, for example, in which the Euro goes to shit and the less attached we are to the EU the better. I think that future is quite likely. Now you might think, like kinabalu, that future probably won't happen. That would be fair enough. But to say there is no future in which Brexit was the right move is insane.
Excellent post. I am an avid remainer, but I would really like to be proved wrong and I accept I could be. Even though I feel strongly it is unlikely I would really like it to be so.
Thank you. Although I think my position is that I don't necessarily want to be proved right. There are two (non-exclusive) possible futures in which Brexit turns out to be the right decision: - Brexit turns out to be a good opportunity and the UK can grow more outside the EU. - Bremain would have turned out to be a bad option.
I think the first is reasonably possible, but my vote for Leave was more based in expectation of the second. I think there is a lot which could go wrong with the EU. (The two most prominent ones being the Euro going to shit and the integration ratchet winding ever tighter). I don't really want to be proved right on this though!
Leave/Remain was a really complex balancing act of imagining hundreds of different futures of Brexit and hundreds of different futures of Bremain, and coming to some sort of judgement of the likelihood of each. Even the really expensive analyses barely scratched the surface on this, tending to assume many things would not change, when in reality any change of circumstance causes people to make different decisions. And none of them assumed a global pandemic or the biggest European war in 75 years. It was impossible to know how it would turn out. There are futures in which Brexit > Bremain, and there are futures in which Bremain > Brexit. My judgement was that Bremain was the higher risk option - but I would be very happy with a future in which the risks I feared do not come to pass, and in which Britain and Europe co-operate and both continue to prosper and Brexit turns out not to have really mattered much either way.
This pretty much spot on. I would add that there was no majority in the UK either for an absolute Remain or an absolute Leave. There was (and I hope still would be) a majority for a reformed EU, but once this was not on the table the only way out of the political union of the EU was to vote Brexit, while holding ones's nose.
By miles the better, imperfect, options now are the Norway route or the Switzerland route. The best chance of that, though slim, is a Labour government relying on resurgent LDs to form the next government.
@nicholascecil Labour's lead over the Tories close to 16 points..Lab 44 per cent, down five points on March, Conservatives 28 per cent, up two points, the Lib-Dems 13 per cent, up two points, and the Greens unchanged on six per cent, @IpsosUK poll for @EveningStandard
An outlier falling into line.
I think this is a small indicator of what will become the settled will of the voters: A Labour government relying on LD support. (Does Raab think so too perhaps?)
It’s also really weird to be in a country where everyone (apparently) likes their prime minister. Sisi. I guess there is a selection bias in who I am meeting (richer, English speaking) nonetheless they ALL approve of him and seem sincere. They say he has brought stability and is bringing prosperity
Same with Vladimir Putin for the first few years. The trick is to resign before hubris or insanity sets in.
On the Suella Braverman thing the precise wording of those emails will make all the difference. It really shouldn’t be a difficult investigation.
If she just asked a civil servant to explore whether an option to attend in private was available and concluded that there wasn’t then I think she’s safe. That’s just asking staff to do your research for you.
If she asked civil servants to try and lean on people to create an exception for her then it seems to be a clear breach of the ministerial code.
My reading is as follows
SB: Can you arrange me a private course, going in with the masses is going to be a real embarrassment and half of them will hate me. CS: No, Fuck off SB that's not my job. Arrange your own bloody course. SB: Sighs, walks off take points.
A bit embarrassing but not a breach of the code.
I still haven't seen a "Suella-friendly" explanation of why (according to "sources close" to her) she requested that the matter be referred to the Cabinet Office.
As people are engaged in creative writing exercises, perhaps they should have a go at that one.
So there'll be a settled view on Brexit good or bad in about 30-40 years. Whether it will be the right one is debatable
Except not really.
Before the vote, lot's of people said it be a bad thing, and bad things would happen.
Since the vote, bad things have happened.
The number of people who agree it's been a bad thing has monotonically risen since the event.
There is no Universe in which it turns out not have been a bad thing.
Yet still the cultists cling on...
Yes, two bad things have happened since Brexit: covid and Ukraine. Occasionally some on the fringes attempt to blame these things on Brexit. But these people are maniacs.
I tend to disregard those who see no universes in which Brexit is a good thing, because they are clearly not thinking through all the possible futures. There is a highly plausible future, for example, in which the Euro goes to shit and the less attached we are to the EU the better. I think that future is quite likely. Now you might think, like kinabalu, that future probably won't happen. That would be fair enough. But to say there is no future in which Brexit was the right move is insane.
Excellent post. I am an avid remainer, but I would really like to be proved wrong and I accept I could be. Even though I feel strongly it is unlikely I would really like it to be so.
Thank you. Although I think my position is that I don't necessarily want to be proved right. There are two (non-exclusive) possible futures in which Brexit turns out to be the right decision: - Brexit turns out to be a good opportunity and the UK can grow more outside the EU. - Bremain would have turned out to be a bad option.
I think the first is reasonably possible, but my vote for Leave was more based in expectation of the second. I think there is a lot which could go wrong with the EU. (The two most prominent ones being the Euro going to shit and the integration ratchet winding ever tighter). I don't really want to be proved right on this though!
Leave/Remain was a really complex balancing act of imagining hundreds of different futures of Brexit and hundreds of different futures of Bremain, and coming to some sort of judgement of the likelihood of each. Even the really expensive analyses barely scratched the surface on this, tending to assume many things would not change, when in reality any change of circumstance causes people to make different decisions. And none of them assumed a global pandemic or the biggest European war in 75 years. It was impossible to know how it would turn out. There are futures in which Brexit > Bremain, and there are futures in which Bremain > Brexit. My judgement was that Bremain was the higher risk option - but I would be very happy with a future in which the risks I feared do not come to pass, and in which Britain and Europe co-operate and both continue to prosper and Brexit turns out not to have really mattered much either way.
My position, which hasn't changed since 2016 ,is that Brexit was a big mistake for the UK given what it.wants to achieve as a country, but.we're not going back, so how are we going to live with our mistake? How.do we deal with the contradictions of Brexit?
A key motivation of Brexit was to "take back control" but the loss of influence means we become much more of.a rule taker. Are people on board with that, because that's how it's going to be? Not sure about that.
Another contradiction, coming to the fore.in recent weeks is a high immigration economy being the way forward.in a Brexit world when people voted Leave to reduce immigration.
None of this is unexpected. Mistakes have consequences. At some point we have to accept those consequences and deal with them.
It’s also really weird to be in a country where everyone (apparently) likes their prime minister. Sisi. I guess there is a selection bias in who I am meeting (richer, English speaking) nonetheless they ALL approve of him and seem sincere. They say he has brought stability and is bringing prosperity
Same with Vladimir Putin for the first few years. The trick is to resign before hubris or insanity sets in.
Yes indeed. Early Putin is a good comparison. He is quite the autocrat but I think a lot of Egyptians are comparing him to the alternative - total chaos and then probable Islamism. They don’t want islamism (especially the women)
So there'll be a settled view on Brexit good or bad in about 30-40 years. Whether it will be the right one is debatable
Except not really.
Before the vote, lot's of people said it be a bad thing, and bad things would happen.
Since the vote, bad things have happened.
The number of people who agree it's been a bad thing has monotonically risen since the event.
There is no Universe in which it turns out not have been a bad thing.
Yet still the cultists cling on...
Yes, two bad things have happened since Brexit: covid and Ukraine. Occasionally some on the fringes attempt to blame these things on Brexit. But these people are maniacs.
I tend to disregard those who see no universes in which Brexit is a good thing, because they are clearly not thinking through all the possible futures. There is a highly plausible future, for example, in which the Euro goes to shit and the less attached we are to the EU the better. I think that future is quite likely. Now you might think, like kinabalu, that future probably won't happen. That would be fair enough. But to say there is no future in which Brexit was the right move is insane.
Excellent post. I am an avid remainer, but I would really like to be proved wrong and I accept I could be. Even though I feel strongly it is unlikely I would really like it to be so.
Thank you. Although I think my position is that I don't necessarily want to be proved right. There are two (non-exclusive) possible futures in which Brexit turns out to be the right decision: - Brexit turns out to be a good opportunity and the UK can grow more outside the EU. - Bremain would have turned out to be a bad option.
I think the first is reasonably possible, but my vote for Leave was more based in expectation of the second. I think there is a lot which could go wrong with the EU. (The two most prominent ones being the Euro going to shit and the integration ratchet winding ever tighter). I don't really want to be proved right on this though!
Leave/Remain was a really complex balancing act of imagining hundreds of different futures of Brexit and hundreds of different futures of Bremain, and coming to some sort of judgement of the likelihood of each. Even the really expensive analyses barely scratched the surface on this, tending to assume many things would not change, when in reality any change of circumstance causes people to make different decisions. And none of them assumed a global pandemic or the biggest European war in 75 years. It was impossible to know how it would turn out. There are futures in which Brexit > Bremain, and there are futures in which Bremain > Brexit. My judgement was that Bremain was the higher risk option - but I would be very happy with a future in which the risks I feared do not come to pass, and in which Britain and Europe co-operate and both continue to prosper and Brexit turns out not to have really mattered much either way.
Yes. Not good Brexit or bad Brexit but a pointless Brexit. This is the dream and in the medium term it is still possible. Let's go for it. Let's shoot for the stars.
So there'll be a settled view on Brexit good or bad in about 30-40 years. Whether it will be the right one is debatable
Except not really.
Before the vote, lot's of people said it be a bad thing, and bad things would happen.
Since the vote, bad things have happened.
The number of people who agree it's been a bad thing has monotonically risen since the event.
There is no Universe in which it turns out not have been a bad thing.
Yet still the cultists cling on...
Yes, two bad things have happened since Brexit: covid and Ukraine. Occasionally some on the fringes attempt to blame these things on Brexit. But these people are maniacs.
I tend to disregard those who see no universes in which Brexit is a good thing, because they are clearly not thinking through all the possible futures. There is a highly plausible future, for example, in which the Euro goes to shit and the less attached we are to the EU the better. I think that future is quite likely. Now you might think, like kinabalu, that future probably won't happen. That would be fair enough. But to say there is no future in which Brexit was the right move is insane.
Excellent post. I am an avid remainer, but I would really like to be proved wrong and I accept I could be. Even though I feel strongly it is unlikely I would really like it to be so.
Thank you. Although I think my position is that I don't necessarily want to be proved right. There are two (non-exclusive) possible futures in which Brexit turns out to be the right decision: - Brexit turns out to be a good opportunity and the UK can grow more outside the EU. - Bremain would have turned out to be a bad option.
I think the first is reasonably possible, but my vote for Leave was more based in expectation of the second. I think there is a lot which could go wrong with the EU. (The two most prominent ones being the Euro going to shit and the integration ratchet winding ever tighter). I don't really want to be proved right on this though!
Leave/Remain was a really complex balancing act of imagining hundreds of different futures of Brexit and hundreds of different futures of Bremain, and coming to some sort of judgement of the likelihood of each. Even the really expensive analyses barely scratched the surface on this, tending to assume many things would not change, when in reality any change of circumstance causes people to make different decisions. And none of them assumed a global pandemic or the biggest European war in 75 years. It was impossible to know how it would turn out. There are futures in which Brexit > Bremain, and there are futures in which Bremain > Brexit. My judgement was that Bremain was the higher risk option - but I would be very happy with a future in which the risks I feared do not come to pass, and in which Britain and Europe co-operate and both continue to prosper and Brexit turns out not to have really mattered much either way.
Absolute bollox thinking. Imagine that EU may have an issue some day, so throw yourself off a cliff now to avoid it, barking.
Nick, I cant help but think you were one of those who mocked Reagan for his age.
What makes you think that? I'm sure I didn't, and remember being amused by his famous debate rejoinder about "not mocking my opponent for his youth and inexperience".
In general I don't mock people about anything, really. I only care what they do, not who they are.
‘Blood in the water for DeSantis’: Trump world embraces Tim Scott’s candidacy The former president’s team views virtually every ‘24 development through the prism of whether it helps or hurts Ron DeSantis. https://www.politico.com/news/2023/05/22/trump-tim-scott-2024-00098292 ...“The more the merrier,” said one Trump adviser of Scott’s announcement. “Tim Scott doesn’t have to write ‘Be Likeable’ at the top of his notepad,” referencing a video from a 2018 DeSantis debate prep where he was advised to be “likeable” to the audience. Trump aides have been buoyed in recent days by signs that the ‘24 primary field is about to get crowded. ..
The claim is that a senior civil servant who was working temporarily as an acting staff member in her office ("to help ease the home secretary into her new position after the recent sacking of her predecessor, Priti Patel") was asked by her to arrange a private course for her. The civil servant was concerned about whether this was appropriate, and reported it to the Permanent Secretary. Braverman's request is alleged to have been made in an email. The claim by Braverman's "team" that she only asked for advice, rather than instructing civil servant to arrange the course for her, is disputed by "sources elsewhere in government".
Even if she had asked the civil servant to do something why is that wrong?
The civil servant said no, and (presumably) was backed up by her permanent secretary.
..She even tried to get Jenrick to take one of the questions which he correctly refused to do.
I almost felt sorry for her at that, it was so pitifully inept. Did she ever practice as a lawyer ?
She did.
I thought the whole thing happened when she was Attorney General, but the story above says it was when she was Home Sec.?
So there'll be a settled view on Brexit good or bad in about 30-40 years. Whether it will be the right one is debatable
Except not really.
Before the vote, lot's of people said it be a bad thing, and bad things would happen.
Since the vote, bad things have happened.
The number of people who agree it's been a bad thing has monotonically risen since the event.
There is no Universe in which it turns out not have been a bad thing.
Yet still the cultists cling on...
Yes, two bad things have happened since Brexit: covid and Ukraine. Occasionally some on the fringes attempt to blame these things on Brexit. But these people are maniacs.
I tend to disregard those who see no universes in which Brexit is a good thing, because they are clearly not thinking through all the possible futures. There is a highly plausible future, for example, in which the Euro goes to shit and the less attached we are to the EU the better. I think that future is quite likely. Now you might think, like kinabalu, that future probably won't happen. That would be fair enough. But to say there is no future in which Brexit was the right move is insane.
Excellent post. I am an avid remainer, but I would really like to be proved wrong and I accept I could be. Even though I feel strongly it is unlikely I would really like it to be so.
Thank you. Although I think my position is that I don't necessarily want to be proved right. There are two (non-exclusive) possible futures in which Brexit turns out to be the right decision: - Brexit turns out to be a good opportunity and the UK can grow more outside the EU. - Bremain would have turned out to be a bad option.
I think the first is reasonably possible, but my vote for Leave was more based in expectation of the second. I think there is a lot which could go wrong with the EU. (The two most prominent ones being the Euro going to shit and the integration ratchet winding ever tighter). I don't really want to be proved right on this though!
Leave/Remain was a really complex balancing act of imagining hundreds of different futures of Brexit and hundreds of different futures of Bremain, and coming to some sort of judgement of the likelihood of each. Even the really expensive analyses barely scratched the surface on this, tending to assume many things would not change, when in reality any change of circumstance causes people to make different decisions. And none of them assumed a global pandemic or the biggest European war in 75 years. It was impossible to know how it would turn out. There are futures in which Brexit > Bremain, and there are futures in which Bremain > Brexit. My judgement was that Bremain was the higher risk option - but I would be very happy with a future in which the risks I feared do not come to pass, and in which Britain and Europe co-operate and both continue to prosper and Brexit turns out not to have really mattered much either way.
Absolute bollox thinking. Imagine that EU may have an issue some day, so throw yourself off a cliff now to avoid it, barking.
Brexit was more like Indiana Jones diving under the descending stone door before it finally locked shut. If we hadn’t brexited in 2016 we would have become even further enmeshed in the EU and exit would have become impossibly painful. Even more painful than the Brexit we’ve had. That sense of Now or Never definitely affected my vote
This painfulness is not by chance. Article 50 was expressly written (by a Brit!) to make secession from the EU deeply unattractive and punishing for any nation attempting it
So there'll be a settled view on Brexit good or bad in about 30-40 years. Whether it will be the right one is debatable
Except not really.
Before the vote, lot's of people said it be a bad thing, and bad things would happen.
Since the vote, bad things have happened.
The number of people who agree it's been a bad thing has monotonically risen since the event.
There is no Universe in which it turns out not have been a bad thing.
Yet still the cultists cling on...
Yes, two bad things have happened since Brexit: covid and Ukraine. Occasionally some on the fringes attempt to blame these things on Brexit. But these people are maniacs.
I tend to disregard those who see no universes in which Brexit is a good thing, because they are clearly not thinking through all the possible futures. There is a highly plausible future, for example, in which the Euro goes to shit and the less attached we are to the EU the better. I think that future is quite likely. Now you might think, like kinabalu, that future probably won't happen. That would be fair enough. But to say there is no future in which Brexit was the right move is insane.
Excellent post. I am an avid remainer, but I would really like to be proved wrong and I accept I could be. Even though I feel strongly it is unlikely I would really like it to be so.
Thank you. Although I think my position is that I don't necessarily want to be proved right. There are two (non-exclusive) possible futures in which Brexit turns out to be the right decision: - Brexit turns out to be a good opportunity and the UK can grow more outside the EU. - Bremain would have turned out to be a bad option.
I think the first is reasonably possible, but my vote for Leave was more based in expectation of the second. I think there is a lot which could go wrong with the EU. (The two most prominent ones being the Euro going to shit and the integration ratchet winding ever tighter). I don't really want to be proved right on this though!
Leave/Remain was a really complex balancing act of imagining hundreds of different futures of Brexit and hundreds of different futures of Bremain, and coming to some sort of judgement of the likelihood of each. Even the really expensive analyses barely scratched the surface on this, tending to assume many things would not change, when in reality any change of circumstance causes people to make different decisions. And none of them assumed a global pandemic or the biggest European war in 75 years. It was impossible to know how it would turn out. There are futures in which Brexit > Bremain, and there are futures in which Bremain > Brexit. My judgement was that Bremain was the higher risk option - but I would be very happy with a future in which the risks I feared do not come to pass, and in which Britain and Europe co-operate and both continue to prosper and Brexit turns out not to have really mattered much either way.
Absolute bollox thinking. Imagine that EU may have an issue some day, so throw yourself off a cliff now to avoid it, barking.
If you think there is a risks of being somewhere outweigh the rewards of being there (this place is fun, but it looks like it's all about to kick off), you leave. If you think the downside of being in a particular investment outweigh the upside (my Blockbuster video stocks have been ticking over nicely, but I hear films will be accessed on a thing called the internet in future), you sell. You might disagree with the balance of risks and rewards, but I don't see why you'd object to the principle.
So there'll be a settled view on Brexit good or bad in about 30-40 years. Whether it will be the right one is debatable
Except not really.
Before the vote, lot's of people said it be a bad thing, and bad things would happen.
Since the vote, bad things have happened.
The number of people who agree it's been a bad thing has monotonically risen since the event.
There is no Universe in which it turns out not have been a bad thing.
Yet still the cultists cling on...
Yes, two bad things have happened since Brexit: covid and Ukraine. Occasionally some on the fringes attempt to blame these things on Brexit. But these people are maniacs.
I tend to disregard those who see no universes in which Brexit is a good thing, because they are clearly not thinking through all the possible futures. There is a highly plausible future, for example, in which the Euro goes to shit and the less attached we are to the EU the better. I think that future is quite likely. Now you might think, like kinabalu, that future probably won't happen. That would be fair enough. But to say there is no future in which Brexit was the right move is insane.
Excellent post. I am an avid remainer, but I would really like to be proved wrong and I accept I could be. Even though I feel strongly it is unlikely I would really like it to be so.
Thank you. Although I think my position is that I don't necessarily want to be proved right. There are two (non-exclusive) possible futures in which Brexit turns out to be the right decision: - Brexit turns out to be a good opportunity and the UK can grow more outside the EU. - Bremain would have turned out to be a bad option.
I think the first is reasonably possible, but my vote for Leave was more based in expectation of the second. I think there is a lot which could go wrong with the EU. (The two most prominent ones being the Euro going to shit and the integration ratchet winding ever tighter). I don't really want to be proved right on this though!
Leave/Remain was a really complex balancing act of imagining hundreds of different futures of Brexit and hundreds of different futures of Bremain, and coming to some sort of judgement of the likelihood of each. Even the really expensive analyses barely scratched the surface on this, tending to assume many things would not change, when in reality any change of circumstance causes people to make different decisions. And none of them assumed a global pandemic or the biggest European war in 75 years. It was impossible to know how it would turn out. There are futures in which Brexit > Bremain, and there are futures in which Bremain > Brexit. My judgement was that Bremain was the higher risk option - but I would be very happy with a future in which the risks I feared do not come to pass, and in which Britain and Europe co-operate and both continue to prosper and Brexit turns out not to have really mattered much either way.
Absolute bollox thinking. Imagine that EU may have an issue some day, so throw yourself off a cliff now to avoid it, barking.
Brexit was more like Indiana Jones diving under the descending stone door before it finally locked shut. If we hadn’t brexited in 2016 we would have become even further enmeshed in the EU and exit would have become impossibly painful. Even more painful than the Brexit we’ve had. That sense of Now or Never definitely affected my vote
This painfulness is not by chance. Article 50 was expressly written (by a Brit!) to make secession from the EU deeply unattractive and punishing for any nation attempting it
Brexit was like Indiana Jones diving under the descending stone door before it finally locked shut? I thought it was like childbirth.
So there'll be a settled view on Brexit good or bad in about 30-40 years. Whether it will be the right one is debatable
Except not really.
Before the vote, lot's of people said it be a bad thing, and bad things would happen.
Since the vote, bad things have happened.
The number of people who agree it's been a bad thing has monotonically risen since the event.
There is no Universe in which it turns out not have been a bad thing.
Yet still the cultists cling on...
Yes, two bad things have happened since Brexit: covid and Ukraine. Occasionally some on the fringes attempt to blame these things on Brexit. But these people are maniacs.
I tend to disregard those who see no universes in which Brexit is a good thing, because they are clearly not thinking through all the possible futures. There is a highly plausible future, for example, in which the Euro goes to shit and the less attached we are to the EU the better. I think that future is quite likely. Now you might think, like kinabalu, that future probably won't happen. That would be fair enough. But to say there is no future in which Brexit was the right move is insane.
Excellent post. I am an avid remainer, but I would really like to be proved wrong and I accept I could be. Even though I feel strongly it is unlikely I would really like it to be so.
Thank you. Although I think my position is that I don't necessarily want to be proved right. There are two (non-exclusive) possible futures in which Brexit turns out to be the right decision: - Brexit turns out to be a good opportunity and the UK can grow more outside the EU. - Bremain would have turned out to be a bad option.
I think the first is reasonably possible, but my vote for Leave was more based in expectation of the second. I think there is a lot which could go wrong with the EU. (The two most prominent ones being the Euro going to shit and the integration ratchet winding ever tighter). I don't really want to be proved right on this though!
Leave/Remain was a really complex balancing act of imagining hundreds of different futures of Brexit and hundreds of different futures of Bremain, and coming to some sort of judgement of the likelihood of each. Even the really expensive analyses barely scratched the surface on this, tending to assume many things would not change, when in reality any change of circumstance causes people to make different decisions. And none of them assumed a global pandemic or the biggest European war in 75 years. It was impossible to know how it would turn out. There are futures in which Brexit > Bremain, and there are futures in which Bremain > Brexit. My judgement was that Bremain was the higher risk option - but I would be very happy with a future in which the risks I feared do not come to pass, and in which Britain and Europe co-operate and both continue to prosper and Brexit turns out not to have really mattered much either way.
Yes. Not good Brexit or bad Brexit but a pointless Brexit. This is the dream and in the medium term it is still possible. Let's go for it. Let's shoot for the stars.
A pointless Brexit is indeed the dream! Because it would mean a future in which both Britain AND Europe were making the right decisions and getting wealthier and more democratic and happier and cleaner and all the other ways we want our societies to be.
Why on earth bring someone's children into the political/twitter domain? They should be wholly out of bounds, unless paraded on the running board of a 1925 Rolls Royce phantom by their parents for some kind of intended political gain.
I have no idea whether she meant well but I read it as passive/aggressive.
Because Raab cited the pressures on his young family as the reason for his standing down as MP and shared this with the press. Jess Phillips said, I agree these pressures are tough on politicians families.
People here are making this into a vile threat by Phillips rather than she's showing empathy.
The Telegraph says that it "has seen an exchange of letters" between him and his CA chairman. Doesn't immediately look like "shared with the press".
In any event, Ed Davey takes the right line: "He knew he was going to lose."
So there'll be a settled view on Brexit good or bad in about 30-40 years. Whether it will be the right one is debatable
Except not really.
Before the vote, lot's of people said it be a bad thing, and bad things would happen.
Since the vote, bad things have happened.
The number of people who agree it's been a bad thing has monotonically risen since the event.
There is no Universe in which it turns out not have been a bad thing.
Yet still the cultists cling on...
Yes, two bad things have happened since Brexit: covid and Ukraine. Occasionally some on the fringes attempt to blame these things on Brexit. But these people are maniacs.
I tend to disregard those who see no universes in which Brexit is a good thing, because they are clearly not thinking through all the possible futures. There is a highly plausible future, for example, in which the Euro goes to shit and the less attached we are to the EU the better. I think that future is quite likely. Now you might think, like kinabalu, that future probably won't happen. That would be fair enough. But to say there is no future in which Brexit was the right move is insane.
Excellent post. I am an avid remainer, but I would really like to be proved wrong and I accept I could be. Even though I feel strongly it is unlikely I would really like it to be so.
Thank you. Although I think my position is that I don't necessarily want to be proved right. There are two (non-exclusive) possible futures in which Brexit turns out to be the right decision: - Brexit turns out to be a good opportunity and the UK can grow more outside the EU. - Bremain would have turned out to be a bad option.
I think the first is reasonably possible, but my vote for Leave was more based in expectation of the second. I think there is a lot which could go wrong with the EU. (The two most prominent ones being the Euro going to shit and the integration ratchet winding ever tighter). I don't really want to be proved right on this though!
Leave/Remain was a really complex balancing act of imagining hundreds of different futures of Brexit and hundreds of different futures of Bremain, and coming to some sort of judgement of the likelihood of each. Even the really expensive analyses barely scratched the surface on this, tending to assume many things would not change, when in reality any change of circumstance causes people to make different decisions. And none of them assumed a global pandemic or the biggest European war in 75 years. It was impossible to know how it would turn out. There are futures in which Brexit > Bremain, and there are futures in which Bremain > Brexit. My judgement was that Bremain was the higher risk option - but I would be very happy with a future in which the risks I feared do not come to pass, and in which Britain and Europe co-operate and both continue to prosper and Brexit turns out not to have really mattered much either way.
Absolute bollox thinking. Imagine that EU may have an issue some day, so throw yourself off a cliff now to avoid it, barking.
Brexit was more like Indiana Jones diving under the descending stone door before it finally locked shut. If we hadn’t brexited in 2016 we would have become even further enmeshed in the EU and exit would have become impossibly painful. Even more painful than the Brexit we’ve had. That sense of Now or Never definitely affected my vote
This painfulness is not by chance. Article 50 was expressly written (by a Brit!) to make secession from the EU deeply unattractive and punishing for any nation attempting it
You had to be pretty blind or really stupid not to know it was going to be a big hurt for UK for some years at least if not forever , especially given we need to keep all teh standrads to trade with them without any benefits and having to bear all teh costs etc. So cutting off your nose to spite your face and just plain stupid.
So there'll be a settled view on Brexit good or bad in about 30-40 years. Whether it will be the right one is debatable
Except not really.
Before the vote, lot's of people said it be a bad thing, and bad things would happen.
Since the vote, bad things have happened.
The number of people who agree it's been a bad thing has monotonically risen since the event.
There is no Universe in which it turns out not have been a bad thing.
Yet still the cultists cling on...
Yes, two bad things have happened since Brexit: covid and Ukraine. Occasionally some on the fringes attempt to blame these things on Brexit. But these people are maniacs.
I tend to disregard those who see no universes in which Brexit is a good thing, because they are clearly not thinking through all the possible futures. There is a highly plausible future, for example, in which the Euro goes to shit and the less attached we are to the EU the better. I think that future is quite likely. Now you might think, like kinabalu, that future probably won't happen. That would be fair enough. But to say there is no future in which Brexit was the right move is insane.
Excellent post. I am an avid remainer, but I would really like to be proved wrong and I accept I could be. Even though I feel strongly it is unlikely I would really like it to be so.
Thank you. Although I think my position is that I don't necessarily want to be proved right. There are two (non-exclusive) possible futures in which Brexit turns out to be the right decision: - Brexit turns out to be a good opportunity and the UK can grow more outside the EU. - Bremain would have turned out to be a bad option.
I think the first is reasonably possible, but my vote for Leave was more based in expectation of the second. I think there is a lot which could go wrong with the EU. (The two most prominent ones being the Euro going to shit and the integration ratchet winding ever tighter). I don't really want to be proved right on this though!
Leave/Remain was a really complex balancing act of imagining hundreds of different futures of Brexit and hundreds of different futures of Bremain, and coming to some sort of judgement of the likelihood of each. Even the really expensive analyses barely scratched the surface on this, tending to assume many things would not change, when in reality any change of circumstance causes people to make different decisions. And none of them assumed a global pandemic or the biggest European war in 75 years. It was impossible to know how it would turn out. There are futures in which Brexit > Bremain, and there are futures in which Bremain > Brexit. My judgement was that Bremain was the higher risk option - but I would be very happy with a future in which the risks I feared do not come to pass, and in which Britain and Europe co-operate and both continue to prosper and Brexit turns out not to have really mattered much either way.
Absolute bollox thinking. Imagine that EU may have an issue some day, so throw yourself off a cliff now to avoid it, barking.
Brexit was more like Indiana Jones diving under the descending stone door before it finally locked shut. If we hadn’t brexited in 2016 we would have become even further enmeshed in the EU and exit would have become impossibly painful. Even more painful than the Brexit we’ve had. That sense of Now or Never definitely affected my vote
This painfulness is not by chance. Article 50 was expressly written (by a Brit!) to make secession from the EU deeply unattractive and punishing for any nation attempting it
Brexit was like Indiana Jones diving under the descending stone door before it finally locked shut? I thought it was like childbirth.
Typical Brexiter bollox.
The opening sequence of the original movie is quite obviously a childbirth metaphor. Duh.
So there'll be a settled view on Brexit good or bad in about 30-40 years. Whether it will be the right one is debatable
Except not really.
Before the vote, lot's of people said it be a bad thing, and bad things would happen.
Since the vote, bad things have happened.
The number of people who agree it's been a bad thing has monotonically risen since the event.
There is no Universe in which it turns out not have been a bad thing.
Yet still the cultists cling on...
Yes, two bad things have happened since Brexit: covid and Ukraine. Occasionally some on the fringes attempt to blame these things on Brexit. But these people are maniacs.
I tend to disregard those who see no universes in which Brexit is a good thing, because they are clearly not thinking through all the possible futures. There is a highly plausible future, for example, in which the Euro goes to shit and the less attached we are to the EU the better. I think that future is quite likely. Now you might think, like kinabalu, that future probably won't happen. That would be fair enough. But to say there is no future in which Brexit was the right move is insane.
Excellent post. I am an avid remainer, but I would really like to be proved wrong and I accept I could be. Even though I feel strongly it is unlikely I would really like it to be so.
Thank you. Although I think my position is that I don't necessarily want to be proved right. There are two (non-exclusive) possible futures in which Brexit turns out to be the right decision: - Brexit turns out to be a good opportunity and the UK can grow more outside the EU. - Bremain would have turned out to be a bad option.
I think the first is reasonably possible, but my vote for Leave was more based in expectation of the second. I think there is a lot which could go wrong with the EU. (The two most prominent ones being the Euro going to shit and the integration ratchet winding ever tighter). I don't really want to be proved right on this though!
Leave/Remain was a really complex balancing act of imagining hundreds of different futures of Brexit and hundreds of different futures of Bremain, and coming to some sort of judgement of the likelihood of each. Even the really expensive analyses barely scratched the surface on this, tending to assume many things would not change, when in reality any change of circumstance causes people to make different decisions. And none of them assumed a global pandemic or the biggest European war in 75 years. It was impossible to know how it would turn out. There are futures in which Brexit > Bremain, and there are futures in which Bremain > Brexit. My judgement was that Bremain was the higher risk option - but I would be very happy with a future in which the risks I feared do not come to pass, and in which Britain and Europe co-operate and both continue to prosper and Brexit turns out not to have really mattered much either way.
Absolute bollox thinking. Imagine that EU may have an issue some day, so throw yourself off a cliff now to avoid it, barking.
Brexit was more like Indiana Jones diving under the descending stone door before it finally locked shut. If we hadn’t brexited in 2016 we would have become even further enmeshed in the EU and exit would have become impossibly painful. Even more painful than the Brexit we’ve had. That sense of Now or Never definitely affected my vote
This painfulness is not by chance. Article 50 was expressly written (by a Brit!) to make secession from the EU deeply unattractive and punishing for any nation attempting it
Brexit was like Indiana Jones diving under the descending stone door before it finally locked shut? I thought it was like childbirth.
Typical Brexiter bollox.
Yes yes. Whatever
My point is good. Eg if we’d stayed in the EU we would surely have joined the Covid Stability Pakt, mutualising and pooling EU debt. That’s a fairly irreversible step
So there'll be a settled view on Brexit good or bad in about 30-40 years. Whether it will be the right one is debatable
Except not really.
Before the vote, lot's of people said it be a bad thing, and bad things would happen.
Since the vote, bad things have happened.
The number of people who agree it's been a bad thing has monotonically risen since the event.
There is no Universe in which it turns out not have been a bad thing.
Yet still the cultists cling on...
Yes, two bad things have happened since Brexit: covid and Ukraine. Occasionally some on the fringes attempt to blame these things on Brexit. But these people are maniacs.
I tend to disregard those who see no universes in which Brexit is a good thing, because they are clearly not thinking through all the possible futures. There is a highly plausible future, for example, in which the Euro goes to shit and the less attached we are to the EU the better. I think that future is quite likely. Now you might think, like kinabalu, that future probably won't happen. That would be fair enough. But to say there is no future in which Brexit was the right move is insane.
Excellent post. I am an avid remainer, but I would really like to be proved wrong and I accept I could be. Even though I feel strongly it is unlikely I would really like it to be so.
Thank you. Although I think my position is that I don't necessarily want to be proved right. There are two (non-exclusive) possible futures in which Brexit turns out to be the right decision: - Brexit turns out to be a good opportunity and the UK can grow more outside the EU. - Bremain would have turned out to be a bad option.
I think the first is reasonably possible, but my vote for Leave was more based in expectation of the second. I think there is a lot which could go wrong with the EU. (The two most prominent ones being the Euro going to shit and the integration ratchet winding ever tighter). I don't really want to be proved right on this though!
Leave/Remain was a really complex balancing act of imagining hundreds of different futures of Brexit and hundreds of different futures of Bremain, and coming to some sort of judgement of the likelihood of each. Even the really expensive analyses barely scratched the surface on this, tending to assume many things would not change, when in reality any change of circumstance causes people to make different decisions. And none of them assumed a global pandemic or the biggest European war in 75 years. It was impossible to know how it would turn out. There are futures in which Brexit > Bremain, and there are futures in which Bremain > Brexit. My judgement was that Bremain was the higher risk option - but I would be very happy with a future in which the risks I feared do not come to pass, and in which Britain and Europe co-operate and both continue to prosper and Brexit turns out not to have really mattered much either way.
Absolute bollox thinking. Imagine that EU may have an issue some day, so throw yourself off a cliff now to avoid it, barking.
If you think there is a risks of being somewhere outweigh the rewards of being there (this place is fun, but it looks like it's all about to kick off), you leave. If you think the downside of being in a particular investment outweigh the upside (my Blockbuster video stocks have been ticking over nicely, but I hear films will be accessed on a thing called the internet in future), you sell. You might disagree with the balance of risks and rewards, but I don't see why you'd object to the principle.
Leaving to prove you can leave doesn't make sense unless you think you are already in the wrong place. Which you might reasonably think. The problem is Leavers seem unable to articulate why outside is better than inside. "Yes there are issues, but it's all worth it because of X." They are unable to say what the X is.
So there'll be a settled view on Brexit good or bad in about 30-40 years. Whether it will be the right one is debatable
Except not really.
Before the vote, lot's of people said it be a bad thing, and bad things would happen.
Since the vote, bad things have happened.
The number of people who agree it's been a bad thing has monotonically risen since the event.
There is no Universe in which it turns out not have been a bad thing.
Yet still the cultists cling on...
Yes, two bad things have happened since Brexit: covid and Ukraine. Occasionally some on the fringes attempt to blame these things on Brexit. But these people are maniacs.
I tend to disregard those who see no universes in which Brexit is a good thing, because they are clearly not thinking through all the possible futures. There is a highly plausible future, for example, in which the Euro goes to shit and the less attached we are to the EU the better. I think that future is quite likely. Now you might think, like kinabalu, that future probably won't happen. That would be fair enough. But to say there is no future in which Brexit was the right move is insane.
Excellent post. I am an avid remainer, but I would really like to be proved wrong and I accept I could be. Even though I feel strongly it is unlikely I would really like it to be so.
Thank you. Although I think my position is that I don't necessarily want to be proved right. There are two (non-exclusive) possible futures in which Brexit turns out to be the right decision: - Brexit turns out to be a good opportunity and the UK can grow more outside the EU. - Bremain would have turned out to be a bad option.
I think the first is reasonably possible, but my vote for Leave was more based in expectation of the second. I think there is a lot which could go wrong with the EU. (The two most prominent ones being the Euro going to shit and the integration ratchet winding ever tighter). I don't really want to be proved right on this though!
Leave/Remain was a really complex balancing act of imagining hundreds of different futures of Brexit and hundreds of different futures of Bremain, and coming to some sort of judgement of the likelihood of each. Even the really expensive analyses barely scratched the surface on this, tending to assume many things would not change, when in reality any change of circumstance causes people to make different decisions. And none of them assumed a global pandemic or the biggest European war in 75 years. It was impossible to know how it would turn out. There are futures in which Brexit > Bremain, and there are futures in which Bremain > Brexit. My judgement was that Bremain was the higher risk option - but I would be very happy with a future in which the risks I feared do not come to pass, and in which Britain and Europe co-operate and both continue to prosper and Brexit turns out not to have really mattered much either way.
My position, which hasn't changed since 2016 ,is that Brexit was a big mistake for the UK given what it.wants to achieve as a country, but.we're not going back, so how are we going to live with our mistake? How.do we deal with the contradictions of Brexit?
A key motivation of Brexit was to "take back control" but the loss of influence means we become much more of.a rule taker. Are people on board with that, because that's how it's going to be? Not sure about that.
Another contradiction, coming to the fore.in recent weeks is a high immigration economy being the way forward.in a Brexit world when people voted Leave to reduce immigration.
None of this is unexpected. Mistakes have consequences. At some point we have to accept those consequences and deal with them.
Which country's population of more control over its decisions and its destiny - Switzerland or Austria? Which country is better able to control its immigration - Switzerland or Austria?
Of course our decisions are limited by the framework of what the rest of the world decides. But it seems odd to suggest we are now more at the mercy of outside forces than we were.
So there'll be a settled view on Brexit good or bad in about 30-40 years. Whether it will be the right one is debatable
Except not really.
Before the vote, lot's of people said it be a bad thing, and bad things would happen.
Since the vote, bad things have happened.
The number of people who agree it's been a bad thing has monotonically risen since the event.
There is no Universe in which it turns out not have been a bad thing.
Yet still the cultists cling on...
Yes, two bad things have happened since Brexit: covid and Ukraine. Occasionally some on the fringes attempt to blame these things on Brexit. But these people are maniacs.
I tend to disregard those who see no universes in which Brexit is a good thing, because they are clearly not thinking through all the possible futures. There is a highly plausible future, for example, in which the Euro goes to shit and the less attached we are to the EU the better. I think that future is quite likely. Now you might think, like kinabalu, that future probably won't happen. That would be fair enough. But to say there is no future in which Brexit was the right move is insane.
Excellent post. I am an avid remainer, but I would really like to be proved wrong and I accept I could be. Even though I feel strongly it is unlikely I would really like it to be so.
Thank you. Although I think my position is that I don't necessarily want to be proved right. There are two (non-exclusive) possible futures in which Brexit turns out to be the right decision: - Brexit turns out to be a good opportunity and the UK can grow more outside the EU. - Bremain would have turned out to be a bad option.
I think the first is reasonably possible, but my vote for Leave was more based in expectation of the second. I think there is a lot which could go wrong with the EU. (The two most prominent ones being the Euro going to shit and the integration ratchet winding ever tighter). I don't really want to be proved right on this though!
Leave/Remain was a really complex balancing act of imagining hundreds of different futures of Brexit and hundreds of different futures of Bremain, and coming to some sort of judgement of the likelihood of each. Even the really expensive analyses barely scratched the surface on this, tending to assume many things would not change, when in reality any change of circumstance causes people to make different decisions. And none of them assumed a global pandemic or the biggest European war in 75 years. It was impossible to know how it would turn out. There are futures in which Brexit > Bremain, and there are futures in which Bremain > Brexit. My judgement was that Bremain was the higher risk option - but I would be very happy with a future in which the risks I feared do not come to pass, and in which Britain and Europe co-operate and both continue to prosper and Brexit turns out not to have really mattered much either way.
Absolute bollox thinking. Imagine that EU may have an issue some day, so throw yourself off a cliff now to avoid it, barking.
Brexit was more like Indiana Jones diving under the descending stone door before it finally locked shut. If we hadn’t brexited in 2016 we would have become even further enmeshed in the EU and exit would have become impossibly painful. Even more painful than the Brexit we’ve had. That sense of Now or Never definitely affected my vote
This painfulness is not by chance. Article 50 was expressly written (by a Brit!) to make secession from the EU deeply unattractive and punishing for any nation attempting it
You had to be pretty blind or really stupid not to know it was going to be a big hurt for UK for some years at least if not forever , especially given we need to keep all teh standrads to trade with them without any benefits and having to bear all teh costs etc. So cutting off your nose to spite your face and just plain stupid.
But you advocated a Yes vote in 2014 which would have seen Scotland instantly ejected from the EU. That didn’t bother you then, nor are you concerned by the practical problems of Scottish independence (“och we’ll be fine, worry about the currency later”)
You are like the most quintessentially blasé brexiteer with an added dash of whisky flavoured wishful thinking
So there'll be a settled view on Brexit good or bad in about 30-40 years. Whether it will be the right one is debatable
Except not really.
Before the vote, lot's of people said it be a bad thing, and bad things would happen.
Since the vote, bad things have happened.
The number of people who agree it's been a bad thing has monotonically risen since the event.
There is no Universe in which it turns out not have been a bad thing.
Yet still the cultists cling on...
Yes, two bad things have happened since Brexit: covid and Ukraine. Occasionally some on the fringes attempt to blame these things on Brexit. But these people are maniacs.
I tend to disregard those who see no universes in which Brexit is a good thing, because they are clearly not thinking through all the possible futures. There is a highly plausible future, for example, in which the Euro goes to shit and the less attached we are to the EU the better. I think that future is quite likely. Now you might think, like kinabalu, that future probably won't happen. That would be fair enough. But to say there is no future in which Brexit was the right move is insane.
Excellent post. I am an avid remainer, but I would really like to be proved wrong and I accept I could be. Even though I feel strongly it is unlikely I would really like it to be so.
Thank you. Although I think my position is that I don't necessarily want to be proved right. There are two (non-exclusive) possible futures in which Brexit turns out to be the right decision: - Brexit turns out to be a good opportunity and the UK can grow more outside the EU. - Bremain would have turned out to be a bad option.
I think the first is reasonably possible, but my vote for Leave was more based in expectation of the second. I think there is a lot which could go wrong with the EU. (The two most prominent ones being the Euro going to shit and the integration ratchet winding ever tighter). I don't really want to be proved right on this though!
Leave/Remain was a really complex balancing act of imagining hundreds of different futures of Brexit and hundreds of different futures of Bremain, and coming to some sort of judgement of the likelihood of each. Even the really expensive analyses barely scratched the surface on this, tending to assume many things would not change, when in reality any change of circumstance causes people to make different decisions. And none of them assumed a global pandemic or the biggest European war in 75 years. It was impossible to know how it would turn out. There are futures in which Brexit > Bremain, and there are futures in which Bremain > Brexit. My judgement was that Bremain was the higher risk option - but I would be very happy with a future in which the risks I feared do not come to pass, and in which Britain and Europe co-operate and both continue to prosper and Brexit turns out not to have really mattered much either way.
Absolute bollox thinking. Imagine that EU may have an issue some day, so throw yourself off a cliff now to avoid it, barking.
Brexit was more like Indiana Jones diving under the descending stone door before it finally locked shut. If we hadn’t brexited in 2016 we would have become even further enmeshed in the EU and exit would have become impossibly painful. Even more painful than the Brexit we’ve had. That sense of Now or Never definitely affected my vote
This painfulness is not by chance. Article 50 was expressly written (by a Brit!) to make secession from the EU deeply unattractive and punishing for any nation attempting it
You had to be pretty blind or really stupid not to know it was going to be a big hurt for UK for some years at least if not forever , especially given we need to keep all teh standrads to trade with them without any benefits and having to bear all teh costs etc. So cutting off your nose to spite your face and just plain stupid.
So there'll be a settled view on Brexit good or bad in about 30-40 years. Whether it will be the right one is debatable
Except not really.
Before the vote, lot's of people said it be a bad thing, and bad things would happen.
Since the vote, bad things have happened.
The number of people who agree it's been a bad thing has monotonically risen since the event.
There is no Universe in which it turns out not have been a bad thing.
Yet still the cultists cling on...
Yes, two bad things have happened since Brexit: covid and Ukraine. Occasionally some on the fringes attempt to blame these things on Brexit. But these people are maniacs.
I tend to disregard those who see no universes in which Brexit is a good thing, because they are clearly not thinking through all the possible futures. There is a highly plausible future, for example, in which the Euro goes to shit and the less attached we are to the EU the better. I think that future is quite likely. Now you might think, like kinabalu, that future probably won't happen. That would be fair enough. But to say there is no future in which Brexit was the right move is insane.
Excellent post. I am an avid remainer, but I would really like to be proved wrong and I accept I could be. Even though I feel strongly it is unlikely I would really like it to be so.
Thank you. Although I think my position is that I don't necessarily want to be proved right. There are two (non-exclusive) possible futures in which Brexit turns out to be the right decision: - Brexit turns out to be a good opportunity and the UK can grow more outside the EU. - Bremain would have turned out to be a bad option.
I think the first is reasonably possible, but my vote for Leave was more based in expectation of the second. I think there is a lot which could go wrong with the EU. (The two most prominent ones being the Euro going to shit and the integration ratchet winding ever tighter). I don't really want to be proved right on this though!
Leave/Remain was a really complex balancing act of imagining hundreds of different futures of Brexit and hundreds of different futures of Bremain, and coming to some sort of judgement of the likelihood of each. Even the really expensive analyses barely scratched the surface on this, tending to assume many things would not change, when in reality any change of circumstance causes people to make different decisions. And none of them assumed a global pandemic or the biggest European war in 75 years. It was impossible to know how it would turn out. There are futures in which Brexit > Bremain, and there are futures in which Bremain > Brexit. My judgement was that Bremain was the higher risk option - but I would be very happy with a future in which the risks I feared do not come to pass, and in which Britain and Europe co-operate and both continue to prosper and Brexit turns out not to have really mattered much either way.
Absolute bollox thinking. Imagine that EU may have an issue some day, so throw yourself off a cliff now to avoid it, barking.
Brexit was more like Indiana Jones diving under the descending stone door before it finally locked shut. If we hadn’t brexited in 2016 we would have become even further enmeshed in the EU and exit would have become impossibly painful. Even more painful than the Brexit we’ve had. That sense of Now or Never definitely affected my vote
This painfulness is not by chance. Article 50 was expressly written (by a Brit!) to make secession from the EU deeply unattractive and punishing for any nation attempting it
Brexit is more like the end of Raiders of the Lost Ark where the Nazis/Leavers open the Ark/Do Brexit and their heads melt and eyeballs pop out because God/Economic Reality doesn't approve of their evil intent.
So there'll be a settled view on Brexit good or bad in about 30-40 years. Whether it will be the right one is debatable
Except not really.
Before the vote, lot's of people said it be a bad thing, and bad things would happen.
Since the vote, bad things have happened.
The number of people who agree it's been a bad thing has monotonically risen since the event.
There is no Universe in which it turns out not have been a bad thing.
Yet still the cultists cling on...
Yes, two bad things have happened since Brexit: covid and Ukraine. Occasionally some on the fringes attempt to blame these things on Brexit. But these people are maniacs.
I tend to disregard those who see no universes in which Brexit is a good thing, because they are clearly not thinking through all the possible futures. There is a highly plausible future, for example, in which the Euro goes to shit and the less attached we are to the EU the better. I think that future is quite likely. Now you might think, like kinabalu, that future probably won't happen. That would be fair enough. But to say there is no future in which Brexit was the right move is insane.
Excellent post. I am an avid remainer, but I would really like to be proved wrong and I accept I could be. Even though I feel strongly it is unlikely I would really like it to be so.
Thank you. Although I think my position is that I don't necessarily want to be proved right. There are two (non-exclusive) possible futures in which Brexit turns out to be the right decision: - Brexit turns out to be a good opportunity and the UK can grow more outside the EU. - Bremain would have turned out to be a bad option.
I think the first is reasonably possible, but my vote for Leave was more based in expectation of the second. I think there is a lot which could go wrong with the EU. (The two most prominent ones being the Euro going to shit and the integration ratchet winding ever tighter). I don't really want to be proved right on this though!
Leave/Remain was a really complex balancing act of imagining hundreds of different futures of Brexit and hundreds of different futures of Bremain, and coming to some sort of judgement of the likelihood of each. Even the really expensive analyses barely scratched the surface on this, tending to assume many things would not change, when in reality any change of circumstance causes people to make different decisions. And none of them assumed a global pandemic or the biggest European war in 75 years. It was impossible to know how it would turn out. There are futures in which Brexit > Bremain, and there are futures in which Bremain > Brexit. My judgement was that Bremain was the higher risk option - but I would be very happy with a future in which the risks I feared do not come to pass, and in which Britain and Europe co-operate and both continue to prosper and Brexit turns out not to have really mattered much either way.
Absolute bollox thinking. Imagine that EU may have an issue some day, so throw yourself off a cliff now to avoid it, barking.
If you think there is a risks of being somewhere outweigh the rewards of being there (this place is fun, but it looks like it's all about to kick off), you leave. If you think the downside of being in a particular investment outweigh the upside (my Blockbuster video stocks have been ticking over nicely, but I hear films will be accessed on a thing called the internet in future), you sell. You might disagree with the balance of risks and rewards, but I don't see why you'd object to the principle.
Leaving to prove you can leave doesn't make sense unless you think you are already in the wrong place. Which you might reasonably think. The problem is Leavers seem unable to articulate why outside is better than inside. "Yes there are issues, but it's all worth it because of X." They are unable to say what the X is.
X is the ability to elect and eject all the major politicians who govern us and an end to rule by Eurocrats and a stupid weird Parliament no one votes for or understands
So there'll be a settled view on Brexit good or bad in about 30-40 years. Whether it will be the right one is debatable
Except not really.
Before the vote, lot's of people said it be a bad thing, and bad things would happen.
Since the vote, bad things have happened.
The number of people who agree it's been a bad thing has monotonically risen since the event.
There is no Universe in which it turns out not have been a bad thing.
Yet still the cultists cling on...
Yes, two bad things have happened since Brexit: covid and Ukraine. Occasionally some on the fringes attempt to blame these things on Brexit. But these people are maniacs.
I tend to disregard those who see no universes in which Brexit is a good thing, because they are clearly not thinking through all the possible futures. There is a highly plausible future, for example, in which the Euro goes to shit and the less attached we are to the EU the better. I think that future is quite likely. Now you might think, like kinabalu, that future probably won't happen. That would be fair enough. But to say there is no future in which Brexit was the right move is insane.
Excellent post. I am an avid remainer, but I would really like to be proved wrong and I accept I could be. Even though I feel strongly it is unlikely I would really like it to be so.
Thank you. Although I think my position is that I don't necessarily want to be proved right. There are two (non-exclusive) possible futures in which Brexit turns out to be the right decision: - Brexit turns out to be a good opportunity and the UK can grow more outside the EU. - Bremain would have turned out to be a bad option.
I think the first is reasonably possible, but my vote for Leave was more based in expectation of the second. I think there is a lot which could go wrong with the EU. (The two most prominent ones being the Euro going to shit and the integration ratchet winding ever tighter). I don't really want to be proved right on this though!
Leave/Remain was a really complex balancing act of imagining hundreds of different futures of Brexit and hundreds of different futures of Bremain, and coming to some sort of judgement of the likelihood of each. Even the really expensive analyses barely scratched the surface on this, tending to assume many things would not change, when in reality any change of circumstance causes people to make different decisions. And none of them assumed a global pandemic or the biggest European war in 75 years. It was impossible to know how it would turn out. There are futures in which Brexit > Bremain, and there are futures in which Bremain > Brexit. My judgement was that Bremain was the higher risk option - but I would be very happy with a future in which the risks I feared do not come to pass, and in which Britain and Europe co-operate and both continue to prosper and Brexit turns out not to have really mattered much either way.
Absolute bollox thinking. Imagine that EU may have an issue some day, so throw yourself off a cliff now to avoid it, barking.
Brexit was more like Indiana Jones diving under the descending stone door before it finally locked shut. If we hadn’t brexited in 2016 we would have become even further enmeshed in the EU and exit would have become impossibly painful. Even more painful than the Brexit we’ve had. That sense of Now or Never definitely affected my vote
This painfulness is not by chance. Article 50 was expressly written (by a Brit!) to make secession from the EU deeply unattractive and punishing for any nation attempting it
Brexit was like Indiana Jones diving under the descending stone door before it finally locked shut? I thought it was like childbirth.
Typical Brexiter bollox.
Yes yes. Whatever
My point is good. Eg if we’d stayed in the EU we would surely have joined the Covid Stability Pakt, mutualising and pooling EU debt. That’s a fairly irreversible step
And if we'd joined all that it would have been the choice of a democratically-elected government.
Not that you'd have to agree with it but not irreversible. The next democratically-elected government could have taken us out of the agreement.
So there'll be a settled view on Brexit good or bad in about 30-40 years. Whether it will be the right one is debatable
Except not really.
Before the vote, lot's of people said it be a bad thing, and bad things would happen.
Since the vote, bad things have happened.
The number of people who agree it's been a bad thing has monotonically risen since the event.
There is no Universe in which it turns out not have been a bad thing.
Yet still the cultists cling on...
Yes, two bad things have happened since Brexit: covid and Ukraine. Occasionally some on the fringes attempt to blame these things on Brexit. But these people are maniacs.
I tend to disregard those who see no universes in which Brexit is a good thing, because they are clearly not thinking through all the possible futures. There is a highly plausible future, for example, in which the Euro goes to shit and the less attached we are to the EU the better. I think that future is quite likely. Now you might think, like kinabalu, that future probably won't happen. That would be fair enough. But to say there is no future in which Brexit was the right move is insane.
Excellent post. I am an avid remainer, but I would really like to be proved wrong and I accept I could be. Even though I feel strongly it is unlikely I would really like it to be so.
Thank you. Although I think my position is that I don't necessarily want to be proved right. There are two (non-exclusive) possible futures in which Brexit turns out to be the right decision: - Brexit turns out to be a good opportunity and the UK can grow more outside the EU. - Bremain would have turned out to be a bad option.
I think the first is reasonably possible, but my vote for Leave was more based in expectation of the second. I think there is a lot which could go wrong with the EU. (The two most prominent ones being the Euro going to shit and the integration ratchet winding ever tighter). I don't really want to be proved right on this though!
Leave/Remain was a really complex balancing act of imagining hundreds of different futures of Brexit and hundreds of different futures of Bremain, and coming to some sort of judgement of the likelihood of each. Even the really expensive analyses barely scratched the surface on this, tending to assume many things would not change, when in reality any change of circumstance causes people to make different decisions. And none of them assumed a global pandemic or the biggest European war in 75 years. It was impossible to know how it would turn out. There are futures in which Brexit > Bremain, and there are futures in which Bremain > Brexit. My judgement was that Bremain was the higher risk option - but I would be very happy with a future in which the risks I feared do not come to pass, and in which Britain and Europe co-operate and both continue to prosper and Brexit turns out not to have really mattered much either way.
Absolute bollox thinking. Imagine that EU may have an issue some day, so throw yourself off a cliff now to avoid it, barking.
Brexit was more like Indiana Jones diving under the descending stone door before it finally locked shut. If we hadn’t brexited in 2016 we would have become even further enmeshed in the EU and exit would have become impossibly painful. Even more painful than the Brexit we’ve had. That sense of Now or Never definitely affected my vote
This painfulness is not by chance. Article 50 was expressly written (by a Brit!) to make secession from the EU deeply unattractive and punishing for any nation attempting it
At the time I largely agreed with this argument. We weren't in the Euro, or Schengen, or with any desire for an EU army etc etc etc. Lots of talk of a twin-track or two-speed Europe, so if we're going to be propelled to the periphery anyway, better to do so under our own terms.
Problem is that our own terms turned out to be batshit crazy. As I have said repeatedly, leaving the EU is not our problem, what the Tories have chosen to do after leaving the EU is the problem. Instead of negotiating an actual deal that actually works (like Switzerland), we self-imposed one-way trade barriers against ourselves. And had the numpties in government try and spin that as some kind of win.
In October we have what the meat industry is openly describing as "hard Brexit". Once again we're about to self-impose big barriers on ourselves, choosing aggro over cooperation. Which will see a big spike in the price of most items containing meaty goodness. Well, ANOTHER big spike...
So there'll be a settled view on Brexit good or bad in about 30-40 years. Whether it will be the right one is debatable
Except not really.
Before the vote, lot's of people said it be a bad thing, and bad things would happen.
Since the vote, bad things have happened.
The number of people who agree it's been a bad thing has monotonically risen since the event.
There is no Universe in which it turns out not have been a bad thing.
Yet still the cultists cling on...
Yes, two bad things have happened since Brexit: covid and Ukraine. Occasionally some on the fringes attempt to blame these things on Brexit. But these people are maniacs.
I tend to disregard those who see no universes in which Brexit is a good thing, because they are clearly not thinking through all the possible futures. There is a highly plausible future, for example, in which the Euro goes to shit and the less attached we are to the EU the better. I think that future is quite likely. Now you might think, like kinabalu, that future probably won't happen. That would be fair enough. But to say there is no future in which Brexit was the right move is insane.
Excellent post. I am an avid remainer, but I would really like to be proved wrong and I accept I could be. Even though I feel strongly it is unlikely I would really like it to be so.
Thank you. Although I think my position is that I don't necessarily want to be proved right. There are two (non-exclusive) possible futures in which Brexit turns out to be the right decision: - Brexit turns out to be a good opportunity and the UK can grow more outside the EU. - Bremain would have turned out to be a bad option.
I think the first is reasonably possible, but my vote for Leave was more based in expectation of the second. I think there is a lot which could go wrong with the EU. (The two most prominent ones being the Euro going to shit and the integration ratchet winding ever tighter). I don't really want to be proved right on this though!
Leave/Remain was a really complex balancing act of imagining hundreds of different futures of Brexit and hundreds of different futures of Bremain, and coming to some sort of judgement of the likelihood of each. Even the really expensive analyses barely scratched the surface on this, tending to assume many things would not change, when in reality any change of circumstance causes people to make different decisions. And none of them assumed a global pandemic or the biggest European war in 75 years. It was impossible to know how it would turn out. There are futures in which Brexit > Bremain, and there are futures in which Bremain > Brexit. My judgement was that Bremain was the higher risk option - but I would be very happy with a future in which the risks I feared do not come to pass, and in which Britain and Europe co-operate and both continue to prosper and Brexit turns out not to have really mattered much either way.
Absolute bollox thinking. Imagine that EU may have an issue some day, so throw yourself off a cliff now to avoid it, barking.
Brexit was more like Indiana Jones diving under the descending stone door before it finally locked shut. If we hadn’t brexited in 2016 we would have become even further enmeshed in the EU and exit would have become impossibly painful. Even more painful than the Brexit we’ve had. That sense of Now or Never definitely affected my vote
This painfulness is not by chance. Article 50 was expressly written (by a Brit!) to make secession from the EU deeply unattractive and punishing for any nation attempting it
Brexit was like Indiana Jones diving under the descending stone door before it finally locked shut? I thought it was like childbirth.
Typical Brexiter bollox.
Yes yes. Whatever
My point is good. Eg if we’d stayed in the EU we would surely have joined the Covid Stability Pakt, mutualising and pooling EU debt. That’s a fairly irreversible step
And if we'd joined all that it would have been the choice of a democratically-elected government.
Not that you'd have to agree with it but not irreversible. The next democratically-elected government could have taken us out of the agreement.
Sure. But there is a point at which you become so embroiled it is in practise impossible to leave even if theoretically do-able. In 2016 we were close to that moment
In an ideal world we’d have had a referendum long before 2016 - on Maastricht or Lisbon - we’d have voted No to further integration and we’d still be in the EU now but in a more accommodating outer circle
This is the great irony of Brexit. The europhiles - by constantly denying us a referendum - ended up guaranteeing their worse nightmare. Total Brexit
So there'll be a settled view on Brexit good or bad in about 30-40 years. Whether it will be the right one is debatable
Except not really.
Before the vote, lot's of people said it be a bad thing, and bad things would happen.
Since the vote, bad things have happened.
The number of people who agree it's been a bad thing has monotonically risen since the event.
There is no Universe in which it turns out not have been a bad thing.
Yet still the cultists cling on...
Yes, two bad things have happened since Brexit: covid and Ukraine. Occasionally some on the fringes attempt to blame these things on Brexit. But these people are maniacs.
I tend to disregard those who see no universes in which Brexit is a good thing, because they are clearly not thinking through all the possible futures. There is a highly plausible future, for example, in which the Euro goes to shit and the less attached we are to the EU the better. I think that future is quite likely. Now you might think, like kinabalu, that future probably won't happen. That would be fair enough. But to say there is no future in which Brexit was the right move is insane.
Excellent post. I am an avid remainer, but I would really like to be proved wrong and I accept I could be. Even though I feel strongly it is unlikely I would really like it to be so.
Thank you. Although I think my position is that I don't necessarily want to be proved right. There are two (non-exclusive) possible futures in which Brexit turns out to be the right decision: - Brexit turns out to be a good opportunity and the UK can grow more outside the EU. - Bremain would have turned out to be a bad option.
I think the first is reasonably possible, but my vote for Leave was more based in expectation of the second. I think there is a lot which could go wrong with the EU. (The two most prominent ones being the Euro going to shit and the integration ratchet winding ever tighter). I don't really want to be proved right on this though!
Leave/Remain was a really complex balancing act of imagining hundreds of different futures of Brexit and hundreds of different futures of Bremain, and coming to some sort of judgement of the likelihood of each. Even the really expensive analyses barely scratched the surface on this, tending to assume many things would not change, when in reality any change of circumstance causes people to make different decisions. And none of them assumed a global pandemic or the biggest European war in 75 years. It was impossible to know how it would turn out. There are futures in which Brexit > Bremain, and there are futures in which Bremain > Brexit. My judgement was that Bremain was the higher risk option - but I would be very happy with a future in which the risks I feared do not come to pass, and in which Britain and Europe co-operate and both continue to prosper and Brexit turns out not to have really mattered much either way.
Absolute bollox thinking. Imagine that EU may have an issue some day, so throw yourself off a cliff now to avoid it, barking.
Brexit was more like Indiana Jones diving under the descending stone door before it finally locked shut. If we hadn’t brexited in 2016 we would have become even further enmeshed in the EU and exit would have become impossibly painful. Even more painful than the Brexit we’ve had. That sense of Now or Never definitely affected my vote
This painfulness is not by chance. Article 50 was expressly written (by a Brit!) to make secession from the EU deeply unattractive and punishing for any nation attempting it
Brexit is more like the end of Raiders of the Lost Ark where the Nazis/Leavers open the Ark/Do Brexit and their heads melt and eyeballs pop out because God/Economic Reality doesn't approve of their evil intent.
That's even worse than Leon's efforts. if it were true, the rest of us could just have closed our eyes for a few minutes, and it would all have been sorted.
So there'll be a settled view on Brexit good or bad in about 30-40 years. Whether it will be the right one is debatable
Except not really.
Before the vote, lot's of people said it be a bad thing, and bad things would happen.
Since the vote, bad things have happened.
The number of people who agree it's been a bad thing has monotonically risen since the event.
There is no Universe in which it turns out not have been a bad thing.
Yet still the cultists cling on...
Yes, two bad things have happened since Brexit: covid and Ukraine. Occasionally some on the fringes attempt to blame these things on Brexit. But these people are maniacs.
I tend to disregard those who see no universes in which Brexit is a good thing, because they are clearly not thinking through all the possible futures. There is a highly plausible future, for example, in which the Euro goes to shit and the less attached we are to the EU the better. I think that future is quite likely. Now you might think, like kinabalu, that future probably won't happen. That would be fair enough. But to say there is no future in which Brexit was the right move is insane.
Excellent post. I am an avid remainer, but I would really like to be proved wrong and I accept I could be. Even though I feel strongly it is unlikely I would really like it to be so.
Thank you. Although I think my position is that I don't necessarily want to be proved right. There are two (non-exclusive) possible futures in which Brexit turns out to be the right decision: - Brexit turns out to be a good opportunity and the UK can grow more outside the EU. - Bremain would have turned out to be a bad option.
I think the first is reasonably possible, but my vote for Leave was more based in expectation of the second. I think there is a lot which could go wrong with the EU. (The two most prominent ones being the Euro going to shit and the integration ratchet winding ever tighter). I don't really want to be proved right on this though!
Leave/Remain was a really complex balancing act of imagining hundreds of different futures of Brexit and hundreds of different futures of Bremain, and coming to some sort of judgement of the likelihood of each. Even the really expensive analyses barely scratched the surface on this, tending to assume many things would not change, when in reality any change of circumstance causes people to make different decisions. And none of them assumed a global pandemic or the biggest European war in 75 years. It was impossible to know how it would turn out. There are futures in which Brexit > Bremain, and there are futures in which Bremain > Brexit. My judgement was that Bremain was the higher risk option - but I would be very happy with a future in which the risks I feared do not come to pass, and in which Britain and Europe co-operate and both continue to prosper and Brexit turns out not to have really mattered much either way.
Absolute bollox thinking. Imagine that EU may have an issue some day, so throw yourself off a cliff now to avoid it, barking.
Brexit was more like Indiana Jones diving under the descending stone door before it finally locked shut. If we hadn’t brexited in 2016 we would have become even further enmeshed in the EU and exit would have become impossibly painful. Even more painful than the Brexit we’ve had. That sense of Now or Never definitely affected my vote
This painfulness is not by chance. Article 50 was expressly written (by a Brit!) to make secession from the EU deeply unattractive and punishing for any nation attempting it
At the time I largely agreed with this argument. We weren't in the Euro, or Schengen, or with any desire for an EU army etc etc etc. Lots of talk of a twin-track or two-speed Europe, so if we're going to be propelled to the periphery anyway, better to do so under our own terms.
Problem is that our own terms turned out to be batshit crazy. As I have said repeatedly, leaving the EU is not our problem, what the Tories have chosen to do after leaving the EU is the problem. Instead of negotiating an actual deal that actually works (like Switzerland), we self-imposed one-way trade barriers against ourselves. And had the numpties in government try and spin that as some kind of win.
In October we have what the meat industry is openly describing as "hard Brexit". Once again we're about to self-impose big barriers on ourselves, choosing aggro over cooperation. Which will see a big spike in the price of most items containing meaty goodness. Well, ANOTHER big spike...
I agree with much of this. And yes the Tories are at fault - especially TMay with her idiotic “red lines”
So there'll be a settled view on Brexit good or bad in about 30-40 years. Whether it will be the right one is debatable
Except not really.
Before the vote, lot's of people said it be a bad thing, and bad things would happen.
Since the vote, bad things have happened.
The number of people who agree it's been a bad thing has monotonically risen since the event.
There is no Universe in which it turns out not have been a bad thing.
Yet still the cultists cling on...
Yes, two bad things have happened since Brexit: covid and Ukraine. Occasionally some on the fringes attempt to blame these things on Brexit. But these people are maniacs.
I tend to disregard those who see no universes in which Brexit is a good thing, because they are clearly not thinking through all the possible futures. There is a highly plausible future, for example, in which the Euro goes to shit and the less attached we are to the EU the better. I think that future is quite likely. Now you might think, like kinabalu, that future probably won't happen. That would be fair enough. But to say there is no future in which Brexit was the right move is insane.
Excellent post. I am an avid remainer, but I would really like to be proved wrong and I accept I could be. Even though I feel strongly it is unlikely I would really like it to be so.
Thank you. Although I think my position is that I don't necessarily want to be proved right. There are two (non-exclusive) possible futures in which Brexit turns out to be the right decision: - Brexit turns out to be a good opportunity and the UK can grow more outside the EU. - Bremain would have turned out to be a bad option.
I think the first is reasonably possible, but my vote for Leave was more based in expectation of the second. I think there is a lot which could go wrong with the EU. (The two most prominent ones being the Euro going to shit and the integration ratchet winding ever tighter). I don't really want to be proved right on this though!
Leave/Remain was a really complex balancing act of imagining hundreds of different futures of Brexit and hundreds of different futures of Bremain, and coming to some sort of judgement of the likelihood of each. Even the really expensive analyses barely scratched the surface on this, tending to assume many things would not change, when in reality any change of circumstance causes people to make different decisions. And none of them assumed a global pandemic or the biggest European war in 75 years. It was impossible to know how it would turn out. There are futures in which Brexit > Bremain, and there are futures in which Bremain > Brexit. My judgement was that Bremain was the higher risk option - but I would be very happy with a future in which the risks I feared do not come to pass, and in which Britain and Europe co-operate and both continue to prosper and Brexit turns out not to have really mattered much either way.
Absolute bollox thinking. Imagine that EU may have an issue some day, so throw yourself off a cliff now to avoid it, barking.
Brexit was more like Indiana Jones diving under the descending stone door before it finally locked shut. If we hadn’t brexited in 2016 we would have become even further enmeshed in the EU and exit would have become impossibly painful. Even more painful than the Brexit we’ve had. That sense of Now or Never definitely affected my vote
This painfulness is not by chance. Article 50 was expressly written (by a Brit!) to make secession from the EU deeply unattractive and punishing for any nation attempting it
Brexit is more like the end of Raiders of the Lost Ark where the Nazis/Leavers open the Ark/Do Brexit and their heads melt and eyeballs pop out because God/Economic Reality doesn't approve of their evil intent.
More like Fatal Attraction, Britain doing fine in an imperfect relationship but it works. Gets head turned by exciting but risky alternative life. Turns out a little challenging. Each time Britain thinks it’s solved it goes a bit mental. Eventually a drastic turn of events happens that ends the trauma and Britain gets back with the wife, a little scarred but having learnt a lesson and will be more careful of Bunny Boilers for good measure.
So there'll be a settled view on Brexit good or bad in about 30-40 years. Whether it will be the right one is debatable
Except not really.
Before the vote, lot's of people said it be a bad thing, and bad things would happen.
Since the vote, bad things have happened.
The number of people who agree it's been a bad thing has monotonically risen since the event.
There is no Universe in which it turns out not have been a bad thing.
Yet still the cultists cling on...
Yes, two bad things have happened since Brexit: covid and Ukraine. Occasionally some on the fringes attempt to blame these things on Brexit. But these people are maniacs.
I tend to disregard those who see no universes in which Brexit is a good thing, because they are clearly not thinking through all the possible futures. There is a highly plausible future, for example, in which the Euro goes to shit and the less attached we are to the EU the better. I think that future is quite likely. Now you might think, like kinabalu, that future probably won't happen. That would be fair enough. But to say there is no future in which Brexit was the right move is insane.
Excellent post. I am an avid remainer, but I would really like to be proved wrong and I accept I could be. Even though I feel strongly it is unlikely I would really like it to be so.
Thank you. Although I think my position is that I don't necessarily want to be proved right. There are two (non-exclusive) possible futures in which Brexit turns out to be the right decision: - Brexit turns out to be a good opportunity and the UK can grow more outside the EU. - Bremain would have turned out to be a bad option.
I think the first is reasonably possible, but my vote for Leave was more based in expectation of the second. I think there is a lot which could go wrong with the EU. (The two most prominent ones being the Euro going to shit and the integration ratchet winding ever tighter). I don't really want to be proved right on this though!
Leave/Remain was a really complex balancing act of imagining hundreds of different futures of Brexit and hundreds of different futures of Bremain, and coming to some sort of judgement of the likelihood of each. Even the really expensive analyses barely scratched the surface on this, tending to assume many things would not change, when in reality any change of circumstance causes people to make different decisions. And none of them assumed a global pandemic or the biggest European war in 75 years. It was impossible to know how it would turn out. There are futures in which Brexit > Bremain, and there are futures in which Bremain > Brexit. My judgement was that Bremain was the higher risk option - but I would be very happy with a future in which the risks I feared do not come to pass, and in which Britain and Europe co-operate and both continue to prosper and Brexit turns out not to have really mattered much either way.
Absolute bollox thinking. Imagine that EU may have an issue some day, so throw yourself off a cliff now to avoid it, barking.
Brexit was more like Indiana Jones diving under the descending stone door before it finally locked shut. If we hadn’t brexited in 2016 we would have become even further enmeshed in the EU and exit would have become impossibly painful. Even more painful than the Brexit we’ve had. That sense of Now or Never definitely affected my vote
This painfulness is not by chance. Article 50 was expressly written (by a Brit!) to make secession from the EU deeply unattractive and punishing for any nation attempting it
At the time I largely agreed with this argument. We weren't in the Euro, or Schengen, or with any desire for an EU army etc etc etc. Lots of talk of a twin-track or two-speed Europe, so if we're going to be propelled to the periphery anyway, better to do so under our own terms.
Problem is that our own terms turned out to be batshit crazy. As I have said repeatedly, leaving the EU is not our problem, what the Tories have chosen to do after leaving the EU is the problem. Instead of negotiating an actual deal that actually works (like Switzerland), we self-imposed one-way trade barriers against ourselves. And had the numpties in government try and spin that as some kind of win.
In October we have what the meat industry is openly describing as "hard Brexit". Once again we're about to self-impose big barriers on ourselves, choosing aggro over cooperation. Which will see a big spike in the price of most items containing meaty goodness. Well, ANOTHER big spike...
I agree with much of this. And yes the Tories are at fault - especially TMay with her idiotic “red lines”
The red lines - and so much of the negotiation that followed - was part of their culture wars which you seem to advocate. Yes it worked politically for them, with a massive turnout of non-voters in red wall shitholes like Thornaby to vote Tory to Get Brexit Done.
The problem then is that we have people like Jonathan Gullis as MPs, who assume the electorate are as thick as they are. And for a while that may have been true as the Tories weaponised stupidity and kept insisting that the more we hurt ourselves the more the stick it to the EU.
A few years further down the line and the game is up. People can see just how shit it is, morons like Gullis haven't got the memo and keep trying to spin failure as success, and the only last bastion for culture wars is the NatC conference.
Brexit was voting to take down from the cliff edge the sign that said: DANGER - CLIFF: DO NOT JUMP.
You could have jumped despite the sign (talking to you, @Leon).
I'm not sure I understand your metaphor. Membership of the EU was a warning sign?
It was saying now we can reduce immigration but we were never going to, and have not now reduced immigration. It was saying now we develop our own standards system for widgets but we were never going to develop our own standards system for widgets.
It was voting to be able to do something that we were and are never going to do.
China must be well pissed off with Putin by now. His daft adventure continues seriously to change the disposition of the Asian Pacific rim states.
Ukraine war shows need for defense pact with US: PNG https://www.taipeitimes.com/News/front/archives/2023/05/22/2003800201 Papua New Guinea (PNG) said it would sign a defense agreement with the US, ahead of a deal with Australia and despite opposition party concerns that it could upset China, because the Ukraine conflict shows the need for military capability.
Today, the Pacific island nation is to host visits by US Secretary of State Antony Blinken, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, New Zealand Prime Minister Chris Hipkins and other Pacific island leaders.
While Modi’s visit is expected to focus on trade, Blinken is to sign a defense cooperation agreement (DCA) with PNG Prime Minister James Marape, the two nations have said...
So there'll be a settled view on Brexit good or bad in about 30-40 years. Whether it will be the right one is debatable
Except not really.
Before the vote, lot's of people said it be a bad thing, and bad things would happen.
Since the vote, bad things have happened.
The number of people who agree it's been a bad thing has monotonically risen since the event.
There is no Universe in which it turns out not have been a bad thing.
Yet still the cultists cling on...
Yes, two bad things have happened since Brexit: covid and Ukraine. Occasionally some on the fringes attempt to blame these things on Brexit. But these people are maniacs.
I tend to disregard those who see no universes in which Brexit is a good thing, because they are clearly not thinking through all the possible futures. There is a highly plausible future, for example, in which the Euro goes to shit and the less attached we are to the EU the better. I think that future is quite likely. Now you might think, like kinabalu, that future probably won't happen. That would be fair enough. But to say there is no future in which Brexit was the right move is insane.
Excellent post. I am an avid remainer, but I would really like to be proved wrong and I accept I could be. Even though I feel strongly it is unlikely I would really like it to be so.
Thank you. Although I think my position is that I don't necessarily want to be proved right. There are two (non-exclusive) possible futures in which Brexit turns out to be the right decision: - Brexit turns out to be a good opportunity and the UK can grow more outside the EU. - Bremain would have turned out to be a bad option.
I think the first is reasonably possible, but my vote for Leave was more based in expectation of the second. I think there is a lot which could go wrong with the EU. (The two most prominent ones being the Euro going to shit and the integration ratchet winding ever tighter). I don't really want to be proved right on this though!
Leave/Remain was a really complex balancing act of imagining hundreds of different futures of Brexit and hundreds of different futures of Bremain, and coming to some sort of judgement of the likelihood of each. Even the really expensive analyses barely scratched the surface on this, tending to assume many things would not change, when in reality any change of circumstance causes people to make different decisions. And none of them assumed a global pandemic or the biggest European war in 75 years. It was impossible to know how it would turn out. There are futures in which Brexit > Bremain, and there are futures in which Bremain > Brexit. My judgement was that Bremain was the higher risk option - but I would be very happy with a future in which the risks I feared do not come to pass, and in which Britain and Europe co-operate and both continue to prosper and Brexit turns out not to have really mattered much either way.
Absolute bollox thinking. Imagine that EU may have an issue some day, so throw yourself off a cliff now to avoid it, barking.
Brexit was more like Indiana Jones diving under the descending stone door before it finally locked shut. If we hadn’t brexited in 2016 we would have become even further enmeshed in the EU and exit would have become impossibly painful. Even more painful than the Brexit we’ve had. That sense of Now or Never definitely affected my vote
This painfulness is not by chance. Article 50 was expressly written (by a Brit!) to make secession from the EU deeply unattractive and punishing for any nation attempting it
Brexit was like Indiana Jones diving under the descending stone door before it finally locked shut? I thought it was like childbirth.
Typical Brexiter bollox.
Yes yes. Whatever
My point is good. Eg if we’d stayed in the EU we would surely have joined the Covid Stability Pakt, mutualising and pooling EU debt. That’s a fairly irreversible step
And if we'd joined all that it would have been the choice of a democratically-elected government.
Not that you'd have to agree with it but not irreversible. The next democratically-elected government could have taken us out of the agreement.
Sure. But there is a point at which you become so embroiled it is in practise impossible to leave even if theoretically do-able. In 2016 we were close to that moment
In an ideal world we’d have had a referendum long before 2016 - on Maastricht or Lisbon - we’d have voted No to further integration and we’d still be in the EU now but in a more accommodating outer circle
This is the great irony of Brexit. The europhiles - by constantly denying us a referendum - ended up guaranteeing their worse nightmare. Total Brexit
This "Remainers are responsible for Brexit" trope is just the most embarrassing, intellectually feeble, political excuse since the Dolchstoßlegende and I just hope it doesn't have the same effects. It's the political equivalent of a domestic abuser. "You Remainers, you didn't give us what we wanted earlier, so we hurted all of us MORE just to prove you wrong. LOOK WHAT YOU MADE US DO!"
So there'll be a settled view on Brexit good or bad in about 30-40 years. Whether it will be the right one is debatable
Except not really.
Before the vote, lot's of people said it be a bad thing, and bad things would happen.
Since the vote, bad things have happened.
The number of people who agree it's been a bad thing has monotonically risen since the event.
There is no Universe in which it turns out not have been a bad thing.
Yet still the cultists cling on...
Yes, two bad things have happened since Brexit: covid and Ukraine. Occasionally some on the fringes attempt to blame these things on Brexit. But these people are maniacs.
I tend to disregard those who see no universes in which Brexit is a good thing, because they are clearly not thinking through all the possible futures. There is a highly plausible future, for example, in which the Euro goes to shit and the less attached we are to the EU the better. I think that future is quite likely. Now you might think, like kinabalu, that future probably won't happen. That would be fair enough. But to say there is no future in which Brexit was the right move is insane.
Excellent post. I am an avid remainer, but I would really like to be proved wrong and I accept I could be. Even though I feel strongly it is unlikely I would really like it to be so.
Thank you. Although I think my position is that I don't necessarily want to be proved right. There are two (non-exclusive) possible futures in which Brexit turns out to be the right decision: - Brexit turns out to be a good opportunity and the UK can grow more outside the EU. - Bremain would have turned out to be a bad option.
I think the first is reasonably possible, but my vote for Leave was more based in expectation of the second. I think there is a lot which could go wrong with the EU. (The two most prominent ones being the Euro going to shit and the integration ratchet winding ever tighter). I don't really want to be proved right on this though!
Leave/Remain was a really complex balancing act of imagining hundreds of different futures of Brexit and hundreds of different futures of Bremain, and coming to some sort of judgement of the likelihood of each. Even the really expensive analyses barely scratched the surface on this, tending to assume many things would not change, when in reality any change of circumstance causes people to make different decisions. And none of them assumed a global pandemic or the biggest European war in 75 years. It was impossible to know how it would turn out. There are futures in which Brexit > Bremain, and there are futures in which Bremain > Brexit. My judgement was that Bremain was the higher risk option - but I would be very happy with a future in which the risks I feared do not come to pass, and in which Britain and Europe co-operate and both continue to prosper and Brexit turns out not to have really mattered much either way.
Absolute bollox thinking. Imagine that EU may have an issue some day, so throw yourself off a cliff now to avoid it, barking.
Brexit was more like Indiana Jones diving under the descending stone door before it finally locked shut. If we hadn’t brexited in 2016 we would have become even further enmeshed in the EU and exit would have become impossibly painful. Even more painful than the Brexit we’ve had. That sense of Now or Never definitely affected my vote
This painfulness is not by chance. Article 50 was expressly written (by a Brit!) to make secession from the EU deeply unattractive and punishing for any nation attempting it
Brexit was like Indiana Jones diving under the descending stone door before it finally locked shut? I thought it was like childbirth.
Typical Brexiter bollox.
Yes yes. Whatever
My point is good. Eg if we’d stayed in the EU we would surely have joined the Covid Stability Pakt, mutualising and pooling EU debt. That’s a fairly irreversible step
And if we'd joined all that it would have been the choice of a democratically-elected government.
Not that you'd have to agree with it but not irreversible. The next democratically-elected government could have taken us out of the agreement.
Sure. But there is a point at which you become so embroiled it is in practise impossible to leave even if theoretically do-able. In 2016 we were close to that moment
In an ideal world we’d have had a referendum long before 2016 - on Maastricht or Lisbon - we’d have voted No to further integration and we’d still be in the EU now but in a more accommodating outer circle
This is the great irony of Brexit. The europhiles - by constantly denying us a referendum - ended up guaranteeing their worse nightmare. Total Brexit
Yes, exactly. Had we placed had a referendum at Lisbon or Maastricht, we could have ended up with the this-far-but-no-further that we would have broadly been happy with. We may even have ended up with the thanks of other electorates, none of whom wanted the EU to become what it has become.
So there'll be a settled view on Brexit good or bad in about 30-40 years. Whether it will be the right one is debatable
Except not really.
Before the vote, lot's of people said it be a bad thing, and bad things would happen.
Since the vote, bad things have happened.
The number of people who agree it's been a bad thing has monotonically risen since the event.
There is no Universe in which it turns out not have been a bad thing.
Yet still the cultists cling on...
Yes, two bad things have happened since Brexit: covid and Ukraine. Occasionally some on the fringes attempt to blame these things on Brexit. But these people are maniacs.
I tend to disregard those who see no universes in which Brexit is a good thing, because they are clearly not thinking through all the possible futures. There is a highly plausible future, for example, in which the Euro goes to shit and the less attached we are to the EU the better. I think that future is quite likely. Now you might think, like kinabalu, that future probably won't happen. That would be fair enough. But to say there is no future in which Brexit was the right move is insane.
Excellent post. I am an avid remainer, but I would really like to be proved wrong and I accept I could be. Even though I feel strongly it is unlikely I would really like it to be so.
Thank you. Although I think my position is that I don't necessarily want to be proved right. There are two (non-exclusive) possible futures in which Brexit turns out to be the right decision: - Brexit turns out to be a good opportunity and the UK can grow more outside the EU. - Bremain would have turned out to be a bad option.
I think the first is reasonably possible, but my vote for Leave was more based in expectation of the second. I think there is a lot which could go wrong with the EU. (The two most prominent ones being the Euro going to shit and the integration ratchet winding ever tighter). I don't really want to be proved right on this though!
Leave/Remain was a really complex balancing act of imagining hundreds of different futures of Brexit and hundreds of different futures of Bremain, and coming to some sort of judgement of the likelihood of each. Even the really expensive analyses barely scratched the surface on this, tending to assume many things would not change, when in reality any change of circumstance causes people to make different decisions. And none of them assumed a global pandemic or the biggest European war in 75 years. It was impossible to know how it would turn out. There are futures in which Brexit > Bremain, and there are futures in which Bremain > Brexit. My judgement was that Bremain was the higher risk option - but I would be very happy with a future in which the risks I feared do not come to pass, and in which Britain and Europe co-operate and both continue to prosper and Brexit turns out not to have really mattered much either way.
Absolute bollox thinking. Imagine that EU may have an issue some day, so throw yourself off a cliff now to avoid it, barking.
Brexit was more like Indiana Jones diving under the descending stone door before it finally locked shut. If we hadn’t brexited in 2016 we would have become even further enmeshed in the EU and exit would have become impossibly painful. Even more painful than the Brexit we’ve had. That sense of Now or Never definitely affected my vote
This painfulness is not by chance. Article 50 was expressly written (by a Brit!) to make secession from the EU deeply unattractive and punishing for any nation attempting it
Brexit was like Indiana Jones diving under the descending stone door before it finally locked shut? I thought it was like childbirth.
Typical Brexiter bollox.
Yes yes. Whatever
My point is good. Eg if we’d stayed in the EU we would surely have joined the Covid Stability Pakt, mutualising and pooling EU debt. That’s a fairly irreversible step
And if we'd joined all that it would have been the choice of a democratically-elected government.
Not that you'd have to agree with it but not irreversible. The next democratically-elected government could have taken us out of the agreement.
Sure. But there is a point at which you become so embroiled it is in practise impossible to leave even if theoretically do-able. In 2016 we were close to that moment
In an ideal world we’d have had a referendum long before 2016 - on Maastricht or Lisbon - we’d have voted No to further integration and we’d still be in the EU now but in a more accommodating outer circle
This is the great irony of Brexit. The europhiles - by constantly denying us a referendum - ended up guaranteeing their worse nightmare. Total Brexit
Yes and no. Referendums are tricky and as we have seen can conflict with a parliamentary democracy. I am happy with the principle that the governments of the day embraced Lisbon and Brexit. I think referendums can do more harm than good; we have a perfectly decent mechanism for making national decisions.
So there'll be a settled view on Brexit good or bad in about 30-40 years. Whether it will be the right one is debatable
Except not really.
Before the vote, lot's of people said it be a bad thing, and bad things would happen.
Since the vote, bad things have happened.
The number of people who agree it's been a bad thing has monotonically risen since the event.
There is no Universe in which it turns out not have been a bad thing.
Yet still the cultists cling on...
Yes, two bad things have happened since Brexit: covid and Ukraine. Occasionally some on the fringes attempt to blame these things on Brexit. But these people are maniacs.
I tend to disregard those who see no universes in which Brexit is a good thing, because they are clearly not thinking through all the possible futures. There is a highly plausible future, for example, in which the Euro goes to shit and the less attached we are to the EU the better. I think that future is quite likely. Now you might think, like kinabalu, that future probably won't happen. That would be fair enough. But to say there is no future in which Brexit was the right move is insane.
Excellent post. I am an avid remainer, but I would really like to be proved wrong and I accept I could be. Even though I feel strongly it is unlikely I would really like it to be so.
Thank you. Although I think my position is that I don't necessarily want to be proved right. There are two (non-exclusive) possible futures in which Brexit turns out to be the right decision: - Brexit turns out to be a good opportunity and the UK can grow more outside the EU. - Bremain would have turned out to be a bad option.
I think the first is reasonably possible, but my vote for Leave was more based in expectation of the second. I think there is a lot which could go wrong with the EU. (The two most prominent ones being the Euro going to shit and the integration ratchet winding ever tighter). I don't really want to be proved right on this though!
Leave/Remain was a really complex balancing act of imagining hundreds of different futures of Brexit and hundreds of different futures of Bremain, and coming to some sort of judgement of the likelihood of each. Even the really expensive analyses barely scratched the surface on this, tending to assume many things would not change, when in reality any change of circumstance causes people to make different decisions. And none of them assumed a global pandemic or the biggest European war in 75 years. It was impossible to know how it would turn out. There are futures in which Brexit > Bremain, and there are futures in which Bremain > Brexit. My judgement was that Bremain was the higher risk option - but I would be very happy with a future in which the risks I feared do not come to pass, and in which Britain and Europe co-operate and both continue to prosper and Brexit turns out not to have really mattered much either way.
Absolute bollox thinking. Imagine that EU may have an issue some day, so throw yourself off a cliff now to avoid it, barking.
Brexit was more like Indiana Jones diving under the descending stone door before it finally locked shut. If we hadn’t brexited in 2016 we would have become even further enmeshed in the EU and exit would have become impossibly painful. Even more painful than the Brexit we’ve had. That sense of Now or Never definitely affected my vote
This painfulness is not by chance. Article 50 was expressly written (by a Brit!) to make secession from the EU deeply unattractive and punishing for any nation attempting it
At the time I largely agreed with this argument. We weren't in the Euro, or Schengen, or with any desire for an EU army etc etc etc. Lots of talk of a twin-track or two-speed Europe, so if we're going to be propelled to the periphery anyway, better to do so under our own terms.
Problem is that our own terms turned out to be batshit crazy. As I have said repeatedly, leaving the EU is not our problem, what the Tories have chosen to do after leaving the EU is the problem. Instead of negotiating an actual deal that actually works (like Switzerland), we self-imposed one-way trade barriers against ourselves. And had the numpties in government try and spin that as some kind of win.
In October we have what the meat industry is openly describing as "hard Brexit". Once again we're about to self-impose big barriers on ourselves, choosing aggro over cooperation. Which will see a big spike in the price of most items containing meaty goodness. Well, ANOTHER big spike...
I agree with much of this. And yes the Tories are at fault - especially TMay with her idiotic “red lines”
The red lines - and so much of the negotiation that followed - was part of their culture wars which you seem to advocate. Yes it worked politically for them, with a massive turnout of non-voters in red wall shitholes like Thornaby to vote Tory to Get Brexit Done.
The problem then is that we have people like Jonathan Gullis as MPs, who assume the electorate are as thick as they are. And for a while that may have been true as the Tories weaponised stupidity and kept insisting that the more we hurt ourselves the more the stick it to the EU.
A few years further down the line and the game is up. People can see just how shit it is, morons like Gullis haven't got the memo and keep trying to spin failure as success, and the only last bastion for culture wars is the NatC conference.
No they are - or they should be - entirely different things
We can argue the culture wars another time, TMay’s failure was a failure of basic politics. She was a Remainer who felt she needed to appease hardline Leavers. She didn’t. Her stupid speech just boxed us in. She made multiple howling errors. Then she nearly lost to Corbyn. A truly terrible prime minister
So there'll be a settled view on Brexit good or bad in about 30-40 years. Whether it will be the right one is debatable
Except not really.
Before the vote, lot's of people said it be a bad thing, and bad things would happen.
Since the vote, bad things have happened.
The number of people who agree it's been a bad thing has monotonically risen since the event.
There is no Universe in which it turns out not have been a bad thing.
Yet still the cultists cling on...
Yes, two bad things have happened since Brexit: covid and Ukraine. Occasionally some on the fringes attempt to blame these things on Brexit. But these people are maniacs.
I tend to disregard those who see no universes in which Brexit is a good thing, because they are clearly not thinking through all the possible futures. There is a highly plausible future, for example, in which the Euro goes to shit and the less attached we are to the EU the better. I think that future is quite likely. Now you might think, like kinabalu, that future probably won't happen. That would be fair enough. But to say there is no future in which Brexit was the right move is insane.
Excellent post. I am an avid remainer, but I would really like to be proved wrong and I accept I could be. Even though I feel strongly it is unlikely I would really like it to be so.
Thank you. Although I think my position is that I don't necessarily want to be proved right. There are two (non-exclusive) possible futures in which Brexit turns out to be the right decision: - Brexit turns out to be a good opportunity and the UK can grow more outside the EU. - Bremain would have turned out to be a bad option.
I think the first is reasonably possible, but my vote for Leave was more based in expectation of the second. I think there is a lot which could go wrong with the EU. (The two most prominent ones being the Euro going to shit and the integration ratchet winding ever tighter). I don't really want to be proved right on this though!
Leave/Remain was a really complex balancing act of imagining hundreds of different futures of Brexit and hundreds of different futures of Bremain, and coming to some sort of judgement of the likelihood of each. Even the really expensive analyses barely scratched the surface on this, tending to assume many things would not change, when in reality any change of circumstance causes people to make different decisions. And none of them assumed a global pandemic or the biggest European war in 75 years. It was impossible to know how it would turn out. There are futures in which Brexit > Bremain, and there are futures in which Bremain > Brexit. My judgement was that Bremain was the higher risk option - but I would be very happy with a future in which the risks I feared do not come to pass, and in which Britain and Europe co-operate and both continue to prosper and Brexit turns out not to have really mattered much either way.
Absolute bollox thinking. Imagine that EU may have an issue some day, so throw yourself off a cliff now to avoid it, barking.
Brexit was more like Indiana Jones diving under the descending stone door before it finally locked shut. If we hadn’t brexited in 2016 we would have become even further enmeshed in the EU and exit would have become impossibly painful. Even more painful than the Brexit we’ve had. That sense of Now or Never definitely affected my vote
This painfulness is not by chance. Article 50 was expressly written (by a Brit!) to make secession from the EU deeply unattractive and punishing for any nation attempting it
Brexit was like Indiana Jones diving under the descending stone door before it finally locked shut? I thought it was like childbirth.
Typical Brexiter bollox.
Yes yes. Whatever
My point is good. Eg if we’d stayed in the EU we would surely have joined the Covid Stability Pakt, mutualising and pooling EU debt. That’s a fairly irreversible step
And if we'd joined all that it would have been the choice of a democratically-elected government.
Not that you'd have to agree with it but not irreversible. The next democratically-elected government could have taken us out of the agreement.
Sure. But there is a point at which you become so embroiled it is in practise impossible to leave even if theoretically do-able. In 2016 we were close to that moment
In an ideal world we’d have had a referendum long before 2016 - on Maastricht or Lisbon - we’d have voted No to further integration and we’d still be in the EU now but in a more accommodating outer circle
This is the great irony of Brexit. The europhiles - by constantly denying us a referendum - ended up guaranteeing their worse nightmare. Total Brexit
This "Remainers are responsible for Brexit" trope is just the most embarrassing, intellectually feeble, political excuse since the Dolchstoßlegende and I just hope it doesn't have the same effects. It's the political equivalent of a domestic abuser. "You Remainers, you didn't give us what we wanted earlier, so we hurted all of us MORE just to prove you wrong. LOOK WHAT YOU MADE US DO!"
Yes. Pointing out that we were constantly denied promised referendums on Europe is just like nazism
So there'll be a settled view on Brexit good or bad in about 30-40 years. Whether it will be the right one is debatable
Except not really.
Before the vote, lot's of people said it be a bad thing, and bad things would happen.
Since the vote, bad things have happened.
The number of people who agree it's been a bad thing has monotonically risen since the event.
There is no Universe in which it turns out not have been a bad thing.
Yet still the cultists cling on...
Yes, two bad things have happened since Brexit: covid and Ukraine. Occasionally some on the fringes attempt to blame these things on Brexit. But these people are maniacs.
I tend to disregard those who see no universes in which Brexit is a good thing, because they are clearly not thinking through all the possible futures. There is a highly plausible future, for example, in which the Euro goes to shit and the less attached we are to the EU the better. I think that future is quite likely. Now you might think, like kinabalu, that future probably won't happen. That would be fair enough. But to say there is no future in which Brexit was the right move is insane.
Excellent post. I am an avid remainer, but I would really like to be proved wrong and I accept I could be. Even though I feel strongly it is unlikely I would really like it to be so.
Thank you. Although I think my position is that I don't necessarily want to be proved right. There are two (non-exclusive) possible futures in which Brexit turns out to be the right decision: - Brexit turns out to be a good opportunity and the UK can grow more outside the EU. - Bremain would have turned out to be a bad option.
I think the first is reasonably possible, but my vote for Leave was more based in expectation of the second. I think there is a lot which could go wrong with the EU. (The two most prominent ones being the Euro going to shit and the integration ratchet winding ever tighter). I don't really want to be proved right on this though!
Leave/Remain was a really complex balancing act of imagining hundreds of different futures of Brexit and hundreds of different futures of Bremain, and coming to some sort of judgement of the likelihood of each. Even the really expensive analyses barely scratched the surface on this, tending to assume many things would not change, when in reality any change of circumstance causes people to make different decisions. And none of them assumed a global pandemic or the biggest European war in 75 years. It was impossible to know how it would turn out. There are futures in which Brexit > Bremain, and there are futures in which Bremain > Brexit. My judgement was that Bremain was the higher risk option - but I would be very happy with a future in which the risks I feared do not come to pass, and in which Britain and Europe co-operate and both continue to prosper and Brexit turns out not to have really mattered much either way.
Absolute bollox thinking. Imagine that EU may have an issue some day, so throw yourself off a cliff now to avoid it, barking.
Brexit was more like Indiana Jones diving under the descending stone door before it finally locked shut. If we hadn’t brexited in 2016 we would have become even further enmeshed in the EU and exit would have become impossibly painful. Even more painful than the Brexit we’ve had. That sense of Now or Never definitely affected my vote
This painfulness is not by chance. Article 50 was expressly written (by a Brit!) to make secession from the EU deeply unattractive and punishing for any nation attempting it
Brexit was like Indiana Jones diving under the descending stone door before it finally locked shut? I thought it was like childbirth.
Typical Brexiter bollox.
Yes yes. Whatever
My point is good. Eg if we’d stayed in the EU we would surely have joined the Covid Stability Pakt, mutualising and pooling EU debt. That’s a fairly irreversible step
And if we'd joined all that it would have been the choice of a democratically-elected government.
Not that you'd have to agree with it but not irreversible. The next democratically-elected government could have taken us out of the agreement.
Sure. But there is a point at which you become so embroiled it is in practise impossible to leave even if theoretically do-able. In 2016 we were close to that moment
In an ideal world we’d have had a referendum long before 2016 - on Maastricht or Lisbon - we’d have voted No to further integration and we’d still be in the EU now but in a more accommodating outer circle
This is the great irony of Brexit. The europhiles - by constantly denying us a referendum - ended up guaranteeing their worse nightmare. Total Brexit
Yes. The intentions of 'ever closer union' EU integrationists, political, economic and fiscal are as honourable as a Scots wish for independence. But people are entitled to take different views.
The consistent failure to argue for the destination, acknowledge what was going on, and seek referendum support stage by stage has wrecked the entire edifice.
Once the ECB and the Euro were in place people in power were in denial about things which could not be rationally denied.
This is the greatest single policy fail since WW II. It is staggering in its incompetence. Labour and Tory governments (even Mrs T) are all equally culpable in this.
So there'll be a settled view on Brexit good or bad in about 30-40 years. Whether it will be the right one is debatable
Except not really.
Before the vote, lot's of people said it be a bad thing, and bad things would happen.
Since the vote, bad things have happened.
The number of people who agree it's been a bad thing has monotonically risen since the event.
There is no Universe in which it turns out not have been a bad thing.
Yet still the cultists cling on...
Yes, two bad things have happened since Brexit: covid and Ukraine. Occasionally some on the fringes attempt to blame these things on Brexit. But these people are maniacs.
I tend to disregard those who see no universes in which Brexit is a good thing, because they are clearly not thinking through all the possible futures. There is a highly plausible future, for example, in which the Euro goes to shit and the less attached we are to the EU the better. I think that future is quite likely. Now you might think, like kinabalu, that future probably won't happen. That would be fair enough. But to say there is no future in which Brexit was the right move is insane.
Excellent post. I am an avid remainer, but I would really like to be proved wrong and I accept I could be. Even though I feel strongly it is unlikely I would really like it to be so.
Thank you. Although I think my position is that I don't necessarily want to be proved right. There are two (non-exclusive) possible futures in which Brexit turns out to be the right decision: - Brexit turns out to be a good opportunity and the UK can grow more outside the EU. - Bremain would have turned out to be a bad option.
I think the first is reasonably possible, but my vote for Leave was more based in expectation of the second. I think there is a lot which could go wrong with the EU. (The two most prominent ones being the Euro going to shit and the integration ratchet winding ever tighter). I don't really want to be proved right on this though!
Leave/Remain was a really complex balancing act of imagining hundreds of different futures of Brexit and hundreds of different futures of Bremain, and coming to some sort of judgement of the likelihood of each. Even the really expensive analyses barely scratched the surface on this, tending to assume many things would not change, when in reality any change of circumstance causes people to make different decisions. And none of them assumed a global pandemic or the biggest European war in 75 years. It was impossible to know how it would turn out. There are futures in which Brexit > Bremain, and there are futures in which Bremain > Brexit. My judgement was that Bremain was the higher risk option - but I would be very happy with a future in which the risks I feared do not come to pass, and in which Britain and Europe co-operate and both continue to prosper and Brexit turns out not to have really mattered much either way.
Absolute bollox thinking. Imagine that EU may have an issue some day, so throw yourself off a cliff now to avoid it, barking.
Brexit was more like Indiana Jones diving under the descending stone door before it finally locked shut. If we hadn’t brexited in 2016 we would have become even further enmeshed in the EU and exit would have become impossibly painful. Even more painful than the Brexit we’ve had. That sense of Now or Never definitely affected my vote
This painfulness is not by chance. Article 50 was expressly written (by a Brit!) to make secession from the EU deeply unattractive and punishing for any nation attempting it
Brexit was like Indiana Jones diving under the descending stone door before it finally locked shut? I thought it was like childbirth.
Typical Brexiter bollox.
Yes yes. Whatever
My point is good. Eg if we’d stayed in the EU we would surely have joined the Covid Stability Pakt, mutualising and pooling EU debt. That’s a fairly irreversible step
And if we'd joined all that it would have been the choice of a democratically-elected government.
Not that you'd have to agree with it but not irreversible. The next democratically-elected government could have taken us out of the agreement.
Sure. But there is a point at which you become so embroiled it is in practise impossible to leave even if theoretically do-able. In 2016 we were close to that moment
In an ideal world we’d have had a referendum long before 2016 - on Maastricht or Lisbon - we’d have voted No to further integration and we’d still be in the EU now but in a more accommodating outer circle
This is the great irony of Brexit. The europhiles - by constantly denying us a referendum - ended up guaranteeing their worse nightmare. Total Brexit
This "Remainers are responsible for Brexit" trope is just the most embarrassing, intellectually feeble, political excuse since the Dolchstoßlegende and I just hope it doesn't have the same effects. It's the political equivalent of a domestic abuser. "You Remainers, you didn't give us what we wanted earlier, so we hurted all of us MORE just to prove you wrong. LOOK WHAT YOU MADE US DO!"
What was imposed on us which we didn't agree to? The Euro? Schengen? The Army? Turkey?
"No further integration" is what we had. And if we wanted to just go back to the Single Market without whatever latest thing the EU were doing, why didn't we do that? Rejoin EFTA and have a free trade deal like Norway.
What happened was very simple. The only thing the multiple competing anti-EU campaigns could agree on was sovereignty. So it because sovereignty or bust - well, Sovereignty AND bust. We couldn't stay in the free market - the thing we wished we could go back to - because we'd be "a rule-taker not a rule-maker".
Yet here we are. In nothing and having their rules imposed on us in a one-sided self-harming manner. Because it transpires - shocking as it is - that we can't just dictate to the world the rules of trade. "Lets go WTO" they said, where we would have the whip hand. And we do, we keep having our hand whipped. To trade with a market you have to comply with that market's rules. We don't tell Europe or the US or Japan what to do, they tell us what to do. We are the supplicants.
So there'll be a settled view on Brexit good or bad in about 30-40 years. Whether it will be the right one is debatable
Except not really.
Before the vote, lot's of people said it be a bad thing, and bad things would happen.
Since the vote, bad things have happened.
The number of people who agree it's been a bad thing has monotonically risen since the event.
There is no Universe in which it turns out not have been a bad thing.
Yet still the cultists cling on...
Yes, two bad things have happened since Brexit: covid and Ukraine. Occasionally some on the fringes attempt to blame these things on Brexit. But these people are maniacs.
I tend to disregard those who see no universes in which Brexit is a good thing, because they are clearly not thinking through all the possible futures. There is a highly plausible future, for example, in which the Euro goes to shit and the less attached we are to the EU the better. I think that future is quite likely. Now you might think, like kinabalu, that future probably won't happen. That would be fair enough. But to say there is no future in which Brexit was the right move is insane.
Excellent post. I am an avid remainer, but I would really like to be proved wrong and I accept I could be. Even though I feel strongly it is unlikely I would really like it to be so.
Thank you. Although I think my position is that I don't necessarily want to be proved right. There are two (non-exclusive) possible futures in which Brexit turns out to be the right decision: - Brexit turns out to be a good opportunity and the UK can grow more outside the EU. - Bremain would have turned out to be a bad option.
I think the first is reasonably possible, but my vote for Leave was more based in expectation of the second. I think there is a lot which could go wrong with the EU. (The two most prominent ones being the Euro going to shit and the integration ratchet winding ever tighter). I don't really want to be proved right on this though!
Leave/Remain was a really complex balancing act of imagining hundreds of different futures of Brexit and hundreds of different futures of Bremain, and coming to some sort of judgement of the likelihood of each. Even the really expensive analyses barely scratched the surface on this, tending to assume many things would not change, when in reality any change of circumstance causes people to make different decisions. And none of them assumed a global pandemic or the biggest European war in 75 years. It was impossible to know how it would turn out. There are futures in which Brexit > Bremain, and there are futures in which Bremain > Brexit. My judgement was that Bremain was the higher risk option - but I would be very happy with a future in which the risks I feared do not come to pass, and in which Britain and Europe co-operate and both continue to prosper and Brexit turns out not to have really mattered much either way.
Absolute bollox thinking. Imagine that EU may have an issue some day, so throw yourself off a cliff now to avoid it, barking.
Brexit was more like Indiana Jones diving under the descending stone door before it finally locked shut. If we hadn’t brexited in 2016 we would have become even further enmeshed in the EU and exit would have become impossibly painful. Even more painful than the Brexit we’ve had. That sense of Now or Never definitely affected my vote
This painfulness is not by chance. Article 50 was expressly written (by a Brit!) to make secession from the EU deeply unattractive and punishing for any nation attempting it
Brexit was like Indiana Jones diving under the descending stone door before it finally locked shut? I thought it was like childbirth.
Typical Brexiter bollox.
Yes yes. Whatever
My point is good. Eg if we’d stayed in the EU we would surely have joined the Covid Stability Pakt, mutualising and pooling EU debt. That’s a fairly irreversible step
And if we'd joined all that it would have been the choice of a democratically-elected government.
Not that you'd have to agree with it but not irreversible. The next democratically-elected government could have taken us out of the agreement.
Sure. But there is a point at which you become so embroiled it is in practise impossible to leave even if theoretically do-able. In 2016 we were close to that moment
In an ideal world we’d have had a referendum long before 2016 - on Maastricht or Lisbon - we’d have voted No to further integration and we’d still be in the EU now but in a more accommodating outer circle
This is the great irony of Brexit. The europhiles - by constantly denying us a referendum - ended up guaranteeing their worse nightmare. Total Brexit
This "Remainers are responsible for Brexit" trope is just the most embarrassing, intellectually feeble, political excuse since the Dolchstoßlegende and I just hope it doesn't have the same effects. It's the political equivalent of a domestic abuser. "You Remainers, you didn't give us what we wanted earlier, so we hurted all of us MORE just to prove you wrong. LOOK WHAT YOU MADE US DO!"
That's somewhat twisting the argument. The argument is that Britain never wanted to go where the political classes tried to take us with regard to Europe. But had they offered a this-far-and-no-further, they could have had it. Brexit wasn't done in a fit of nihilism: it was done because when Britain was finally offered a choice of two futures, it preferred one to the other. But had a choice been offered earlier, a choice more acceptable to both sides would have been reached.
Why on earth bring someone's children into the political/twitter domain? They should be wholly out of bounds, unless paraded on the running board of a 1925 Rolls Royce phantom by their parents for some kind of intended political gain.
I have no idea whether she meant well but I read it as passive/aggressive.
Because Raab cited the pressures on his young family as the reason for his standing down as MP and shared this with the press. Jess Phillips said, I agree these pressures are tough on politicians families.
People here are making this into a vile threat by Phillips rather than she's showing empathy.
The Telegraph says that it "has seen an exchange of letters" between him and his CA chairman. Doesn't immediately look like "shared with the press".
That's a slightly naive view of what "has seen an exchange of letters" means in the language of the press, and why you put things in letters in the modern age.
Raab will have had various private discussions with officers of his constituency party, which might have been pretty candid (and might well have been less than cordial from rumours one hears). The exchange of letters is the formal part, setting out for public consumption the "official" version of why the MP is leaving and why the constituency association is sorry to see them go but understands etc.
Ditto cabinet resignations. No doubt the "I expect your resignation letter on my desk by tomorrow at 7am" conversation can get rather heated, but the formal letters say "honour of a lifetime to serve such a wonderful PM for whom I would willingly die a thousand political deaths" and "thank you for the immeasurable and transformative brilliance of your contribution to the nation over your fornight as Welsh Secretary".
X is the ability to elect and eject all the major politicians who govern us and an end to rule by Eurocrats and a stupid weird Parliament no one votes for or understands
So there'll be a settled view on Brexit good or bad in about 30-40 years. Whether it will be the right one is debatable
Except not really.
Before the vote, lot's of people said it be a bad thing, and bad things would happen.
Since the vote, bad things have happened.
The number of people who agree it's been a bad thing has monotonically risen since the event.
There is no Universe in which it turns out not have been a bad thing.
Yet still the cultists cling on...
Yes, two bad things have happened since Brexit: covid and Ukraine. Occasionally some on the fringes attempt to blame these things on Brexit. But these people are maniacs.
I tend to disregard those who see no universes in which Brexit is a good thing, because they are clearly not thinking through all the possible futures. There is a highly plausible future, for example, in which the Euro goes to shit and the less attached we are to the EU the better. I think that future is quite likely. Now you might think, like kinabalu, that future probably won't happen. That would be fair enough. But to say there is no future in which Brexit was the right move is insane.
Excellent post. I am an avid remainer, but I would really like to be proved wrong and I accept I could be. Even though I feel strongly it is unlikely I would really like it to be so.
Thank you. Although I think my position is that I don't necessarily want to be proved right. There are two (non-exclusive) possible futures in which Brexit turns out to be the right decision: - Brexit turns out to be a good opportunity and the UK can grow more outside the EU. - Bremain would have turned out to be a bad option.
I think the first is reasonably possible, but my vote for Leave was more based in expectation of the second. I think there is a lot which could go wrong with the EU. (The two most prominent ones being the Euro going to shit and the integration ratchet winding ever tighter). I don't really want to be proved right on this though!
Leave/Remain was a really complex balancing act of imagining hundreds of different futures of Brexit and hundreds of different futures of Bremain, and coming to some sort of judgement of the likelihood of each. Even the really expensive analyses barely scratched the surface on this, tending to assume many things would not change, when in reality any change of circumstance causes people to make different decisions. And none of them assumed a global pandemic or the biggest European war in 75 years. It was impossible to know how it would turn out. There are futures in which Brexit > Bremain, and there are futures in which Bremain > Brexit. My judgement was that Bremain was the higher risk option - but I would be very happy with a future in which the risks I feared do not come to pass, and in which Britain and Europe co-operate and both continue to prosper and Brexit turns out not to have really mattered much either way.
Absolute bollox thinking. Imagine that EU may have an issue some day, so throw yourself off a cliff now to avoid it, barking.
If you think there is a risks of being somewhere outweigh the rewards of being there (this place is fun, but it looks like it's all about to kick off), you leave. If you think the downside of being in a particular investment outweigh the upside (my Blockbuster video stocks have been ticking over nicely, but I hear films will be accessed on a thing called the internet in future), you sell. You might disagree with the balance of risks and rewards, but I don't see why you'd object to the principle.
So if one has a family history of congenital heart issues, ideally one should rip out their own heart to prevent the inevitable.
Exclusive: Suella Braverman is facing fresh allegations of ministerial code breaches over her failure to formally disclose previous work with the Rwandan government
She was the director of a charity training its lawyers for five years
I don't think there is anything interesting in who the candidates are gonna be for the Dems and GOP. Only thing still up in the air, in my mind, is who does Trump pick for his VP? He won't have Pence again, whereas I would assume Biden will keep Kamala on the ticket, so it's the only real unknown.
I would put some money on Kari Lake of Arizona - she lost her race, but she is a good communicator, the right kind of crazy for Trump, is a woman who would actually probably perform better against Kamala in a debate, and she has a history on TV. She has her own grievance narrative and stolen election claim (just dismissed by the courts), so she won't disagree with Trump publicly on that front (where other GOPers would). And whilst she didn't win Arizona, she might help make it more competitive in the GE.
More than 20,000 alleged incidents of sexual violence and sexual misconduct by patients on hospital staff were recorded in the five years to 2022 by 212 NHS trusts in England, freedom of information (FoI) requests by the Guardian and the British Medical Journal (BMJ) found.
The 20,928 cases accounted for just under 60% of the total alleged incidents trusts disclosed. Allegations included claims of rape, sexual assault, harassment, stalking and sexualised remarks.
Experts cautioned that the figures were likely to be a serious underestimate as staff are often deterred from making complaints when patients abuse them...
I don't think there is anything interesting in who the candidates are gonna be for the Dems and GOP. Only thing still up in the air, in my mind, is who does Trump pick for his VP? He won't have Pence again, whereas I would assume Biden will keep Kamala on the ticket, so it's the only real unknown.
I would put some money on Kari Lake of Arizona - she lost her race, but she is a good communicator, the right kind of crazy for Trump, is a woman who would actually probably perform better against Kamala in a debate, and she has a history on TV. She has her own grievance narrative and stolen election claim (just dismissed by the courts), so she won't disagree with Trump publicly on that front (where other GOPers would). And whilst she didn't win Arizona, she might help make it more competitive in the GE.
Exclusive: Suella Braverman is facing fresh allegations of ministerial code breaches over her failure to formally disclose previous work with the Rwandan government
She was the director of a charity training its lawyers for five years
So there'll be a settled view on Brexit good or bad in about 30-40 years. Whether it will be the right one is debatable
Except not really.
Before the vote, lot's of people said it be a bad thing, and bad things would happen.
Since the vote, bad things have happened.
The number of people who agree it's been a bad thing has monotonically risen since the event.
There is no Universe in which it turns out not have been a bad thing.
Yet still the cultists cling on...
Yes, two bad things have happened since Brexit: covid and Ukraine. Occasionally some on the fringes attempt to blame these things on Brexit. But these people are maniacs.
I tend to disregard those who see no universes in which Brexit is a good thing, because they are clearly not thinking through all the possible futures. There is a highly plausible future, for example, in which the Euro goes to shit and the less attached we are to the EU the better. I think that future is quite likely. Now you might think, like kinabalu, that future probably won't happen. That would be fair enough. But to say there is no future in which Brexit was the right move is insane.
Excellent post. I am an avid remainer, but I would really like to be proved wrong and I accept I could be. Even though I feel strongly it is unlikely I would really like it to be so.
Thank you. Although I think my position is that I don't necessarily want to be proved right. There are two (non-exclusive) possible futures in which Brexit turns out to be the right decision: - Brexit turns out to be a good opportunity and the UK can grow more outside the EU. - Bremain would have turned out to be a bad option.
I think the first is reasonably possible, but my vote for Leave was more based in expectation of the second. I think there is a lot which could go wrong with the EU. (The two most prominent ones being the Euro going to shit and the integration ratchet winding ever tighter). I don't really want to be proved right on this though!
Leave/Remain was a really complex balancing act of imagining hundreds of different futures of Brexit and hundreds of different futures of Bremain, and coming to some sort of judgement of the likelihood of each. Even the really expensive analyses barely scratched the surface on this, tending to assume many things would not change, when in reality any change of circumstance causes people to make different decisions. And none of them assumed a global pandemic or the biggest European war in 75 years. It was impossible to know how it would turn out. There are futures in which Brexit > Bremain, and there are futures in which Bremain > Brexit. My judgement was that Bremain was the higher risk option - but I would be very happy with a future in which the risks I feared do not come to pass, and in which Britain and Europe co-operate and both continue to prosper and Brexit turns out not to have really mattered much either way.
Absolute bollox thinking. Imagine that EU may have an issue some day, so throw yourself off a cliff now to avoid it, barking.
Brexit was more like Indiana Jones diving under the descending stone door before it finally locked shut. If we hadn’t brexited in 2016 we would have become even further enmeshed in the EU and exit would have become impossibly painful. Even more painful than the Brexit we’ve had. That sense of Now or Never definitely affected my vote
This painfulness is not by chance. Article 50 was expressly written (by a Brit!) to make secession from the EU deeply unattractive and punishing for any nation attempting it
Brexit was like Indiana Jones diving under the descending stone door before it finally locked shut? I thought it was like childbirth.
Typical Brexiter bollox.
Yes yes. Whatever
My point is good. Eg if we’d stayed in the EU we would surely have joined the Covid Stability Pakt, mutualising and pooling EU debt. That’s a fairly irreversible step
And if we'd joined all that it would have been the choice of a democratically-elected government.
Not that you'd have to agree with it but not irreversible. The next democratically-elected government could have taken us out of the agreement.
Sure. But there is a point at which you become so embroiled it is in practise impossible to leave even if theoretically do-able. In 2016 we were close to that moment
In an ideal world we’d have had a referendum long before 2016 - on Maastricht or Lisbon - we’d have voted No to further integration and we’d still be in the EU now but in a more accommodating outer circle
This is the great irony of Brexit. The europhiles - by constantly denying us a referendum - ended up guaranteeing their worse nightmare. Total Brexit
This "Remainers are responsible for Brexit" trope is just the most embarrassing, intellectually feeble, political excuse since the Dolchstoßlegende and I just hope it doesn't have the same effects. It's the political equivalent of a domestic abuser. "You Remainers, you didn't give us what we wanted earlier, so we hurted all of us MORE just to prove you wrong. LOOK WHAT YOU MADE US DO!"
This argument is no use at all. Successive pro EU governments in the UK did not notice what millions of ordinary people noticed. One, that there was a democratic deficit. Two, that the EU was long term integrationist. Three, that UK people wanted a single market in goods and services but not in the movement of people.
At the point where both Remain and Leave were sub optimal outcomes, we were, for the first time asked a very simplistic question. The majority wanted neither answer. They wanted democracy, accountability and a UK government that over 40 years had shaped the EU in ways acceptable to us.
I voted for the bad answer - Leave, instead of the worse answer - Remain. And reluctantly I would do so again.
Exclusive: Suella Braverman is facing fresh allegations of ministerial code breaches over her failure to formally disclose previous work with the Rwandan government
She was the director of a charity training its lawyers for five years
X is the ability to elect and eject all the major politicians who govern us and an end to rule by Eurocrats and a stupid weird Parliament no one votes for or understands
I don't think there is anything interesting in who the candidates are gonna be for the Dems and GOP. Only thing still up in the air, in my mind, is who does Trump pick for his VP? He won't have Pence again, whereas I would assume Biden will keep Kamala on the ticket, so it's the only real unknown.
I would put some money on Kari Lake of Arizona - she lost her race, but she is a good communicator, the right kind of crazy for Trump, is a woman who would actually probably perform better against Kamala in a debate, and she has a history on TV. She has her own grievance narrative and stolen election claim (just dismissed by the courts), so she won't disagree with Trump publicly on that front (where other GOPers would). And whilst she didn't win Arizona, she might help make it more competitive in the GE.
Any other contenders to consider?
*swoon*
A loon who has never held elected office - I can see her appeal to Trump. Not so sure about you.
I don't think there is anything interesting in who the candidates are gonna be for the Dems and GOP. Only thing still up in the air, in my mind, is who does Trump pick for his VP? He won't have Pence again, whereas I would assume Biden will keep Kamala on the ticket, so it's the only real unknown.
I would put some money on Kari Lake of Arizona - she lost her race, but she is a good communicator, the right kind of crazy for Trump, is a woman who would actually probably perform better against Kamala in a debate, and she has a history on TV. She has her own grievance narrative and stolen election claim (just dismissed by the courts), so she won't disagree with Trump publicly on that front (where other GOPers would). And whilst she didn't win Arizona, she might help make it more competitive in the GE.
Any other contenders to consider?
*swoon*
Don't get me wrong, she'd be awful, and one heart attack away from being POTUS herself, which in many ways could be worse than Trump, but I see her as the kind of person Trump would want to pick. Last time he picked Pence because he didn't have any acolytes of his own and the Tea Party people were able to convince him to take him. This time he'll want to pick someone who would overturn an election for him (if Trump wins I would see him try to overturn term limits for POTUS, or make the argument again that he should get a mulligan on his first term due to the "Russia Hoax" and "Stolen Election", so will try to run again).
Comments
Some of us have argued, rather persistently, since the vote as to how the position might have been, and might be improved.
Although I think my position is that I don't necessarily want to be proved right.
There are two (non-exclusive) possible futures in which Brexit turns out to be the right decision:
- Brexit turns out to be a good opportunity and the UK can grow more outside the EU.
- Bremain would have turned out to be a bad option.
I think the first is reasonably possible, but my vote for Leave was more based in expectation of the second. I think there is a lot which could go wrong with the EU. (The two most prominent ones being the Euro going to shit and the integration ratchet winding ever tighter).
I don't really want to be proved right on this though!
Leave/Remain was a really complex balancing act of imagining hundreds of different futures of Brexit and hundreds of different futures of Bremain, and coming to some sort of judgement of the likelihood of each. Even the really expensive analyses barely scratched the surface on this, tending to assume many things would not change, when in reality any change of circumstance causes people to make different decisions. And none of them assumed a global pandemic or the biggest European war in 75 years. It was impossible to know how it would turn out. There are futures in which Brexit > Bremain, and there are futures in which Bremain > Brexit. My judgement was that Bremain was the higher risk option - but I would be very happy with a future in which the risks I feared do not come to pass, and in which Britain and Europe co-operate and both continue to prosper and Brexit turns out not to have really mattered much either way.
For a very large number of voters, Brexit was a simple act of voting Leave if you hate immigrants.
Contrast with LA which felt incredibly vibrant and exhilarating; I've been fascinated by the place ever since (though have never returned).
People here are making this into a vile threat by Phillips rather than she's showing empathy.
It was quite freaky then. Oddly so for such a rich city. The idea it has declined to a startling extent does not entice me back
Ah..
My view is still that we are better off not part of the EU but with a good working relationship with it. But the working relationship will require constant work, just as it would as a member of the EU, and just as it does with other countries. That's why we have a foreign office.
Can’t take photos of her tho - so here is a “night clock” which tells the time by water slowly dripping away for 12 hours. By day they had sundials
Wikipedia states that's he's got two kids (as is also the case for her), which wouldn't be the case if he were bothered about it.
Note she didn't name them.
Bit desperate from you.
As of now, we have declared candidates:
Donald Trump (76, former President)
Nikki Haley (51, former gov of South Carolina)
Asa Hutchinson (72, gov of Arkansas)
Tim Scott (57, US Senator from South Carolina)
Vivek Ramaswarmy (37, businessman from Ohio)
Larry Elder (71, radio host, former candidate for governor of California)
Possibly - Ron DeSantis (44, governor of Florida)
A dozen or more maybes, including Chris Christie, Tucker Carlson, Mike Pence, Glenn Youngkin, Gregg Abbott, Liz Cheney, Ted Cruz…
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_Republican_Party_presidential_primaries
Eddie Marsan
@eddiemarsan
·
May 21
I had to do a speed awareness course and, as a famous actor, it was really humiliating…no one recognised me.
James Blunt
@JamesBlunt
Mine was on Zoom, and I thought I’d got away with not being recognised, till the instructor asked people if they could think of ways to keep calm whilst driving. Someone suggested listening to some James Blunt, and everyone pissed themselves.
Bizarre
Never really took to LA.
Labour's lead over the Tories close to 16 points..Lab 44 per cent, down five points on March, Conservatives 28 per cent, up two points, the Lib-Dems 13 per cent, up two points, and the Greens unchanged on six per cent, @IpsosUK poll for @EveningStandard
By miles the better, imperfect, options now are the Norway route or the Switzerland route. The best chance of that, though slim, is a Labour government relying on resurgent LDs to form the next government.
As people are engaged in creative writing exercises, perhaps they should have a go at that one.
A key motivation of Brexit was to "take back control" but the loss of influence means we become much more of.a rule taker. Are people on board with that, because that's how it's going to be? Not sure about that.
Another contradiction, coming to the fore.in recent weeks is a high immigration economy being the way forward.in a Brexit world when people voted Leave to reduce immigration.
None of this is unexpected. Mistakes have consequences. At some point we have to accept those consequences and deal with them.
E. Jean Carroll adds Trump’s CNN town hall remarks to defamation suit
https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4016051-e-jean-carroll-adds-trumps-cnn-town-hall-to-defamation-suit/
In general I don't mock people about anything, really. I only care what they do, not who they are.
The former president’s team views virtually every ‘24 development through the prism of whether it helps or hurts Ron DeSantis.
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/05/22/trump-tim-scott-2024-00098292
...“The more the merrier,” said one Trump adviser of Scott’s announcement. “Tim Scott doesn’t have to write ‘Be Likeable’ at the top of his notepad,” referencing a video from a 2018 DeSantis debate prep where he was advised to be “likeable” to the audience.
Trump aides have been buoyed in recent days by signs that the ‘24 primary field is about to get crowded. ..
Speaker grants Commons urgent question to cover claims Suella Braverman broke ministerial code
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2023/may/23/dominic-raab-conservatives-lib-dems-election-rishi-sunak-suella-braverman-uk-politics-live
This painfulness is not by chance. Article 50 was expressly written (by a Brit!) to make secession from the EU deeply unattractive and punishing for any nation attempting it
Typical Brexiter bollox.
"He knew he was going to lose."
Duh.
My point is good. Eg if we’d stayed in the EU we would surely have joined the Covid Stability Pakt,
mutualising and pooling EU debt. That’s a fairly irreversible step
Which country is better able to control its immigration - Switzerland or Austria?
Of course our decisions are limited by the framework of what the rest of the world decides. But it seems odd to suggest we are now more at the mercy of outside forces than we were.
You are like the most quintessentially blasé brexiteer with an added dash of whisky flavoured wishful thinking
Not that you'd have to agree with it but not irreversible. The next democratically-elected government could have taken us out of the agreement.
You could have jumped despite the sign (talking to you, @Leon).
Problem is that our own terms turned out to be batshit crazy. As I have said repeatedly, leaving the EU is not our problem, what the Tories have chosen to do after leaving the EU is the problem. Instead of negotiating an actual deal that actually works (like Switzerland), we self-imposed one-way trade barriers against ourselves. And had the numpties in government try and spin that as some kind of win.
In October we have what the meat industry is openly describing as "hard Brexit". Once again we're about to self-impose big barriers on ourselves, choosing aggro over cooperation. Which will see a big spike in the price of most items containing meaty goodness. Well, ANOTHER big spike...
In an ideal world we’d have had a referendum long before 2016 - on Maastricht or Lisbon - we’d have voted No to further integration and we’d still be in the EU now but in a more accommodating outer circle
This is the great irony of Brexit. The europhiles - by constantly denying us a referendum - ended up guaranteeing their worse nightmare. Total Brexit
if it were true, the rest of us could just have closed our eyes for a few minutes, and it would all have been sorted.
I'm still waiting.
The problem then is that we have people like Jonathan Gullis as MPs, who assume the electorate are as thick as they are. And for a while that may have been true as the Tories weaponised stupidity and kept insisting that the more we hurt ourselves the more the stick it to the EU.
A few years further down the line and the game is up. People can see just how shit it is, morons like Gullis haven't got the memo and keep trying to spin failure as success, and the only last bastion for culture wars is the NatC conference.
It was voting to be able to do something that we were and are never going to do.
His daft adventure continues seriously to change the disposition of the Asian Pacific rim states.
Ukraine war shows need for defense pact with US: PNG
https://www.taipeitimes.com/News/front/archives/2023/05/22/2003800201
Papua New Guinea (PNG) said it would sign a defense agreement with the US, ahead of a deal with Australia and despite opposition party concerns that it could upset China, because the Ukraine conflict shows the need for military capability.
Today, the Pacific island nation is to host visits by US Secretary of State Antony Blinken, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, New Zealand Prime Minister Chris Hipkins and other Pacific island leaders.
While Modi’s visit is expected to focus on trade, Blinken is to sign a defense cooperation agreement (DCA) with PNG Prime Minister James Marape, the two nations have said...
We can argue the culture wars another time, TMay’s failure was a failure of basic politics. She was a Remainer who felt she needed to appease hardline Leavers. She didn’t. Her stupid speech just boxed us in. She made multiple howling errors. Then she nearly lost to Corbyn. A truly terrible prime minister
The consistent failure to argue for the destination, acknowledge what was going on, and seek referendum support stage by stage has wrecked the entire edifice.
Once the ECB and the Euro were in place people in power were in denial about things which could not be rationally denied.
This is the greatest single policy fail since WW II. It is staggering in its incompetence. Labour and Tory governments (even Mrs T) are all equally culpable in this.
The Euro?
Schengen?
The Army?
Turkey?
"No further integration" is what we had. And if we wanted to just go back to the Single Market without whatever latest thing the EU were doing, why didn't we do that? Rejoin EFTA and have a free trade deal like Norway.
What happened was very simple. The only thing the multiple competing anti-EU campaigns could agree on was sovereignty. So it because sovereignty or bust - well, Sovereignty AND bust. We couldn't stay in the free market - the thing we wished we could go back to - because we'd be "a rule-taker not a rule-maker".
Yet here we are. In nothing and having their rules imposed on us in a one-sided self-harming manner. Because it transpires - shocking as it is - that we can't just dictate to the world the rules of trade. "Lets go WTO" they said, where we would have the whip hand. And we do, we keep having our hand whipped. To trade with a market you have to comply with that market's rules. We don't tell Europe or the US or Japan what to do, they tell us what to do. We are the supplicants.
The argument is that Britain never wanted to go where the political classes tried to take us with regard to Europe. But had they offered a this-far-and-no-further, they could have had it.
Brexit wasn't done in a fit of nihilism: it was done because when Britain was finally offered a choice of two futures, it preferred one to the other. But had a choice been offered earlier, a choice more acceptable to both sides would have been reached.
Raab will have had various private discussions with officers of his constituency party, which might have been pretty candid (and might well have been less than cordial from rumours one hears). The exchange of letters is the formal part, setting out for public consumption the "official" version of why the MP is leaving and why the constituency association is sorry to see them go but understands etc.
Ditto cabinet resignations. No doubt the "I expect your resignation letter on my desk by tomorrow at 7am" conversation can get rather heated, but the formal letters say "honour of a lifetime to serve such a wonderful PM for whom I would willingly die a thousand political deaths" and "thank you for the immeasurable and transformative brilliance of your contribution to the nation over your fornight as Welsh Secretary".
https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewhc/admin/2023/1228
Now we can't.
he makes our laws for life.
Why aren't the police removing the protestors who are obstructing King Zog's Highway?
Exclusive: Suella Braverman is facing fresh allegations of ministerial code breaches over her failure to formally disclose previous work with the Rwandan government
She was the director of a charity training its lawyers for five years
https://twitter.com/lizziedearden/status/1660960831184543744
I wonder if he can revoke her security clearance...
I would put some money on Kari Lake of Arizona - she lost her race, but she is a good communicator, the right kind of crazy for Trump, is a woman who would actually probably perform better against Kamala in a debate, and she has a history on TV. She has her own grievance narrative and stolen election claim (just dismissed by the courts), so she won't disagree with Trump publicly on that front (where other GOPers would). And whilst she didn't win Arizona, she might help make it more competitive in the GE.
Any other contenders to consider?
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/may/23/nhs-staff-report-20000-claims-of-patient-sexual-misconduct-over-five-years
Thousands of hospital staff are reporting claims of sexual assaults and harassment by patients, an investigation has found, prompting calls for ministers to address the “daily threat of abuse” faced by doctors and nurses.
More than 20,000 alleged incidents of sexual violence and sexual misconduct by patients on hospital staff were recorded in the five years to 2022 by 212 NHS trusts in England, freedom of information (FoI) requests by the Guardian and the British Medical Journal (BMJ) found.
The 20,928 cases accounted for just under 60% of the total alleged incidents trusts disclosed. Allegations included claims of rape, sexual assault, harassment, stalking and sexualised remarks.
Experts cautioned that the figures were likely to be a serious underestimate as staff are often deterred from making complaints when patients abuse them...
Take the stone Rishi!
At the point where both Remain and Leave were sub optimal outcomes, we were, for the first time asked a very simplistic question. The majority wanted neither answer. They wanted democracy, accountability and a UK government that over 40 years had shaped the EU in ways acceptable to us.
I voted for the bad answer - Leave, instead of the worse answer - Remain. And reluctantly I would do so again.
This came out in November
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/suella-braverman-rwanda-law-migrants-b2233102.html
Not so sure about you.
We still comply with EU regs but have no say in writing them.
Sloooooooooooowwwwww hand clap
@PME_Politics
MRP, anyone? 👀