If May had adopted the consensual approach that Foxy suggests far fewer people would be trying to stop Brexit. My MP is now a prominent backer of a People's Vote but in the immediate aftermath of the referendum he took the view that the decision was irreversible. May's divisive and unrealistic approach is the key factor driving division.
No, the key factor driving division is that she's weak because of the GE2017 result, which not only forced her into a minority government but also clobbered her personal political authority. Unsurprisingly, every Tom Dick & Harry (or at least every Adonis and Rees Mogg) think that if they make enough trouble they can bully her into changing course in their favoured direction. Multiple attempts at bullying in various incompatible directions is what gives the sense of division.
And who called the 2017 election, and why?
Ah, well that's a different question. Actually her mistake wasn't calling the election, it was screwing it up having called it.
Given her awkwardness in interviews she might well have screwed it up anyway.
Counter-factual writers must be licking their lips at the spectacle of Britain from about 2014 onwards.
Or weeping.
Well, as a citizen I can understand the weeping. But if I was so inclined..... and I might be one of these days........ how about a story about a Britain where Kennedy got off the drink?
I don't think the LDs have any blame due for the unsatisfactory Brexit mess that the current government is fighting over.
It is a Tory dogs dinner, no one else is responsible.
With respect that is too simplistic. Everyone shoulders blame from the ultra Brexiteers to the remainers who never accepted the result and have tried everything they can to prevent Brexit. If a consensus and respect for the vote had taken place a cross party position should have been agreed and pursued. It is not a conservative mess. It is a seriously divided Country's mess
If May had taken the position that Brexit needed to be negotiated by an all party team, with representation by all countries then there may be some truth to that.
She chose not to do so, chose her own redlines without consultation and as a consequence owns the mess.
And those actively trying to stop Brexit have no responsibility
I agree, they do not.
May excluded all opinions on how to proceed, apart from the upper echelons of the Tories.
She owns the process, and by excluding others has allowed them to lob brickbats at her version.
A multi-party committee including all devolved nations would have been better, even though thrashing out a common position clearly not easy, before A50 was served.
She chose not to do so. She owns Brexit. It will be her poisonous legacy, though I still expect it to go with a whimper rather than a bang.
I suppose the first world war is slipping far enough into history now that it becomes more acceptable to see things like this that might have been thought distasteful when there were still people alive who experienced the trenches first hand.
It brings to mind things like the civil war re-enactors and similar.
It is bizarre.
Mind you, some of the other poppy stuff is worse, such as the poppy christmas tree:
"If you’re sick and tired, too, here is what you can do. Vote for Democrats on Tuesday. For every office. Regardless of who they are. And I say that as a former Republican."
I don't think the LDs have any blame due for the unsatisfactory Brexit mess that the current government is fighting over.
It is a Tory dogs dinner, no one else is responsible.
With respect that is too simplistic. Everyone shoulders blame from the ultra Brexiteers to the remainers who never accepted the result and have tried everything they can to prevent Brexit. If a consensus and respect for the vote had taken place a cross party position should have been agreed and pursued. It is not a conservative mess. It is a seriously divided Country's mess
If May had taken the position that Brexit needed to be negotiated by an all party team, with representation by all countries then there may be some truth to that.
She chose not to do so, chose her own redlines without consultation and as a consequence owns the mess.
And those actively trying to stop Brexit have no responsibility
I agree, they do not.
May excluded all opinions on how to proceed, apart from the upper echelons of the Tories.
She owns the process, and by excluding others has allowed them to lob brickbats at her version.
A multi-party committee including all devolved nations would have been better, even though thrashing out a common position clearly not easy, before A50 was served.
She chose not to do so. She owns Brexit. It will be her poisonous legacy, though I still expect it to go with a whimper rather than a bang.
This is quite literally nonsense. In a perfect world May would have got all parties around the table and they would agree to do what's best for the country. However in a perfect world we wouldn't have politics. If you think Corbyn Sturgeon and Cable would sit down and agree to any form of Brexit without playing politics then you are deluded. There has been lots of talk on here today about the coalition when the LDs put country before party and then got annihilated. If you think anyone else is going to do that then you have a better expectation of people than I do.
If May had adopted the consensual approach that Foxy suggests far fewer people would be trying to stop Brexit. My MP is now a prominent backer of a People's Vote but in the immediate aftermath of the referendum he took the view that the decision was irreversible. May's divisive and unrealistic approach is the key factor driving division.
No, the key factor driving division is that she's weak because of the GE2017 result, which not only forced her into a minority government but also clobbered her personal political authority. Unsurprisingly, every Tom Dick & Harry (or at least every Adonis and Rees Mogg) think that if they make enough trouble they can bully her into changing course in their favoured direction. Multiple attempts at bullying in various incompatible directions is what gives the sense of division.
A majority would make it easier to get legislation through parliament but it wouldn't resolve any of the contradictions of Brexit. Ultimately governments are answerable to the electorate and the dog's dinner would still be a dog's dinner.
I don't think the LDs have any blame due for the unsatisfactory Brexit mess that the current government is fighting over.
It is a Tory dogs dinner, no one else is responsible.
With respect that is too simplistic. Everyone shoulders blame from the ultra Brexiteers to the remainers who never accepted the result and have tried everything they can to prevent Brexit. If a consensus and respect for the vote had taken place a cross party position should have been agreed and pursued. It is not a conservative mess. It is a seriously divided Country's mess
If May had taken the position that Brexit needed to be negotiated by an all party team, with representation by all countries then there may be some truth to that.
She chose not to do so, chose her own redlines without consultation and as a consequence owns the mess.
And those actively trying to stop Brexit have no responsibility
I agree, they do not.
May excluded all opinions on how to proceed, apart from the upper echelons of the Tories.
She owns the process, and by excluding others has allowed them to lob brickbats at her version.
A multi-party committee including all devolved nations would have been better, even though thrashing out a common position clearly not easy, before A50 was served.
She chose not to do so. She owns Brexit. It will be her poisonous legacy, though I still expect it to go with a whimper rather than a bang.
This is quite literally nonsense. In a perfect world May would have got all parties around the table and they would agree to do what's best for the country. However in a perfect world we wouldn't have politics. If you think Corbyn Sturgeon and Cable would sit down and agree to any form of Brexit without playing politics then you are deluded. There has been lots of talk on here today about the coalition when the LDs put country before party and then got annihilated. If you think anyone else is going to do that then you have a better expectation of people than I do.
Sure, a multiparty convention on Brexit would have had significant challenges!
Nonetheless, May did not even attempt it. She chose to make it a partisan issue, and even called an election so that she could ram through her own version of Brexit. Having made it partisan she cannot cry partisan at others.
Long term the best result for the Dems would be to fail to take control of either chamber. If they take control of the House, we will see them push too hard on the impeachment front which - like Clinton in reverse - will only benefit Trump in 2020.
If they fail, Trump has ownership of everything and if it goes wrong, noone to blame but himself to blame if it goes wrong, and with the clock ticking on a recession there's got to be a good chance of that happening.
It may not come across by reading the UK press or the NYT/WP, but one of Trump's biggest assets is the Dems - they're a mess. A resounding failure may lead them to sort themselves out and coalesce around a sensible candidate - and if they do, Trump should be very beatable.
If the Dems take the house, pile in on Trump in 2020 - if the Reps hold on, bet the other way.
May excluded all opinions on how to proceed, apart from the upper echelons of the Tories.
She owns the process, and by excluding others has allowed them to lob brickbats at her version.
A multi-party committee including all devolved nations would have been better, even though thrashing out a common position clearly not easy, before A50 was served.
She chose not to do so. She owns Brexit. It will be her poisonous legacy, though I still expect it to go with a whimper rather than a bang.
This is quite literally nonsense. In a perfect world May would have got all parties around the table and they would agree to do what's best for the country. However in a perfect world we wouldn't have politics. If you think Corbyn Sturgeon and Cable would sit down and agree to any form of Brexit without playing politics then you are deluded. There has been lots of talk on here today about the coalition when the LDs put country before party and then got annihilated. If you think anyone else is going to do that then you have a better expectation of people than I do.
I don't expect Corbyn or Sturgeon would have responded positively, but they may have decided it would have been riskier not to. We don't know because May didn't even make a token effort.
If they had failed to engage then May could have gone over their heads directly to the people, by following Ireland's example with the abortion referendum and convening a citizens' assembly.
She did neither. She was not interested in forging a national consensus. She attempted to use the situation for party advantage, was inept and we stymied by the voters. But even then she did not listen and change course. She acted as though she had a landslide majority when she did not. It's a massive failure of her making.
I don't think the LDs have any blame due for the unsatisfactory Brexit mess that the current government is fighting over.
It is a Tory dogs dinner, no one else is responsible.
With respect that is too simplistic. Everyone shoulders blame from the ultra Brexiteers to the remainers who never accepted the result and have tried everything they can to prevent Brexit. If a consensus and respect for the vote had taken place a cross party position should have been agreed and pursued. It is not a conservative mess. It is a seriously divided Country's mess
If May had taken the position that Brexit needed to be negotiated by an all party team, with representation by all countries then there may be some truth to that.
She chose not to do so, chose her own redlines without consultation and as a consequence owns the mess.
And those actively trying to stop Brexit have no responsibility
I agree, they do not.
May excluded all opinions on how to proceed, apart from the upper echelons of the Tories.
She owns the process, and by excluding others has allowed them to lob brickbats at her version.
A multi-party committee including all devolved nations would have been better, even though thrashing out a common position clearly not easy, before A50 was served.
She chose not to do so. She owns Brexit. It will be her poisonous legacy, though I still expect it to go with a whimper rather than a bang.
Sure, a multiparty convention on Brexit would have had significant challenges!
Nonetheless, May did not even attempt it. She chose to make it a partisan issue, and even called an election so that she could ram through her own version of Brexit. Having made it partisan she cannot cry partisan at others.
I don't think May is doing any crying.
My view hasn't changed. UK democracy is functioning well. There's plenty of opposition to Brexit, including the recent large march in London; various elements of the process have been tested in the courts and the Lords are holding the government's feet to the fire. I'm genuinely puzzled that the Lib Dems aren't doing better in the polls, but as I'm a political anorak I probably mix in the wrong circles.
Only a fool would argue that the negotiations have gone well, and the leading Brexiteers have all fallen on their faces. However, barring an Act of God, the UK will exit on March 29th, and the ardent EUrophiles will have to turn their attention to article 49. Then we'll see whether the Rejoin manifesto is electorally attractive.
My view hasn't changed. UK democracy is functioning well. There's plenty of opposition to Brexit, including the recent large march in London; various elements of the process have been tested in the courts and the Lords are holding the government's feet to the fire. I'm genuinely puzzled that the Lib Dems aren't doing better in the polls, but as I'm a political anorak I probably mix in the wrong circles.
Only a fool would argue that the negotiations have gone well, and the leading Brexiteers have all fallen on their faces. However, barring an Act of God, the UK will exit on March 29th, and the ardent EUrophiles will have to turn their attention to article 49. Then we'll see whether the Rejoin manifesto is electorally attractive.
Rejoining doesn't have to be attractive on its own, it just needs to be seen as the least worst option.
The reality of Leaving being a terrible mistake might just swing it on its own.
A decade of Brexit induced economic ruin might do the trick.
Long term the best result for the Dems would be to fail to take control of either chamber. If they take control of the House, we will see them push too hard on the impeachment front which - like Clinton in reverse - will only benefit Trump in 2020.
If they fail, Trump has ownership of everything and if it goes wrong, noone to blame but himself to blame if it goes wrong, and with the clock ticking on a recession there's got to be a good chance of that happening.
It may not come across by reading the UK press or the NYT/WP, but one of Trump's biggest assets is the Dems - they're a mess. A resounding failure may lead them to sort themselves out and coalesce around a sensible candidate - and if they do, Trump should be very beatable.
If the Dems take the house, pile in on Trump in 2020 - if the Reps hold on, bet the other way.
I'm not convinced. The GOP talks about Trump being impeached more than the Dems do. If the Dems take the House and don't impeach, that'll take away that line of attack. The question is whether the pressure from their base will be irresistible, but I don't see any particular evidence that it would be.
I'm not sure why failure would lead them to coalesce around a good candidate more than success would. I see no indication that they even really understand why Clinton was a bad candidate, so I'm not sure what the process is by which they have this revelation. Whatever the result, the different wings of the party will spin it to back up their preferred type of candidate.
My view hasn't changed. UK democracy is functioning well. There's plenty of opposition to Brexit, including the recent large march in London; various elements of the process have been tested in the courts and the Lords are holding the government's feet to the fire. I'm genuinely puzzled that the Lib Dems aren't doing better in the polls, but as I'm a political anorak I probably mix in the wrong circles.
Only a fool would argue that the negotiations have gone well, and the leading Brexiteers have all fallen on their faces. However, barring an Act of God, the UK will exit on March 29th, and the ardent EUrophiles will have to turn their attention to article 49. Then we'll see whether the Rejoin manifesto is electorally attractive.
Rejoining doesn't have to be attractive on its own, it just needs to be seen as the least worst option.
The reality of Leaving being a terrible mistake might just swing it on its own.
A decade of Brexit induced economic ruin might do the trick.
Fortunately I am sure no one would wish a decade of economic ruin on the UK purely to make rejoining easier (not least since the argument is often presented how obviously great the EU is, and how inevitable the whole thing is because of support from the young), so we can hope while there are economic consequences it will not be a decade of ruin.
My view hasn't changed. UK democracy is functioning well. There's plenty of opposition to Brexit, including the recent large march in London; various elements of the process have been tested in the courts and the Lords are holding the government's feet to the fire. I'm genuinely puzzled that the Lib Dems aren't doing better in the polls, but as I'm a political anorak I probably mix in the wrong circles.
Only a fool would argue that the negotiations have gone well, and the leading Brexiteers have all fallen on their faces. However, barring an Act of God, the UK will exit on March 29th, and the ardent EUrophiles will have to turn their attention to article 49. Then we'll see whether the Rejoin manifesto is electorally attractive.
Rejoining doesn't have to be attractive on its own, it just needs to be seen as the least worst option.
The reality of Leaving being a terrible mistake might just swing it on its own.
A decade of Brexit induced economic ruin might do the trick.
Fortunately I am sure no one would wish a decade of economic ruin on the UK purely to make rejoining easier (not least since the argument is often presented how obviously great the EU is, and how inevitable the whole thing is because of support from the young), so we can hope while there are economic consequences it will not be a decade of ruin.
Given the entrenchment on both sides, coupled with the betrayal myth, I can see Leavers doubling down. They'll say Mrs May's Brexit is BINO, so we need to do proper Brexit which makes things worse.
My view hasn't changed. UK democracy is functioning well. There's plenty of opposition to Brexit, including the recent large march in London; various elements of the process have been tested in the courts and the Lords are holding the government's feet to the fire. I'm genuinely puzzled that the Lib Dems aren't doing better in the polls, but as I'm a political anorak I probably mix in the wrong circles.
Only a fool would argue that the negotiations have gone well, and the leading Brexiteers have all fallen on their faces. However, barring an Act of God, the UK will exit on March 29th, and the ardent EUrophiles will have to turn their attention to article 49. Then we'll see whether the Rejoin manifesto is electorally attractive.
Rejoining doesn't have to be attractive on its own, it just needs to be seen as the least worst option.
The reality of Leaving being a terrible mistake might just swing it on its own.
A decade of Brexit induced economic ruin might do the trick.
I don't think that follows. Just because a succession of populist politicians has been demonstrably bad for the Italian economy hasn't stopped people voting for them. Brexit will make the UK more like Italy with unfortunate consequences for our younger people. Italy is a demoralising place for the young. Same with Ireland after independence where the young ended up emigrating, I guess. It kills aspiration.
Long term the best result for the Dems would be to fail to take control of either chamber. If they take control of the House, we will see them push too hard on the impeachment front which - like Clinton in reverse - will only benefit Trump in 2020.
If they fail, Trump has ownership of everything and if it goes wrong, noone to blame but himself to blame if it goes wrong, and with the clock ticking on a recession there's got to be a good chance of that happening.
It may not come across by reading the UK press or the NYT/WP, but one of Trump's biggest assets is the Dems - they're a mess. A resounding failure may lead them to sort themselves out and coalesce around a sensible candidate - and if they do, Trump should be very beatable.
If the Dems take the house, pile in on Trump in 2020 - if the Reps hold on, bet the other way.
I'm not convinced. The GOP talks about Trump being impeached more than the Dems do. If the Dems take the House and don't impeach, that'll take away that line of attack. The question is whether the pressure from their base will be irresistible, but I don't see any particular evidence that it would be.
I'm not sure why failure would lead them to coalesce around a good candidate more than success would. I see no indication that they even really understand why Clinton was a bad candidate, so I'm not sure what the process is by which they have this revelation. Whatever the result, the different wings of the party will spin it to back up their preferred type of candidate.
Agreed. The real advantage for the Dems if they can take one or other of the houses is that they acquire a great deal of investigative powers. That's what they'll use from day one, and if they do find something truly fishy, that's what they will run in 2020 on. Impeachment is only . a possibility if they find something so bad that the rest of the GOP disowns Trump.
I don't think the LDs have any blame due for the unsatisfactory Brexit mess that the current government is fighting over.
It is a Tory dogs dinner, no one else is responsible.
With respect that is s
If May had taken the position that Brexit needed to be negotiated by an all party team, with representation by all countries then there may be some truth to that.
She chose not to do so, chose her own redlines without consultation and as a consequence owns the mess.
And those actively trying to stop Brexit have no responsibility
I agree, they do not.
May excluded all opinions on how to proceed, apart from the upper echelons of the Tories.
She owns the process, and by excluding others has allowed them to lob brickbats at her version.
A multi-party committee including all devolved nations would have been better, even though thrashing out a common position clearly not easy, before A50 was served.
She chose not to do so. She owns Brexit. It will be her poisonous legacy, though I still expect it to go with a whimper rather than a bang.
Sure, a multiparty convention on Brexit would have had significant challenges!
Nonetheless, May did not even attempt it. She chose to make it a partisan issue, and even called an election so that she could ram through her own version of Brexit. Having made it partisan she cannot cry partisan at others.
I don't think May is doing any crying.
My view hasn't changed. UK democracy is functioning well. There's plenty of opposition to Brexit, including the recent large march in London; various elements of the process have been tested in the courts and the Lords are holding the government's feet to the fire. I'm genuinely puzzled that the Lib Dems aren't doing better in the polls, but as I'm a political anorak I probably mix in the wrong circles.
Only a fool would argue that the negotiations have gone well, and the leading Brexiteers have all fallen on their faces. However, barring an Act of God, the UK will exit on March 29th, and the ardent EUrophiles will have to turn their attention to article 49. Then we'll see whether the Rejoin manifesto is electorally attractive.
I disagree with the first paragraph, as I think the lack of democratic consensus behind May's agenda will not leave Britain in a good place.
I agree though with the second paragraph, Blind Brexit is the destination, so that once that rubicon is crossed it is not easy to return, no matter how crap the deal.
My view hasn't changed. UK democracy is functioning well. There's plenty of opposition to Brexit, including the recent large march in London; various elements of the process have been tested in the courts and the Lords are holding the government's feet to the fire. I'm genuinely puzzled that the Lib Dems aren't doing better in the polls, but as I'm a political anorak I probably mix in the wrong circles.
Only a fool would argue that the negotiations have gone well, and the leading Brexiteers have all fallen on their faces. However, barring an Act of God, the UK will exit on March 29th, and the ardent EUrophiles will have to turn their attention to article 49. Then we'll see whether the Rejoin manifesto is electorally attractive.
Rejoining doesn't have to be attractive on its own, it just needs to be seen as the least worst option.
The reality of Leaving being a terrible mistake might just swing it on its own.
A decade of Brexit induced economic ruin might do the trick.
Fortunately I am sure no one would wish a decade of economic ruin on the UK purely to make rejoining easier (not least since the argument is often presented how obviously great the EU is, and how inevitable the whole thing is because of support from the young), so we can hope while there are economic consequences it will not be a decade of ruin.
We will be able to rejoin on much better terms. We will be poor enough to qualify all sorts of regional aid. I recently saw Rick Stein in Albania. Looking forward to receiving their food parcels
I don't think the LDs have any blame due for the unsatisfactory Brexit mess that the current government is fighting over.
It is a Tory dogs dinner, no one else is responsible.
With respect that is too simplistic. Everyone shoulders blame from the ultra Brexiteers to the remainers who never accepted the result and have tried everything they can to prevent Brexit. If a consensus and respect for the vote had taken place a cross party position should have been agreed and pursued. It is not a conservative mess. It is a divided Country's mess
If May had taken the position that Brexit needed to be negotiated by an all party team, with representation by all countries then there may be some truth to that.
She chose not to do so, chose her own redlines without consultation and as a consequence owns the mess.
And those actively trying to stop Brexit have no responsibility
I agree, they do not.
May excluded all opinions on how to proceed, apart from the upper echelons of the Tories.
She owns the process, and by excluding others has allowed them to lob brickbats at her version.
A multi-party committee including all devolved nations would have been better, even though thrashing out a common position clearly not easy, before A50 was served.
She chose not to do so. She owns Brexit. It will be her poisonous legacy, though I still expect it to go with a whimper rather than a bang.
This is quite literally nonsense. In a perfect world May would have got all parties around the table and they would agree to do what's best for the country. However in a perfect world we wouldn't have politics. If you think Corbyn Sturgeon and Cable would sit down and agree to any form of Brexit without playing politics then you are deluded. There has been lots of talk on here today about the coalition when the LDs put country before party and then got annihilated. If you think anyone else is going to do that then you have a better expectation of people than I do.
Sure, a multiparty convention on Brexit would have had significant challenges!
Nonetheless, May did not even attempt it. She chose to make it a partisan issue, and even called an election so that she could ram through her own version of Brexit. Having made it partisan she cannot cry partisan at others.
I agree it is partisan but by necessity. I rate the chance that she could have formed a multi party convention at less than 5%. Labour has made too much political capital by sitting on the fence, LDs got burned in coalition and SNP hate the Tories. Not sure what meeting would have achieved.
My view hasn't changed. UK democracy is functioning well. There's plenty of opposition to Brexit, including the recent large march in London; various elements of the process have been tested in the courts and the Lords are holding the government's feet to the fire. I'm genuinely puzzled that the Lib Dems aren't doing better in the polls, but as I'm a political anorak I probably mix in the wrong circles.
Only a fool would argue that the negotiations have gone well, and the leading Brexiteers have all fallen on their faces. However, barring an Act of God, the UK will exit on March 29th, and the ardent EUrophiles will have to turn their attention to article 49. Then we'll see whether the Rejoin manifesto is electorally attractive.
Rejoining doesn't have to be attractive on its own, it just needs to be seen as the least worst option.
The reality of Leaving being a terrible mistake might just swing it on its own.
A decade of Brexit induced economic ruin might do the trick.
Fortunately I am sure no one would wish a decade of economic ruin on the UK purely to make rejoining easier (not least since the argument is often presented how obviously great the EU is, and how inevitable the whole thing is because of support from the young), so we can hope while there are economic consequences it will not be a decade of ruin.
It is typical out-of-touch-rich-PB'er syndrome, something of which I am sure I am guilty of too sometimes.
For many people, the last decade - or more - *has* been economic ruin. The hollowing out of town centres. Year after year of below inflation pay rises. Zero hours contracts. Not being able to get a doctor's appointment this side of next month. That b*stard somehow getting on the property ladder because he's got rich parents while you're living hand to mouth with no chance of ever saving the twenty or so grand (outside of London) you need for a deposit.
I have said it before but it bears re-stating, a vote for remain (or rejoin) is a vote for the status quo. What we need are radical solutions to fix the fact that, for a long time, society clearly hasn't been working for everyone. Brexit is a radical solution, in a sense, although in reality it is more of a protest vote. Corbynism is another solution, although I feel it is the wrong one.
Remaining in (or rejoining) the EU isn't a solution, it is a vote for I'm alright jack.
My view hasn't changed. UK democracy is functioning well. There's plenty of opposition to Brexit, including the recent large march in London; various elements of the process have been tested in the courts and the Lords are holding the government's feet to the fire. I'm genuinely puzzled that the Lib Dems aren't doing better in the polls, but as I'm a political anorak I probably mix in the wrong circles.
Only a fool would argue that the negotiations have gone well, and the leading Brexiteers have all fallen on their faces. However, barring an Act of God, the UK will exit on March 29th, and the ardent EUrophiles will have to turn their attention to article 49. Then we'll see whether the Rejoin manifesto is electorally attractive.
Rejoining doesn't have to be attractive on its own, it just needs to be seen as the least worst option.
The reality of Leaving being a terrible mistake might just swing it on its own.
A decade of Brexit induced economic ruin might do the trick.
Fortunately I am sure no one would wish a decade of economic ruin on the UK purely to make rejoining easier (not least since the argument is often presented how obviously great the EU is, and how inevitable the whole thing is because of support from the young), so we can hope while there are economic consequences it will not be a decade of ruin.
It is typical out-of-touch-rich-PB'er syndrome, something of which I am sure I am guilty of too sometimes.
For many people, the last decade - or more - *has* been economic ruin. The hollowing out of town centres. Year after year of below inflation pay rises. Zero hours contracts. Not being able to get a doctor's appointment this side of next month. That b*stard somehow getting on the property ladder because he's got rich parents while you're living hand to mouth with no chance of ever saving the twenty or so grand (outside of London) you need for a deposit.
I have said it before but it bears re-stating, a vote for remain (or rejoin) is a vote for the status quo. What we need are radical solutions to fix the fact that, for a long time, society clearly hasn't been working for everyone. Brexit is a radical solution, in a sense, although in reality it is more of a protest vote. Corbynism is another solution, although I feel it is the wrong one.
Remaining in (or rejoining) the EU isn't a solution, it is a vote for I'm alright jack.
Or being in the EU made those things less worse than they would otherwise have been. I guess we'll find out after Brexit.
My view hasn't changed. UK democracy is functioning well. There's plenty of opposition to Brexit, including the recent large march in London; various elements of the process have been tested in the courts and the Lords are holding the government's feet to the fire. I'm genuinely puzzled that the Lib Dems aren't doing better in the polls, but as I'm a political anorak I probably mix in the wrong circles.
Only a fool would argue that the negotiations have gone well, and the leading Brexiteers have all fallen on their faces. However, barring an Act of God, the UK will exit on March 29th, and the ardent EUrophiles will have to turn their attention to article 49. Then we'll see whether the Rejoin manifesto is electorally attractive.
Rejoining doesn't have to be attractive on its own, it just needs to be seen as the least worst option.
The reality of Leaving being a terrible mistake might just swing it on its own.
A decade of Brexit induced economic ruin might do the trick.
Fortunately I am sure no one would wish a decade of economic ruin on the UK purely to make rejoining easier (not least since the argument is often presented how obviously great the EU is, and how inevitable the whole thing is because of support from the young), so we can hope while there are economic consequences it will not be a decade of ruin.
It is typical out-of-touch-rich-PB'er syndrome, something of which I am sure I am guilty of too sometimes.
For many people, the last decade - or more - *has* been economic ruin. The hollowing out of town centres. Year after year of below inflation pay rises. Zero hours contracts. Not being able to get a doctor's appointment this side of next month. That b*stard somehow getting on the property ladder because he's got rich parents while you're living hand to mouth with no chance of ever saving the twenty or so grand (outside of London) you need for a deposit.
I have said it before but it bears re-stating, a vote for remain (or rejoin) is a vote for the status quo. What we need are radical solutions to fix the fact that, for a long time, society clearly hasn't been working for everyone. Brexit is a radical solution, in a sense, although in reality it is more of a protest vote. Corbynism is another solution, although I feel it is the wrong one.
Remaining in (or rejoining) the EU isn't a solution, it is a vote for I'm alright jack.
I agree, the correlation between a high Leave vote and those demographics and geographies in decline is there to be seen.
It isn't clear at all that Brexit will help, and indeed it is very likely that the differences will be exacerbated.
My view hasn't changed. UK democracy is functioning well. There's plenty of opposition to Brexit, including the recent large march in London; various elements of the process have been tested in the courts and the Lords are holding the government's feet to the fire. I'm genuinely puzzled that the Lib Dems aren't doing better in the polls, but as I'm a political anorak I probably mix in the wrong circles.
Only a fool would argue that the negotiations have gone well, and the leading Brexiteers have all fallen on their faces. However, barring an Act of God, the UK will exit on March 29th, and the ardent EUrophiles will have to turn their attention to article 49. Then we'll see whether the Rejoin manifesto is electorally attractive.
Rejoining doesn't have to be attractive on its own, it just needs to be seen as the least worst option.
The reality of Leaving being a terrible mistake might just swing it on its own.
A decade of Brexit induced economic ruin might do the trick.
Fortunately I am sure no one would wish a decade of economic ruin on the UK purely to make rejoining easier (not least since the argument is often presented how obviously great the EU is, and how inevitable the whole thing is because of support from the young), so we can hope while there are economic consequences it will not be a decade of ruin.
It is typical out-of-touch-rich-PB'er syndrome, something of which I am sure I am guilty of too sometimes.
For many people, the last decade - or more - *has* been economic ruin. The hollowing out of town centres. Year after year of below inflation pay rises. Zero hours contracts. Not being able to get a doctor's appointment this side of next month. That b*stard somehow getting on the property ladder because he's got rich parents while you're living hand to mouth with no chance of ever saving the twenty or so grand (outside of London) you need for a deposit.
I have said it before but it bears re-stating, a vote for remain (or rejoin) is a vote for the status quo. What we need are radical solutions to fix the fact that, for a long time, society clearly hasn't been working for everyone. Brexit is a radical solution, in a sense, although in reality it is more of a protest vote. Corbynism is another solution, although I feel it is the wrong one.
Remaining in (or rejoining) the EU isn't a solution, it is a vote for I'm alright jack.
Slashing your wrists when you’re lost in the woods is usually a bad idea.
Rejoining doesn't have to be attractive on its own, it just needs to be seen as the least worst option.
The reality of Leaving being a terrible mistake might just swing it on its own.
A decade of Brexit induced economic ruin might do the trick.
Fortunately I am sure no one would wish a decade of economic ruin on the UK purely to make rejoining easier (not least since the argument is often presented how obviously great the EU is, and how inevitable the whole thing is because of support from the young), so we can hope while there are economic consequences it will not be a decade of ruin.
It is typical out-of-touch-rich-PB'er syndrome, something of which I am sure I am guilty of too sometimes.
For many people, the last decade - or more - *has* been economic ruin. The hollowing out of town centres. Year after year of below inflation pay rises. Zero hours contracts. Not being able to get a doctor's appointment this side of next month. That b*stard somehow getting on the property ladder because he's got rich parents while you're living hand to mouth with no chance of ever saving the twenty or so grand (outside of London) you need for a deposit.
I have said it before but it bears re-stating, a vote for remain (or rejoin) is a vote for the status quo. What we need are radical solutions to fix the fact that, for a long time, society clearly hasn't been working for everyone. Brexit is a radical solution, in a sense, although in reality it is more of a protest vote. Corbynism is another solution, although I feel it is the wrong one.
Remaining in (or rejoining) the EU isn't a solution, it is a vote for I'm alright jack.
I agree, the correlation between a high Leave vote and those demographics and geographies in decline is there to be seen.
It isn't clear at all that Brexit will help, and indeed it is very likely that the differences will be exacerbated.
Indeed, it is not clear at all that Brexit will help. It would be a tragedy if Brexit made those who voted for it worse off. But for many people, the system wasn't working for them long before Brexit.
My view hasn't changed. UK democracy is functioning well. There's plenty of opposition to Brexit, including the recent large march in London; various elements of the process have been tested in the courts and the Lords are holding the government's feet to the fire. I'm genuinely puzzled that the Lib Dems aren't doing better in the polls, but as I'm a political .
Rejoining doesn't have to be attractive on its own, it just needs to be seen as the least worst option.
The reality of Leaving being a terrible mistake might just swing it on its own.
A decade of Brexit induced economic ruin might do the trick.
Fortunately I am sure no one would wish a decade of economic ruin on the UK purely to make rejoining easier (not least since the argument is often presented how obviously great the EU is, and how inevitable the whole thing is because of support from the young), so we can hope while there are economic consequences it will not be a decade of ruin.
It is typical out-of-touch-rich-PB'er syndrome, something of which I am sure I am guilty of too sometimes.
For many people, the last decade - or more - *has* been economic ruin. The hollowing out of town centres. Year after year of below inflation pay rises. Zero hours contracts. Not being able to get a doctor's appointment this side of next month. That b*stard somehow getting on the property ladder because he's got rich parents while you're living hand to mouth with no chance of ever saving the twenty or so grand (outside of London) you need for a deposit.
I have said it before but it bears re-stating, a vote for remain (or rejoin) is a vote for the status quo. What we need are radical solutions to fix the fact that, for a long time, society clearly hasn't been working for everyone. Brexit is a radical solution, in a sense, although in reality it is more of a protest vote. Corbynism is another solution, although I feel it is the wrong one.
Remaining in (or rejoining) the EU isn't a solution, it is a vote for I'm alright jack.
An interesting argument, but, one I believe to be wrong. Globalisation is happening whether governments, the media or PB commentators like it or not. I can (and have) bought single items from China at prices far below the offer for the same item from UK retailers. Governments from all countries around the planet are unable to control legal, let alone illegal, transactions. To put the UK outside one of the main trading blocs is just an invitation to criminal organisations to make considerable moolah before we are declared a pariah state. Never mind that London is already considered by many around the globe to be a pirate city.
Rejoining doesn't have to be attractive on its own, it just needs to be seen as the least worst option.
The reality of Leaving being a terrible mistake might just swing it on its own.
A decade of Brexit induced economic ruin might do the trick.
Fortunately I am sure no one would wish a decade of economic ruin on the UK purely to make rejoining easier (not least since the argument is often presented how obviously great the EU is, and how inevitable the whole thing is because of support from the young), so we can hope while there are economic consequences it will not be a decade of ruin.
It is typical out-of-touch-rich-PB'er syndrome, something of which I am sure I am guilty of too sometimes.
For many people, the last decade - or more - *has* been economic ruin. The hollowing out of town centres. Year after year of below inflation pay rises. Zero hours contracts. Not being able to get a doctor's appointment this side of next month. That b*stard somehow getting on the property ladder because he's got rich parents while you're living hand to mouth with no chance of ever saving the twenty or so grand (outside of London) you need for a deposit.
I have said it before but it bears re-stating, a vote for remain (or rejoin) is a vote for the status quo. What we need are radical solutions to fix the fact that, for a long time, society clearly hasn't been working for everyone. Brexit is a radical solution, in a sense, although in reality it is more of a protest vote. Corbynism is another solution, although I feel it is the wrong one.
Remaining in (or rejoining) the EU isn't a solution, it is a vote for I'm alright jack.
I agree, the correlation between a high Leave vote and those demographics and geographies in decline is there to be seen.
It isn't clear at all that Brexit will help, and indeed it is very likely that the differences will be exacerbated.
Indeed, it is not clear at all that Brexit will help. It would be a tragedy if Brexit made those who voted for it worse off. But for many people, the system wasn't working for them long before Brexit.
Indeed it is the very definition of tragedy:
"A drama or literary work in which the main character is brought to ruin or suffers extreme sorrow, especially as a consequence of a tragic flaw, moral weakness, or inability to cope with unfavorable circumstances."
My view hasn't changed. UK democracy is functioning well. There's plenty of opposition to Brexit, including the recent large march in London; various elements of the process have been tested in the courts and the Lords are holding the government's feet to the fire. I'm genuinely puzzled that the Lib Dems aren't doing better in the polls, but as I'm a political anorak I probably mix in the wrong circles.
Only a fool would argue that the negotiations have gone well, and the leading Brexiteers have all fallen on their faces. However, barring an Act of God, the UK will exit on March 29th, and the ardent EUrophiles will have to turn their attention to article 49. Then we'll see whether the Rejoin manifesto is electorally attractive.
Rejoining doesn't have to be attractive on its own, it just needs to be seen as the least worst option.
The reality of Leaving being a terrible mistake might just swing it on its own.
A decade of Brexit induced economic ruin might do the trick.
Fortunately I am sure no one would wish a decade of economic ruin on the UK purely to make rejoining easier (not least since the argument is often presented how obviously great the EU is, and how inevitable the whole thing is because of support from the young), so we can hope while there are economic consequences it will not be a decade of ruin.
It is typical out-of-touch-rich-PB'er syndrome, something of which I am sure I am guilty of too sometimes.
For many people, the last decade - or more - *has* been economic ruin. The hollowing out of town centres. Year after year of below inflation pay rises. Zero hours contracts. Not being able to get a doctor's appointment this side of next month. That b*stard somehow getting on the property ladder because he's got rich parents while you're living hand to mouth with no chance of ever saving the twenty or so grand (outside of London) you need for a deposit.
I have said it before but it bears re-stating, a vote for remain (or rejoin) is a vote for the status quo. What we need are radical solutions to fix the fact that, for a long time, society clearly hasn't been working for everyone. Brexit is a radical solution, in a sense, although in reality it is more of a protest vote. Corbynism is another solution, although I feel it is the wrong one.
Remaining in (or rejoining) the EU isn't a solution, it is a vote for I'm alright jack.
Slashing your wrists when you’re lost in the woods is usually a bad idea.
Any remain/rejoin vote needs to explain how the poorest and most marginalised members of society will benefit from it.
Rejoining doesn't have to be attractive on its own, it just needs to be seen as the least worst option.
The reality of Leaving being a terrible mistake might just swing it on its own.
A decade of Brexit induced economic ruin might do the trick.
Fortunately I am sure no one would wish a decade of economic ruin on the UK purely to make rejoining easier (not least since the argument is often presented how obviously great the EU is, and how inevitable the whole thing is because of support from the young), so we can hope while there are economic consequences it will not be a decade of ruin.
It is typical out-of-touch-rich-PB'er syndrome, something of which I am sure I am guilty of too sometimes.
For many people, the last decade - or more - *has* been economic ruin. The hollowing out of town centres. Year after year of below inflation pay rises. Zero hours contracts. Not being able to get a doctor's appointment this side of next month. That b*stard somehow getting on the property ladder because he's got rich parents while you're living hand to mouth with no chance of ever saving the twenty or so grand (outside of London) you need for a deposit.
I have said it before but it bears re-stating, a vote for remain (or rejoin) is a vote for the status quo. What we need are radical solutions to fix the fact that, for a long time, society clearly hasn't been working for everyone. Brexit is a radical solution, in a sense, although in reality it is more of a protest vote. Corbynism is another solution, although I feel it is the wrong one.
Remaining in (or rejoining) the EU isn't a solution, it is a vote for I'm alright jack.
Slashing your wrists when you’re lost in the woods is usually a bad idea.
Any remain/rejoin vote needs to explain how the poorest and most marginalised members of society will benefit from it.
Still waiting.
No it doesn't, it just needs 51% to believe that they would benefit from it.
In the meantime, Corbynism, then Auf Weidersehen Pet.
OT: The thought that "friends" of Cameron are floating (probably lead) balloons on his returning to Westminster is amusing but there must be many Tory party members and supporters around the country who will be hanging their heads in disbelief Much more, and the members and supporters will be doing a "Momentum" to reclaim control of the party from the public school/Oxbridge PPE professionals and SPADS. Should be fun.....
My view hasn't changed. UK democracy is functioning well. There's plenty of opposition to Brexit, including the recent large march in London; various elements of the process have been tested in the courts and the Lords are holding the government's feet to the fire. I'm genuinely puzzled that the Lib Dems aren't doing better in the polls, but as I'm a political anorak I probably mix in the wrong circles.
Only a fool would argue that the negotiations have gone well, and the leading Brexiteers have all fallen on their faces. However, barring an Act of God, the UK will exit on March 29th, and the ardent EUrophiles will have to turn their attention to article 49. Then we'll see whether the Rejoin manifesto is electorally attractive.
Rejoining doesn't have to be attractive on its own, it just needs to be seen as the least worst option.
The reality of Leaving being a terrible mistake might just swing it on its own.
A decade of Brexit induced economic ruin might do the trick.
Fortunately I am sure no one would wish a decade of economic ruin on the UK purely to make rejoining easier (not least since the argument is often presented how obviously great the EU is, and how inevitable the whole thing is because of support from the young), so we can hope while there are economic consequences it will not be a decade of ruin.
It is typical out-of-touch-rich-PB'er syndrome, something of which I am sure I am guilty of too sometimes.
For many people, the last decade - or more - *has* been economic ruin. The hollowing out of town centres. Year after year of below inflation pay rises. Zero hours contracts. Not being able to get a doctor's appointment this side of next month. That b*stard somehow getting on the property ladder because he's got rich parents while you're living hand to mouth with no chance of ever saving the twenty or so grand (outside of London) you need for a deposit.
I have said it before but it bears re-stating, a vote for remain (or rejoin) is a vote for the status quo. What we need are radical solutions to fix the fact that, for a long time, society clearly hasn't been working for everyone. Brexit is a radical solution, in a sense, although in reality it is more of a protest vote. Corbynism is another solution, although I feel it is the wrong one.
Remaining in (or rejoining) the EU isn't a solution, it is a vote for I'm alright jack.
Slashing your wrists when you’re lost in the woods is usually a bad idea.
Chopping of your gangrenous limb is usually a good idea.
It is typical out-of-touch-rich-PB'er syndrome, something of which I am sure I am guilty of too sometimes.
For many people, the last decade - or more - *has* been economic ruin. The hollowing out of town centres. Year after year of below inflation pay rises. Zero hours contracts. Not being able to get a doctor's appointment this side of next month. That b*stard somehow getting on the property ladder because he's got rich parents while you're living hand to mouth with no chance of ever saving the twenty or so grand (outside of London) you need for a deposit.
I have said it before but it bears re-stating, a vote for remain (or rejoin) is a vote for the status quo. What we need are radical solutions to fix the fact that, for a long time, society clearly hasn't been working for everyone. Brexit is a radical solution, in a sense, although in reality it is more of a protest vote. Corbynism is another solution, although I feel it is the wrong one.
Remaining in (or rejoining) the EU isn't a solution, it is a vote for I'm alright jack.
I agree, the correlation between a high Leave vote and those demographics and geographies in decline is there to be seen.
It isn't clear at all that Brexit will help, and indeed it is very likely that the differences will be exacerbated.
Indeed, it is not clear at all that Brexit will help. It would be a tragedy if Brexit made those who voted for it worse off. But for many people, the system wasn't working for them long before Brexit.
Indeed it is the very definition of tragedy:
"A drama or literary work in which the main character is brought to ruin or suffers extreme sorrow, especially as a consequence of a tragic flaw, moral weakness, or inability to cope with unfavorable circumstances."
I suspect where we differ is on whether or not Brexit impoverished such people in the first place. I can't claim working class credentials, but when the warehouse guys, driver guys, etc I sometimes have a drink with say that everything changed for them with the expansion of the EU a decade or so ago I tend to take them at their word. There is a case to be made that we as a nation would be in a worse position outside the EU, but my limited experience tells me that a lot of people have seen their livelihoods decimated by freedom of movement.
Rejoining doesn't have to be attractive on its own, it just needs to be seen as the least worst option.
The reality of Leaving being a terrible mistake might just swing it on its own.
A decade of Brexit induced economic ruin might do the trick.
Fortunately I am sure no one would wish a decade of economic ruin on the UK purely to make rejoining easier (not least since the argument is often presented how obviously great the EU is, and how inevitable the whole thing is because of support from the young), so we can hope while there are economic consequences it will not be a decade of ruin.
It is typical out-of-touch-rich-PB'er syndrome, something of which I am sure I am guilty of too sometimes.
For many people, the last decade - or more - *has* been economic ruin. The hollowing out of town centres. Year after year of below inflation pay rises. Zero hours contracts. Not being able to get a doctor's appointment this side of next month. That b*stard somehow getting on the property ladder because he's got rich parents while you're living hand to mouth with no chance of ever saving the twenty or so grand (outside of London) you need for a deposit.
I have said it before but it bears re-stating, a vote for remain (or rejoin) is a vote for the status quo. What we need are radical solutions to fix the fact that, for a long time, society clearly hasn't been working for everyone. Brexit is a radical solution, in a sense, although in reality it is more of a protest vote. Corbynism is another solution, although I feel it is the wrong one.
Remaining in (or rejoining) the EU isn't a solution, it is a vote for I'm alright jack.
Slashing your wrists when you’re lost in the woods is usually a bad idea.
Any remain/rejoin vote needs to explain how the poorest and most marginalised members of society will benefit from it.
Still waiting.
Easy. They just need to make shit up. It worked for Leave.
Only a fool would argue that the negotiations have gone well, and the leading Brexiteers have all fallen on their faces. However, barring an Act of God, the UK will exit on March 29th, and the ardent EUrophiles will have to turn their attention to article 49. Then we'll see whether the Rejoin manifesto is electorally attractive.
Rejoining doesn't have to be attractive on its own, it just needs to be seen as the least worst option.
The reality of Leaving being a terrible mistake might just swing it on its own.
A decade of Brexit induced economic ruin might do the trick.
Fortunately I am sure no one would wish a decade of economic ruin on the UK purely to make rejoining easier (not least since the argument is often presented how obviously great the EU is, and how inevitable the whole thing is because of support from the young), so we can hope while there are economic consequences it will not be a decade of ruin.
It is typical out-of-touch-rich-PB'er syndrome, something of which I am sure I am guilty of too sometimes.
For many people, the last decade - or more - *has* been economic ruin. The hollowing out of town centres. Year after year of below inflation pay rises. Zero hours contracts. Not being able to get a doctor's appointment this side of next month. That b*stard somehow getting on the property ladder because he's got rich parents while you're living hand to mouth with no chance of ever saving the twenty or so grand (outside of London) you need for a deposit.
I have said it before but it bears re-stating, a vote for remain (or rejoin) is a vote for the status quo. What we need are radical solutions to fix the fact that, for a long time, society clearly hasn't been working for everyone. Brexit is a radical solution, in a sense, although in reality it is more of a protest vote. Corbynism is another solution, although I feel it is the wrong one.
Remaining in (or rejoining) the EU isn't a solution, it is a vote for I'm alright jack.
Slashing your wrists when you’re lost in the woods is usually a bad idea.
Chopping of your gangrenous limb is usually a good idea.
Probably not if you are lost in the woods!
Removing a gangrenous leg would mean difficulty walking out of the wood, cutting off a gangrenous arm may well be a challenge one handed. Either is likely to lead to rapid death from exsanguination or infection.
Just realised, Cameron is bored after writing his autobiography in his shed. No one has offered him (a la Blair) a high profile, and obviously high paying job suitable for his experience and knowledge Aw! Shame....
Rejoining doesn't have to be attractive on its own, it just needs to be seen as the least worst option.
The reality of Leaving being a terrible mistake might just swing it on its own.
A decade of Brexit induced economic ruin might do the trick.
Fortunately I am sure no one would wish a decade of economic ruin on the UK purely to make rejoining easier (not least since the argument is often presented how obviously great the EU is, and how inevitable the whole thing is because of support from the young), so we can hope while there are economic consequences it will not be a decade of ruin.
It is typical out-of-touch-rich-PB'er syndrome, something of which I am sure I am guilty of too sometimes.
For many people, the last decade - or more - *has* been economic ruin. The hollowing out of town centres. Year after year of below inflation pay rises. Zero hours contracts. Not being able to get a doctor's appointment this side of next month. That b*stard somehow getting on the property ladder because he's got rich parents while you're living hand to mouth with no chance of ever saving the twenty or so grand (outside of London) you need for a deposit.
I have said it before but it bears re-stating, a vote for remain (or rejoin) is a vote for the status quo. What we need are radical solutions to fix the fact that, for a long time, society clearly hasn't been working for everyone. Brexit is a radical solution, in a sense, although in reality it is more of a protest vote. Corbynism is another solution, although I feel it is the wrong one.
Remaining in (or rejoining) the EU isn't a solution, it is a vote for I'm alright jack.
I think you make some good points here. Not sure about the conclusion though.
I'd suggest that there are some positive aspect from Brexit that might help - Brexit breaks the mould, and might engender some new thinking. - Getting out of the EU takes away some of the big EU risks
I do agree that radical solutions are needed. The difficulty is that almost every radical solution involves substantial changes to what the state gives out - benefits, health, pensions etc. In the long-term the current arrangements are doomed, but such a huge part of the electorate is dependent on these arrangements that their self-interest will outweigh rational solutions.
It starts much deeper though. We give Mr Miggins money because in some sense he deserves it. Some sort of a human right to whatever. It's a somewhat weird spin-off from religion, but enhanced to cost us the earth. I'm sure noone has intrinsic rights. They particularly don't have an intrinsic right to a lawyer. (Imagine if it was an intrinsic right to a coffee shop)
Edit: sorry i messed up the blockquote stuff here - please refer to originals backthread
Fortunately I am sure no one would wish a decade of economic ruin on the UK purely to make rejoining easier (not least since the argument is often presented how obviously great the EU is, and how inevitable the whole thing is because of support from the young), so we can hope while there are economic consequences it will not be a decade of ruin.
It is typical out-of-touch-rich-PB'er syndrome, something of which I am sure I am guilty of too sometimes.
For many people, the last decade - or more - *has* been economic ruin. The hollowing out of town centres. Year after year of below inflation pay rises. Zero hours contracts. Not being able to get a doctor's appointment this side of next month. That b*stard somehow getting on the property ladder because he's got rich parents while you're living hand to mouth with no chance of ever saving the twenty or so grand (outside of London) you need for a deposit.
I have said it before but it bears re-stating, a vote for remain (or rejoin) is a vote for the status quo. What we need are radical solutions to fix the fact that, for a long time, society clearly hasn't been working for everyone. Brexit is a radical solution, in a sense, although in reality it is more of a protest vote. Corbynism is another solution, although I feel it is the wrong one.
Remaining in (or rejoining) the EU isn't a solution, it is a vote for I'm alright jack.
Slashing your wrists when you’re lost in the woods is usually a bad idea.
Any remain/rejoin vote needs to explain how the poorest and most marginalised members of society will benefit from it.
Still waiting.
Easy. They just need to make shit up. It worked for Leave.
My guess is that the truly devastating difference came because of the difference in purchasing parity power.
If you're a working guy in a warehouse or driving a van or in a factory, you need the £7-10 an hour to buy you a bare-minimum life in the UK, a decent enough house to live in, some clothes for the baby, a couple of pints on the weekend... who knows.
Everything changed when the EU enlarged and a huge number of people realised that while £7-10 quid went nowhere over here, in terms of a decent life, you could send that back to Poland or wherever. A reverse auf wiedersehen pet, if you like. Suddenly you had people competing for jobs who were very happy for £7 an hour because it bought them a decent family life back home while you were f***ing f***cked son.
The EU enlargement was probably a net gain for all economies concerned, but it certainly wasn't for all people. Hence Brexit.
Much of what Mr Hitler initially proposed was mainstream socialism, whilst I may not like it, it'd perfectly normal for a party like Labour to support it.
As long as they don't start persecuting Jews it's all good, oh wait a minute.................
Fortunately I am sure no one would wish a decade of economic ruin on the UK purely to make rejoining easier (not least since the argument is often presented how obviously great the EU is, and how inevitable the whole thing is because of support from the young), so we can hope while there are economic consequences it will not be a decade of ruin.
It is typical out-of-touch-rich-PB'er syndrome Remaining in (or rejoining) the EU isn't a solution, it is a vote for I'm alright jack.
Slashing your wrists when you’re lost in the woods is usually a bad idea.
Any remain/rejoin vote needs to explain how the poorest and most marginalised members of society will benefit from it.
Still waiting.
Easy. They just need to make shit up. It worked for Leave.
My guess is that the truly devastating difference came because of the difference in purchasing parity power.
If you're a working guy in a warehouse or driving a van or in a factory, you need the £7-10 an hour to buy you a bare-minimum life in the UK, a decent enough house to live in, some clothes for the baby, a couple of pints on the weekend... who knows.
Everything changed when the EU enlarged and a huge number of people realised that while £7-10 quid went nowhere over here, in terms of a decent life, you could send that back to Poland or wherever. A reverse auf wiedersehen pet, if you like. Suddenly you had people competing for jobs who were very happy for £7 an hour because it bought them a decent family life back home while you were f***ing f***cked son.
The EU enlargement was probably a net gain for all economies concerned, but it certainly wasn't for all people. Hence Brexit.
Nice try, but with out the minimum wage we would not have been able to attract the unskilled labour to work in hospitals, nursing homes and as carers (and being UK taxpayers) that wipe the backsides and stick the catheters up the penises of the aged incontentants. Then there is the unskilled jobs of mass filleting fish or butchering which while working with incredibly sharp knives, very few UK citizens want to do. Then there is the gathering of fruit crops, and many others, that in these days of "mass UK employment" there seems to be no one available to do the work....
Fortunately I am sure no one would wish a decade of economic ruin on the UK purely to make rejoining easier (not least since the argument is often presented how obviously great the EU is, and how inevitable the whole thing is because of support from the young), so we can hope while there are economic consequences it will not be a decade of ruin.
It is typical out-of-touch-rich-PB'er syndrome Remaining in (or rejoining) the EU isn't a solution, it is a vote for I'm alright jack.
Slashing your wrists when you’re lost in the woods is usually a bad idea.
Any remain/rejoin vote needs to explain how the poorest and most marginalised members of society will benefit from it.
Still waiting.
Easy. They just need to make shit up. It worked for Leave.
My guess is that the truly devastating difference came because of the difference in purchasing parity power.
If you're a working guy in a warehouse or driving a van or in a factory, you need the £7-10 an hour to buy you a bare-minimum life in the UK, a decent enough house to live in, some clothes for the baby, a couple of pints on the weekend... who knows.
Everything changed when the EU enlarged and a huge number of people realised that while £7-10 quid went nowhere over here, in terms of a decent life, you could send that back to Poland or wherever. A reverse auf wiedersehen pet, if you like. Suddenly you had people competing for jobs who were very happy for £7 an hour because it bought them a decent family life back home while you were f***ing f***cked son.
The EU enlargement was probably a net gain for all economies concerned, but it certainly wasn't for all people. Hence Brexit.
Nice try, but with out the minimum wage we would not have been able to attract the unskilled labour to work in hospitals, nursing homes and as carers (and being UK taxpayers) that wipe the backsides and stick the catheters up the penises of the aged incontentants. Then there is the unskilled jobs of mass filleting fish or butchering which while working with incredibly sharp knives, very few UK citizens want to do. Then there is the gathering of fruit crops, and many others, that in these days of "mass UK employment" there seems to be no one available to do the work....
Are you saying those jobs weren't being done by anyone before large-scale immigration? Of course not, they were being done by British people.
I was triggered by all the racist abuse from the Welsh rugby fans.
Plus you're confused, too much alcohol in your system?
Because you say you've only just seen this intervention.
You saw it a few hours ago, and replied to it, a few hours ago.
I have been working all afternoon. I have just seen it.
Racist "banter" is unpleasant.
If you suffered abuse from Welsh rugby fans, than I sympathise.
You should have made a complaint at the time to the relevant authorities & you would have received my full support.
Racist banter is not funny, it is racism. It is not funny to talk of "Jocks" and Sheepshaggers": and "Micks".
I am making a request to the moderators to remove the post.
You could also delete the post yourself.
The Welsh aren't a race are they? Racially speaking they're a mixture of Britons, Celts and Anglo-Saxons. The question is whether it's okay to insult a nationality. Most people would say yes. People insult Americans all the time.
Any remain/rejoin vote needs to explain how the poorest and most marginalised members of society will benefit from it.
Still waiting.
More investment and more trade means more prosperity, jobs and tax money for welfare. Greater influence means getting more of the stuff you want and greater personal freedom means more opportunity.
Just 1% of the population think Brexit is doing very well, yet very few leavers make the logical inference that Brexit is a bad idea in itself. It is easy to throw "cognitive dissonance" at people as an insult, but when it applies to half the population, it's probably not a useful label.
I was triggered by all the racist abuse from the Welsh rugby fans.
Plus you're confused, too much alcohol in your system?
Because you say you've only just seen this intervention.
You saw it a few hours ago, and replied to it, a few hours ago.
I have been working all afternoon. I have just seen it.
Racist "banter" is unpleasant.
If you suffered abuse from Welsh rugby fans, than I sympathise.
You should have made a complaint at the time to the relevant authorities & you would have received my full support.
Racist banter is not funny, it is racism. It is not funny to talk of "Jocks" and Sheepshaggers": and "Micks".
I am making a request to the moderators to remove the post.
You could also delete the post yourself.
The Welsh aren't a race are they? Racially speaking they're a mixture of Britons, Celts and Anglo-Saxons. The question is whether it's okay to insult a nationality. Most people would say yes. People insult Americans all the time.
Under the Equality Act 2010, ‘race’ includes ‘ethnic or national origins’. A legal case from the 1980s established that the essential characteristics of an ethnic group are (1) a long shared history and (2) a cultural tradition (both of which the Welsh people have in abundance).
Other characteristics include a common language or geographical origin. A more recent case from 2001 confirmed that the Scots and the English are separate racial groups, defined by reference to their national origins.
Therefore, under the UK’s main anti-discrimination legislation, the Welsh people qualify as a distinct racial group (as well as the Scots and the English and the Irish. for that matter).
In any case, let's take a look at the kind of characters who indulges in anti-welsh "banter" about sheep shaggers and funny language.
Piers Morgan, Anne Robinson, Jeremy Clarkson, AA Gill, Rod Liddle, Eddie Jones and TSE.
I rest my case.
Who would really want to add their name to that list?
I was triggered by all the racist abuse from the Welsh rugby fans.
Plus you're confused, too much alcohol in your system?
Because you say you've only just seen this intervention.
You saw it a few hours ago, and replied to it, a few hours ago.
I have been working all afternoon. I have just seen it.
Racist "banter" is unpleasant.
If you suffered abuse from Welsh rugby fans, than I sympathise.
You should have made a complaint at the time to the relevant authorities & you would have received my full support.
Racist banter is not funny, it is racism. It is not funny to talk of "Jocks" and Sheepshaggers": and "Micks".
I am making a request to the moderators to remove the post.
You could also delete the post yourself.
The Welsh aren't a race are they? Racially speaking they're a mixture of Britons, Celts and Anglo-Saxons. The question is whether it's okay to insult a nationality. Most people would say yes. People insult Americans all the time.
Under the Equality Act 2010, ‘race’ includes ‘ethnic or national origins’. A legal case from the 1980s established that the essential characteristics of an ethnic group are (1) a long shared history and (2) a cultural tradition (both of which the Welsh people have in abundance).
Other characteristics include a common language or geographical origin. A more recent case from 2001 confirmed that the Scots and the English are separate racial groups, defined by reference to their national origins.
Therefore, under the UK’s main anti-discrimination legislation, the Welsh people qualify as a distinct racial group (as well as the Scots and the English and the Irish. for that matter).
In any case, let's take a look at the kind of characters who indulges in anti-welsh "banter" about sheep shaggers.
Piers Morgan, Anne Robinson, Jeremy Clarkson, AA Gill, Rod Liddle, Eddie Jones and TSE.
I rest my case.
Who would really want to add their name to that list?
The Welsh fans in 2003 who chanted 'I'd rather fuck a sheep than an English woman'?
I was triggered by all the racist abuse from the Welsh rugby fans.
Plus you're confused, too much alcohol in your system?
Because you say you've only just seen this intervention.
You saw it a few hours ago, and replied to it, a few hours ago.
I have been working all afternoon. I have just seen it.
Racist "banter" is unpleasant.
If you suffered abuse from Welsh rugby fans, than I sympathise.
You should have made a complaint at the time to the relevant authorities & you would have received my full support.
Racist banter is not funny, it is racism. It is not funny to talk of "Jocks" and Sheepshaggers": and "Micks".
I am making a request to the moderators to remove the post.
You could also delete the post yourself.
The Welsh aren't a race are they? Racially speaking they're a mixture of Britons, Celts and Anglo-Saxons. The question is whether it's okay to insult a nationality. Most people would say yes. People insult Americans all the time.
Under the Equality Act 2010, ‘race’ includes ‘ethnic or national origins’. A legal case from the 1980s established that the essential characteristics of an ethnic group are (1) a long shared history and (2) a cultural tradition (both of which the Welsh people have in abundance).
Other characteristics include a common language or geographical origin. A more recent case from 2001 confirmed that the Scots and the English are separate racial groups, defined by reference to their national origins.
Therefore, under the UK’s main anti-discrimination legislation, the Welsh people qualify as a distinct racial group (as well as the Scots and the English and the Irish. for that matter).
In any case, let's take a look at the kind of characters who indulges in anti-welsh "banter" about sheep shaggers.
Piers Morgan, Anne Robinson, Jeremy Clarkson, AA Gill, Rod Liddle, Eddie Jones and TSE.
I rest my case.
Who would really want to add their name to that list?
The Welsh fans in 2003 who chanted 'I'd rather fuck a sheep than an English woman'?
Anti English prejudice is bad. Some Welsh people make vile remarks about the English (as in fact do some Scots and Irish people).
But, it doesn't entitle you to vent anti Welsh prejudice on a blog and make racist remarks about ram shaggers.
I was triggered by all the racist abuse from the Welsh rugby fans.
Plus you're confused, too much alcohol in your system?
Because you say you've only just seen this intervention.
You saw it a few hours ago, and replied to it, a few hours ago.
I have been working all afternoon. I have just seen it.
Racist "banter" is unpleasant.
If you suffered abuse from Welsh rugby fans, than I sympathise.
You should have made a complaint at the time to the relevant authorities & you would have received my full support.
Racist banter is not funny, it is racism. It is not funny to talk of "Jocks" and Sheepshaggers": and "Micks".
I am making a request to the moderators to remove the post.
You could also delete the post yourself.
The Welsh aren't a race are they? Racially speaking they're a mixture of Britons, Celts and Anglo-Saxons. The question is whether it's okay to insult a nationality. Most people would say yes. People insult Americans all the time.
Under the Equality Act 2010, ‘race’ includes ‘ethnic or national origins’. A legal case from the 1980s established that the essential characteristics of an ethnic group are (1) a long shared history and (2) a cultural tradition (both of which the Welsh people have in abundance).
Other characteristics include a common language or geographical origin. A more recent case from 2001 confirmed that the Scots and the English are separate racial groups, defined by reference to their national origins.
Therefore, under the UK’s main anti-discrimination legislation, the Welsh people qualify as a distinct racial group (as well as the Scots and the English and the Irish. for that matter).
In any case, let's take a look at the kind of characters who indulges in anti-welsh "banter" about sheep shaggers.
Piers Morgan, Anne Robinson, Jeremy Clarkson, AA Gill, Rod Liddle, Eddie Jones and TSE.
I rest my case.
Who would really want to add their name to that list?
The Welsh fans in 2003 who chanted 'I'd rather fuck a sheep than an English woman'?
Anti English prejudice is bad. Some Welsh people make vile remarks about the English (as in fact do some Scots and Irish people).
But, it doesn't entitle you to vent anti Welsh prejudice on a blog and make racist remarks about ram shaggers.
I was triggered by all the racist abuse from the Welsh rugby fans.
Plus you're confused, too much alcohol in your system?
Because you say you've only just seen this intervention.
You saw it a few hours ago, and replied to it, a few hours ago.
I have been working all afternoon. I have just seen it.
Racist "banter" is unpleasant.
If you suffered abuse from Welsh rugby fans, than I sympathise.
You should have made a complaint at the time to the relevant authorities & you would have received my full support.
Racist banter is not funny, it is racism. It is not funny to talk of "Jocks" and Sheepshaggers": and "Micks".
I am making a request to the moderators to remove the post.
You could also delete the post yourself.
The Welsh aren't a race are they? Racially speaking they're a mixture of Britons, Celts and Anglo-Saxons. The question is whether it's okay to insult a nationality. Most people would say yes. People insult Americans all the time.
Under the Equality Act 2010, ‘race’ includes ‘ethnic or national origins’. A legal case from the 1980s established that the essential characteristics of an ethnic group are (1) a long shared history and (2) a cultural tradition (both of which the Welsh people have in abundance).
Other characteristics include a common language or geographical origin. A more recent case from 2001 confirmed that the Scots and the English are separate racial groups, defined by reference to their national origins.
Therefore, under the UK’s main anti-discrimination legislation, the Welsh people qualify as a distinct racial group (as well as the Scots and the English and the Irish. for that matter).
In any case, let's take a look at the kind of characters who indulges in anti-welsh "banter" about sheep shaggers.
Piers Morgan, Anne Robinson, Jeremy Clarkson, AA Gill, Rod Liddle, Eddie Jones and TSE.
I rest my case.
Who would really want to add their name to that list?
The Welsh fans in 2003 who chanted 'I'd rather fuck a sheep than an English woman'?
Anti English prejudice is bad. Some Welsh people make vile remarks about the English (as in fact do some Scots and Irish people).
But, it doesn't entitle you to vent anti Welsh prejudice on a blog and make racist remarks about ram shaggers.
Rejoining doesn't have to be attractive on its own, it just needs to be seen as the least worst option.
The reality of Leaving being a terrible mistake might just swing it on its own.
A decade of Brexit induced economic ruin might do the trick.
Fortunately I am sure no one would wish a decade of economic ruin on the UK purely to make rejoining easier (not least since the argument is often presented how obviously great the EU is, and how inevitable the whole thing is because of support from the young), so we can hope while there are economic consequences it will not be a decade of ruin.
It is typical out-of-touch-rich-PB'er syndrome, something of which I am sure I am guilty of too sometimes.
For many people, the last decade - or more - *has* been economic ruin. The hollowing out of town centres. Year after year of below inflation pay rises. Zero hours contracts. Not being able to get a doctor's appointment this side of next month. That b*stard somehow getting on the property ladder because he's got rich parents while you're living hand to mouth with no chance of ever saving the twenty or so grand (outside of London) you need for a deposit.
I have said it before but it bears re-stating, a vote for remain (or rejoin) is a vote for the status quo. What we need are radical solutions to fix the fact that, for a long time, society clearly hasn't been working for everyone. Brexit is a radical solution, in a sense, although in reality it is more of a protest vote. Corbynism is another solution, although I feel it is the wrong one.
Remaining in (or rejoining) the EU isn't a solution, it is a vote for I'm alright jack.
Slashing your wrists when you’re lost in the woods is usually a bad idea.
Any remain/rejoin vote needs to explain how the poorest and most marginalised members of society will benefit from it.
Still waiting.
That argument comes down to “I really hate the EU so no matter how damaging it might be I’m willing to ignore the numerous small incremental benefits it offered so that I can continue my irrational hatred.” I get that you hate the EU. Arguing that leaving it has anything to do with the plight of the poor is just a veneer to legitimise your irrational hatred.
Anti English prejudice is bad. Some Welsh people make vile remarks about the English (as in fact do some Scots and Irish people).
But, it doesn't entitle you to vent anti Welsh prejudice on a blog and make racist remarks about ram shaggers.
Personally I don't mind anything you can throw at me for being English. That's almost the problem though in that I can't imagine anything that I can throw at you being hurtful.
As far as I am concerned Welsh people are equal to English people in every regard, and you're far better in many others. There is an exception though - you are rubbish at rugby.
I would like to be in a society where every race. colour, creed, sex, or rugby-playing talent could hold their heads up high and just feel robust in themselves. I think we're getting closer, but we're far from there yet.
Anti English prejudice is bad. Some Welsh people make vile remarks about the English (as in fact do some Scots and Irish people).
But, it doesn't entitle you to vent anti Welsh prejudice on a blog and make racist remarks about ram shaggers.
Personally I don't mind anything you can throw at me for being English. That's almost the problem though in that I can't imagine anything that I can throw at you being hurtful.
As far as I am concerned Welsh people are equal to English people in every regard, and you're far better in many others. There is an exception though - you are rubbish at rugby.
I would like to be in a society where every race. colour, creed, sex, or rugby-playing talent could hold their heads up high and just feel robust in themselves. I think we're getting closer, but we're far from there yet.
The only time I was frightened by serious racial abuse was in Youghal, Co Cork, Ireland,
I was triggered by all the racist abuse from the Welsh rugby fans.
Plus you're confused, too much alcohol in your system?
Because you say you've only just seen this intervention.
You saw it a few hours ago, and replied to it, a few hours ago.
I have been working all afternoon. I have just seen it.
Racist "banter" is unpleasant.
If you suffered abuse from Welsh rugby fans, than I sympathise.
You should have made a complaint at the time to the relevant authorities & you would have received my full support.
Racist banter is not funny, it is racism. It is not funny to talk of "Jocks" and Sheepshaggers": and "Micks".
I am making a request to the moderators to remove the post.
You could also delete the post yourself.
The Welsh aren't a race are they? Racially speaking they're a mixture of Britons, Celts and Anglo-Saxons. The question is whether it's okay to insult a nationality. Most people would say yes. People insult Americans all the time.
Under the Equality Act 2010, ‘race’ includes ‘ethnic or national origins’. A legal case from the 1980s established that the essential characteristics of an ethnic group are (1) a long shared history and (2) a cultural tradition (both of which the Welsh people have in abundance).
Other characteristics include a common language or geographical origin. A more recent case from 2001 confirmed that the Scots and the English are separate racial groups, defined by reference to their national origins.
Therefore, under the UK’s main anti-discrimination legislation, the Welsh people qualify as a distinct racial group (as well as the Scots and the English and the Irish. for that matter).
In any case, let's take a look at the kind of characters who indulges in anti-welsh "banter" about sheep shaggers and funny language.
Piers Morgan, Anne Robinson, Jeremy Clarkson, AA Gill, Rod Liddle, Eddie Jones and TSE.
I rest my case.
Who would really want to add their name to that list?
He knows he's wrong but there's no face-saving way out.
Slashing your wrists when you’re lost in the woods is usually a bad idea.
Any remain/rejoin vote needs to explain how the poorest and most marginalised members of society will benefit from it.
Still waiting.
That argument comes down to “I really hate the EU so no matter how damaging it might be I’m willing to ignore the numerous small incremental benefits it offered so that I can continue my irrational hatred.” I get that you hate the EU. Arguing that leaving it has anything to do with the plight of the poor is just a veneer to legitimise your irrational hatred.
Except for the fact that poor people disproportionately voted against it. Perhaps leaving the EU isn't the best mechanism to lift them out of povery, but you can't deny that they were suffering while the EU that you love so much looked on and looked idle. So either the EU is to blame or the EU is powerless to change things, either way it's not much of an argument for the star spangled blue thing.
Freedom of movement impoverished the most marginal members of our society, those at the bitter end - because they were suddenly exposed to competition from people who could send their pound home where it gave them a life, rather than a mere existence which is what it is worth here. In terms of labour, supply massively increased while demand remained broadly the same, leading to huge drops in the standard of living for unskilled workers. Hence Brexit.
Brexit and Corbynism are two cheeks of the same arse, the latter of which I'll admit has come home to bite PB tories on the bum. But I still believe that the EU has impoverished the poorest in our society and remainers like yourself are still the "I'm alright jack" contingent, blind to how opening our borders has meant a race to the bottom in terms of wages and living conditions for the worst off in our society. You are yet to offer a better solution than the status quo, which benefits you - but not the majority.
Anti English prejudice is bad. Some Welsh people make vile remarks about the English (as in fact do some Scots and Irish people).
But, it doesn't entitle you to vent anti Welsh prejudice on a blog and make racist remarks about ram shaggers.
Personally I don't mind anything you can throw at me for being English. That's almost the problem though in that I can't imagine anything that I can throw at you being hurtful.
As far as I am concerned Welsh people are equal to English people in every regard, and you're far better in many others. There is an exception though - you are rubbish at rugby.
I would like to be in a society where every race. colour, creed, sex, or rugby-playing talent could hold their heads up high and just feel robust in themselves. I think we're getting closer, but we're far from there yet.
The only time I was frightened by serious racial abuse was in Youghal, Co Cork, Ireland,
Slashing your wrists when you’re lost in the woods is usually a bad idea.
Any remain/rejoin vote needs to explain how the poorest and most marginalised members of society will benefit from it.
Still waiting.
That argument comes down to “I really hate the EU so no matter how damaging it might be I’m willing to ignore the numerous small incremental benefits it offered so that I can continue my irrational hatred.” I get that you hate the EU. Arguing that leaving it has anything to do with the plight of the poor is just a veneer to legitimise your irrational hatred.
Except for the fact that poor people disproportionately voted against it. Perhaps leaving the EU isn't the best mechanism to lift them out of povery, but you can't deny that they were suffering while the EU that you love so much looked on and looked idle. So either the EU is to blame or the EU is powerless to change things, either way it's not much of an argument for the star spangled blue thing.
Freedom of movement impoverished the most marginal members of our society, those at the bitter end - because they were suddenly exposed to competition from people who could send their pound home where it gave them a life, rather than a mere existence which is what it is worth here. In terms of labour, supply massively increased while demand remained broadly the same, leading to huge drops in the standard of living for unskilled workers. Hence Brexit.
Brexit and Corbynism are two cheeks of the same arse, the latter of which I'll admit has come home to bite PB tories on the bum. But I still believe that the EU has impoverished the poorest in our society and remainers like yourself are still the "I'm alright jack" contingent, blind to how opening our borders has meant a race to the bottom in terms of wages and living conditions for the worst off in our society. You are yet to offer a better solution than the status quo, which benefits you - but not the majority.
The status quo benefits the majority relative to Brexit. But you hate the EU so you won’t care.
Slashing your wrists when you’re lost in the woods is usually a bad idea.
Any remain/rejoin vote needs to explain how the poorest and most marginalised members of society will benefit from it.
Still waiting.
That argument comes down to “I really hate the EU so no matter how damaging it might be I’m willing to ignore the numerous small incremental benefits it offered so that I can continue my irrational hatred.” I get that you hate the EU. Arguing that leaving it has anything to do with the plight of the poor is just a veneer to legitimise your irrational hatred.
Except for the fact that poor people disproportionately voted against it. Perhaps leaving the EU isn't the best mechanism to lift them out of povery, but you can't deny that they were suffering while the EU that you love so much looked on and looked idle. So either the EU is to blame or the EU is powerless to change things, either way it's not much of an argument for the star spangled blue thing.
Freedom of movement impoverished the most marginal members of our society, those at the bitter end - because they were suddenly exposed to competition from people who could send their pound home where it gave them a life, rather than a mere existence which is what it is worth here. In terms of labour, supply massively increased while demand remained broadly the same, leading to huge drops in the standard of living for unskilled workers. Hence Brexit.
Brexit and Corbynism are two cheeks of the same arse, the latter of which I'll admit has come home to bite PB tories on the bum. But I still believe that the EU has impoverished the poorest in our society and remainers like yourself are still the "I'm alright jack" contingent, blind to how opening our borders has meant a race to the bottom in terms of wages and living conditions for the worst off in our society. You are yet to offer a better solution than the status quo, which benefits you - but not the majority.
The status quo benefits the majority relative to Brexit. But you hate the EU so you won’t care.
And therein lies the point. Let's say that 75% of the population benefit from the EU, but 25% don't. The 25% have never had a voice. Until now.
Brexit was won because of them. If you want to cancel it, what will you do to make their lives better?
Long term the best result for the Dems would be to fail to take control of either chamber. If they take control of the House, we will see them push too hard on the impeachment front which - like Clinton in reverse - will only benefit Trump in 2020.
If they fail, Trump has ownership of everything and if it goes wrong, noone to blame but himself to blame if it goes wrong, and with the clock ticking on a recession there's got to be a good chance of that happening.
It may not come across by reading the UK press or the NYT/WP, but one of Trump's biggest assets is the Dems - they're a mess. A resounding failure may lead them to sort themselves out and coalesce around a sensible candidate - and if they do, Trump should be very beatable.
If the Dems take the house, pile in on Trump in 2020 - if the Reps hold on, bet the other way.
Indeed, both Bill Clinton and Obama saw their party lose the House and both were comfortably re elected. Jimmy Carter saw his party hold the House despite some losses and was beaten by Ronald in 1980.
However I think the Democrats are almost certain to take the House on Tuesday even if the GOP hold the Senate
My view hasn't changed. UK democracy is functioning well. There's plenty of opposition to Brexit, including the recent large march in London; various elements of the process have been tested in the courts and the Lords are holding the government's feet to the fire. ttractive.
Rejoining doesn't have to be attractive on its own, it just needs to be seen as the least worst option.
The reality of Leaving being a terrible mistake might just swing it on its own.
A decade of Brexit induced economic ruin might do the trick.
Fortunately I am sure no one would wish a decade of economic ruin on the UK purely to make rejoining easier (not least since the argument is often presented how obviously great the EU is, and how inevitable the whole thing is because of support from the young), so we can hope while there are economic consequences it will not be a decade of ruin.
It is typical out-of-touch-rich-PB'er syndrome, something of which I am sure I am guilty of too sometimes.
For many people, the last decade - or more - *has* been economic ruin. The hollowing out of town centres. Year after year of below inflation pay rises. Zero hours contracts. Not being able to get a doctor's appointment this side of next month. That b*stard somehow getting on the property ladder because he's got rich parents while you're living hand to mouth with no chance of ever saving the twenty or so grand (outside of London) you need for a deposit.
I have said it before but it bears re-stating, a vote for remain (or rejoin) is a vote for the status quo. What we need are radical solutions to fix the fact that, for a long time, society clearly hasn't been working for everyone. Brexit is a radical solution, in a sense, although in reality it is more of a protest vote. Corbynism is another solution, although I feel it is the wrong one.
Remaining in (or rejoining) the EU isn't a solution, it is a vote for I'm alright jack.
I agree, the correlation between a high Leave vote and those demographics and geographies in decline is there to be seen.
It isn't clear at all that Brexit will help, and indeed it is very likely that the differences will be exacerbated.
I was triggered by all the racist abuse from the Welsh rugby fans.
Plus you're confused, too much alcohol in your system?
Because you say you've only just seen this intervention.
You saw it a few hours ago, and replied to it, a few hours ago.
I have been working all afternoon. I have just seen it.
Racist "banter" is unpleasant.
If you suffered abuse from Welsh rugby fans, than I sympathise.
You should have made a complaint at the time to the relevant authorities & you would have received my full support.
Racist banter is not funny, it is racism. It is not funny to talk of "Jocks" and Sheepshaggers": and "Micks".
I am making a request to the moderators to remove the post.
You could also delete the post yourself.
The Welsh aren't a race are they? Racially speaking they're a mixture of Britons, Celts and Anglo-Saxons. The question is whether it's okay to insult a nationality. Most people would say yes. People insult Americans all the time.
Under the Equality Act 2010, ‘race’ includes ‘ethnic or national origins’. A legal case from the 1980s established that the essential characteristics of an ethnic group are (1) a long shared history and (2) a cultural tradition (both of which the Welsh people have in abundance).
Other characteristics include a common language or geographical origin. A more recent case from 2001 confirmed that the Scots and the English are separate racial groups, defined by reference to their national origins.
Therefore, under the UK’s main anti-discrimination legislation, the Welsh people qualify as a distinct racial group (as well as the Scots and the English and the Irish. for that matter).
In any case, let's take a look at the kind of characters who indulges in anti-welsh "banter" about sheep shaggers.
Piers Morgan, Anne Robinson, Jeremy Clarkson, AA Gill, Rod Liddle, Eddie Jones and TSE.
I rest my case.
Who would really want to add their name to that list?
The Welsh fans in 2003 who chanted 'I'd rather fuck a sheep than an English woman'?
How does that scan as a song lyric? Too many syllables.
Anti English prejudice is bad. Some Welsh people make vile remarks about the English (as in fact do some Scots and Irish people).
But, it doesn't entitle you to vent anti Welsh prejudice on a blog and make racist remarks about ram shaggers.
Personally I don't mind anything you can throw at me for being English. That's almost the problem though in that I can't imagine anything that I can throw at you being hurtful.
As far as I am concerned Welsh people are equal to English people in every regard, and you're far better in many others. There is an exception though - you are rubbish at rugby.
I would like to be in a society where every race. colour, creed, sex, or rugby-playing talent could hold their heads up high and just feel robust in themselves. I think we're getting closer, but we're far from there yet.
The only time I was frightened by serious racial abuse was in Youghal, Co Cork, Ireland,
I was mistaken for English.
The last time I was called a P**i C**t was on Magdalen Bridge in Cambridge one evening c.2006.
I suppose the first world war is slipping far enough into history now that it becomes more acceptable to see things like this that might have been thought distasteful when there were still people alive who experienced the trenches first hand.
It brings to mind things like the civil war re-enactors and similar.
It is bizarre.
Mind you, some of the other poppy stuff is worse, such as the poppy christmas tree:
Slashing your wrists when you’re lost in the woods is usually a bad idea.
Any remain/rejoin vote needs to explain how the poorest and most marginalised members of society will benefit from it.
Still waiting.
That argument comes down to “I really hate the EU so no matter how damaging it might be I’m willing to ignore the numerous small incremental benefits it offered so that I can continue my irrational hatred.” I get that you hate the EU. Arguing that leaving it has anything to do with the plight of the poor is just a veneer to legitimise your irrational hatred.
Except for the fact that poor people disproportionately voted against it. Perhaps leaving the EU isn't the best mechanism to lift them out of povery, but you can't deny that they were suffering while the EU that you love so much looked on and looked idle. So either the EU is to blame or the EU is powerless to change things, either way it's not much of an argument for the star spangled blue thing.
Freedom of movement impoverished the most marginal members of our society, those at the bitter end - because they were suddenly exposed to competition from people who could send their pound home where it gave them a life, rather than a mere existence which is what it is worth here. In terms of labour, supply massively increased while demand remained broadly the same, leading to huge drops in the standard of living for unskilled workers. Hence Brexit.
Brexit and Corbynism are two cheeks of the same arse, the latter of which I'll admit has come home to bite PB tories on the bum. But I still believe that the EU has impoverished the poorest in our society and remainers like yourself are still the "I'm alright jack" contingent, blind to how opening our borders has meant a race to the bottom in terms of wages and living conditions for the worst off in our society. You are yet to offer a better solution than the status quo, which benefits you - but not the majority.
Brexit and Corbynism are not the same cheeks of the same arse, Corbynism is the result of rebellion and the retaking of the soul of the Labour Party from the Blairittes and the right-wing of nu-labour. Brexit is more the rebellion of many who felt they were being ignored and overlooked by the professional ppe's and SPADS of our political system. Just wait until the Tory membership decide that they have had enough...
Any remain/rejoin vote needs to explain how the poorest and most marginalised members of society will benefit from it.
Still waiting.
That argument comes down to “I really hate the EU so no matter how damaging it might be I’m willing to ignore the numerous small incremental benefits it offered so that I can continue my irrational hatred.” I get that you hate the EU. Arguing that leaving it has anything to do with the plight of the poor is just a veneer to legitimise your irrational hatred.
Except for the fact that poor people disproportionately voted against it. Perhaps leaving the EU isn't the best mechanism to lift them out of povery, but you can't deny that they were suffering while the EU that you love so much looked on and looked idle. So either the EU is to blame or the EU is powerless to change things, either way it's not much of an argument for the star spangled blue thing.
Freedom of movement impoverished the most marginal members of our society, those at the bitter end - because they were suddenly exposed to competition from people who could send their pound home where it gave them a life, rather than a mere existence which is what it is worth here. In terms of labour, supply massively increased while demand remained broadly the same, leading to huge drops in the standard of living for unskilled workers. Hence Brexit.
Brexit and Corbynism are two cheeks of the same arse, the latter of which I'll admit has come home to bite PB tories on the bum. But I still believe that the EU has impoverished the poorest in our society and remainers like yourself are still the "I'm alright jack" contingent, blind to how opening our borders has meant a race to the bottom in terms of wages and living conditions for the worst off in our society. You are yet to offer a better solution than the status quo, which benefits you - but not the majority.
Brexit and Corbynism are not the same cheeks of the same arse, Corbynism is the result of rebellion and the retaking of the soul of the Labour Party from the Blairittes and the right-wing of nu-labour. Brexit is more the rebellion of many who felt they were being ignored and overlooked by the professional ppe's and SPADS of our political system. Just wait until the Tory membership decide that they have had enough...
Corbynism is the result of a ton of university educated middle class people not getting guaranteed jobs or the ability to buy homes with whatever jobs they can get. Trades unionists in Durham were always going to vote Labour, Corbynism thrives amongst the middle classes who expeceted a certain standard of life who didn't get it.
I was triggered by all the racist abuse from the Welsh rugby fans.
Plus you're confused, too much alcohol in your system?
Because you say you've only just seen this intervention.
You saw it a few hours ago, and replied to it, a few hours ago.
I have been working all afternoon. I have just seen it.
Racist "banter" is unpleasant.
If you suffered abuse from Welsh rugby fans, than I sympathise.
You should have made a complaint at the time to the relevant authorities & you would have received my full support.
Racist banter is not funny, it is racism. It is not funny to talk of "Jocks" and Sheepshaggers": and "Micks".
I am making a request to the moderators to remove the post.
You could also delete the post yourself.
The Welsh aren't a race are they? Racially speaking they're a mixture of Britons, Celts and Anglo-Saxons. The question is whether it's okay to insult a nationality. Most people would say yes. People insult Americans all the time.
Under the Equality Act 2010, ‘race’ includes ‘ethnic or national origins’. A legal case from the 1980s established that the essential characteristics of an ethnic group are (1) a long shared history and (2) a cultural tradition (both of which the Welsh people have in abundance).
Other characteristics include a common language or geographical origin. A more recent case from 2001 confirmed that the Scots and the English are separate racial groups, defined by reference to their national origins.
Therefore, under the UK’s main anti-discrimination legislation, the Welsh people qualify as a distinct racial group (as well as the Scots and the English and the Irish. for that matter).
In any case, let's take a look at the kind of characters who indulges in anti-welsh "banter" about sheep shaggers.
Piers Morgan, Anne Robinson, Jeremy Clarkson, AA Gill, Rod Liddle, Eddie Jones and TSE.
I rest my case.
Who would really want to add their name to that list?
The Welsh fans in 2003 who chanted 'I'd rather fuck a sheep than an English woman'?
How does that scan as a song lyric? Too many syllables.
As a Cardiff City fan I take it as a badge of honour to be called a sheepshagger. Not offended at all.
Will be at the Leicester game. Doubt that we will hear that chant tomorrow for a change.
OT. They have just said Donald Trump is no longer going to trade with Iran but 8 countries have been granted a temporary exemption to continue trading oil.
Are countries now accepting that Trump can decide who can trade with Iran?
Anti English prejudice is bad. Some Welsh people make vile remarks about the English (as in fact do some Scots and Irish people).
But, it doesn't entitle you to vent anti Welsh prejudice on a blog and make racist remarks about ram shaggers.
Personally I don't mind anything you can throw at me for being English. That's almost the problem though in that I can't imagine anything that I can throw at you being hurtful.
As far as I am concerned Welsh people are equal to English people in every regard, and you're far better in many others. There is an exception though - you are rubbish at rugby.
I would like to be in a society where every race. colour, creed, sex, or rugby-playing talent could hold their heads up high and just feel robust in themselves. I think we're getting closer, but we're far from there yet.
The only time I was frightened by serious racial abuse was in Youghal, Co Cork, Ireland,
I was mistaken for English.
The last time I was called a P**i C**t was on Magdalen Bridge in Cambridge one evening c.2006.
Magdalene Bridge.
The picturesque Magdalen Bridge with its adjoining deer park is 85 miles west of the punt touters on Magdalene Bridge.
Anti English prejudice is bad. Some Welsh people make vile remarks about the English (as in fact do some Scots and Irish people).
But, it doesn't entitle you to vent anti Welsh prejudice on a blog and make racist remarks about ram shaggers.
Personally I don't mind anything you can throw at me for being English. That's almost the problem though in that I can't imagine anything that I can throw at you being hurtful.
As far as I am concerned Welsh people are equal to English people in every regard, and you're far better in many others. There is an exception though - you are rubbish at rugby.
I would like to be in a society where every race. colour, creed, sex, or rugby-playing talent could hold their heads up high and just feel robust in themselves. I think we're getting closer, but we're far from there yet.
The only time I was frightened by serious racial abuse was in Youghal, Co Cork, Ireland,
I was mistaken for English.
The last time I was called a P**i C**t was on Magdalen Bridge in Cambridge one evening c.2006.
I was triggered by all the racist abuse from the Welsh rugby fans.
Plus you're confused, too much alcohol in your system?
Because you say you've only just seen this intervention.
You saw it a few hours ago, and replied to it, a few hours ago.
I have been working all afternoon. I have just seen it.
Racist "banter" is unpleasant.
If you suffered abuse from Welsh rugby fans, than I sympathise.
You should have made a complaint at the time to the relevant authorities & you would have received my full support.
Racist banter is not funny, it is racism. It is not funny to talk of "Jocks" and Sheepshaggers": and "Micks".
I am making a request to the moderators to remove the post.
You could also delete the post yourself.
The Welsh aren't a race are they? Racially speaking they're a mixture of Britons, Celts and Anglo-Saxons. The question is whether it's okay to insult a nationality. Most people would say yes. People insult Americans all the time.
Under the Equality Act 2010, ‘race’ includes ‘ethnic or national origins’. A legal case from the 1980s established that the essential characteristics of an ethnic group are (1) a long shared history and (2) a cultural tradition (both of which the Welsh people have in abundance).
Other characteristics include a common language or geographical origin. A more recent case from 2001 confirmed that the Scots and the English are separate racial groups, defined by reference to their national origins.
Therefore, under the UK’s main anti-discrimination legislation, the Welsh people qualify as a distinct racial group (as well as the Scots and the English and the Irish. for that matter).
In any case, let's take a look at the kind of characters who indulges in anti-welsh "banter" about sheep shaggers.
Piers Morgan, Anne Robinson, Jeremy Clarkson, AA Gill, Rod Liddle, Eddie Jones and TSE.
I rest my case.
Who would really want to add their name to that list?
The Welsh fans in 2003 who chanted 'I'd rather fuck a sheep than an English woman'?
How does that scan as a song lyric? Too many syllables.
As a Cardiff City fan I take it as a badge of honour to be called a sheepshagger. Not offended at all.
Will be at the Leicester game. Doubt that we will hear that chant tomorrow for a change.
As TSE's great hero, David Cameron, said:
"There's a difference between Spurs fans self-describing themselves as Yids and someone calling someone a Yid as an insult,"
I suppose the first world war is slipping far enough into history now that it becomes more acceptable to see things like this that might have been thought distasteful when there were still people alive who experienced the trenches first hand.
It brings to mind things like the civil war re-enactors and similar.
It is bizarre.
Mind you, some of the other poppy stuff is worse, such as the poppy christmas tree:
Poppyism has, regrettably, become a thing. Quiet reflection sacrificed on the altar of ostentatious subscription.
The trend is now that you have to be seen to be mourning/paying respect. This is a bit of a personal bugbear for me. Witnessing the fire crews who went to the Leicester City helicopter crash standing to attention, heads bowed at the scene, days later really stuck in my craw. We don't do that for Joe Public when they get killed in equally tragic circumstances. Maybe I'm just a miserable bastard, but it really irritates me.
I suppose the first world war is slipping far enough into history now that it becomes more acceptable to see things like this that might have been thought distasteful when there were still people alive who experienced the trenches first hand.
It brings to mind things like the civil war re-enactors and similar.
It is bizarre.
Mind you, some of the other poppy stuff is worse, such as the poppy christmas tree:
I suppose the first world war is slipping far enough into history now that it becomes more acceptable to see things like this that might have been thought distasteful when there were still people alive who experienced the trenches first hand.
It brings to mind things like the civil war re-enactors and similar.
It is bizarre.
Mind you, some of the other poppy stuff is worse, such as the poppy christmas tree:
That argument comes down to “I really hate the EU so no matter how damaging it might be I’m willing to ignore the numerous small incremental benefits it offered so that I can continue my irrational hatred.” I get that you hate the EU. Arguing that leaving it has anything to do with the plight of the poor is just a veneer to legitimise your irrational hatred.
Just because you disagree with it doesn't make it irrational.
Slashing your wrists when you’re lost in the woods is usually a bad idea.
Any remain/rejoin vote needs to explain how the poorest and most marginalised members of society will benefit from it.
Still waiting.
That argument comes down to “I really hate the EU so no matter how damaging it might be I’m willing to ignore the numerous small incremental benefits it offered so that I can continue my irrational hatred.” I get that you hate the EU. Arguing that leaving it has anything to do with the plight of the poor is just a veneer to legitimise your irrational hatred.
Except for the fact that poor people disproportionately voted against it. Perhaps leaving the EU isn't the best mechanism to lift them out of povery, but you can't deny that they were suffering while the EU that you love so much looked on and looked idle. So either the EU is to blame or the EU is powerless to change things, either way it's not much of an argument for the star spangled blue thing.
Freedom of movement impoverished the most marginal members of our society, those at the bitter end - because they were suddenly exposed to competition from people who could send their pound home where it gave them a life, rather than a mere existence which is what it is worth here. In terms of labour, supply massively increased while demand remained broadly the same, leading to huge drops in the standard of living for unskilled workers. Hence Brexit.
Brexit and Corbynism are two cheeks of the same arse, the latter of which I'll admit has come home to bite PB tories on the bum. But I still believe that the EU has impoverished the poorest in our society and remainers like yourself are still the "I'm alright jack" contingent, blind to how opening our borders has meant a race to the bottom in terms of wages and living conditions for the worst off in our society. You are yet to offer a better solution than the status quo, which benefits you - but not the majority.
The status quo benefits the majority relative to Brexit. But you hate the EU so you won’t care.
And therein lies the point. Let's say that 75% of the population benefit from the EU, but 25% don't. The 25% have never had a voice. Until now.
Brexit was won because of them. If you want to cancel it, what will you do to make their lives better?
And yet again you change the argument. The argument is irrelevant. You hate the EU so any justification will do. Be honest and admit that the reason you want to leave the EU is your visceral hatred of it. Stop pretending that it’s any interest in the well-being of the poorest. You’re fooling no one.
I suppose the first world war is slipping far enough into history now that it becomes more acceptable to see things like this that might have been thought distasteful when there were still people alive who experienced the trenches first hand.
It brings to mind things like the civil war re-enactors and similar.
It is bizarre.
Mind you, some of the other poppy stuff is worse, such as the poppy christmas tree:
Poppyism has, regrettably, become a thing. Quiet reflection sacrificed on the altar of ostentatious subscription.
The trend is now that you have to be seen to be mourning/paying respect. This is a bit of a personal bugbear for me. Witnessing the fire crews who went to the Leicester City helicopter crash standing to attention, heads bowed at the scene, days later really stuck in my craw. We don't do that for Joe Public when they get killed in equally tragic circumstances. Maybe I'm just a miserable bastard, but it really irritates me.
I dropped by the King Power the other day. I am not normally a fan of the pop up shrines at the scenes of tragic sudden deaths, but this one got to me. Sure, I have had a few bits of generosity from Vichai, and the best football season of my life, but it really was quite moving seeing the young and old, the rich and the poor, the rough and the posh, all honouring the man.
I suppose the first world war is slipping far enough into history now that it becomes more acceptable to see things like this that might have been thought distasteful when there were still people alive who experienced the trenches first hand.
It brings to mind things like the civil war re-enactors and similar.
It is bizarre.
Mind you, some of the other poppy stuff is worse, such as the poppy christmas tree:
Poppyism has, regrettably, become a thing. Quiet reflection sacrificed on the altar of ostentatious subscription.
The trend is now that you have to be seen to be mourning/paying respect. This is a bit of a personal bugbear for me. Witnessing the fire crews who went to the Leicester City helicopter crash standing to attention, heads bowed at the scene, days later really stuck in my craw. We don't do that for Joe Public when they get killed in equally tragic circumstances. Maybe I'm just a miserable bastard, but it really irritates me.
I dropped by the King Power the other day. I am not normally a fan of the pop up shrines at the scenes of tragic sudden deaths, but this one got to me. Sure, I have had a few bits of generosity from Vichai, and the best football season of my life, but it really was quite moving seeing the young and old, the rich and the poor, the rough and the posh, all honouring the man.
I suppose the first world war is slipping far enough into history now that it becomes more acceptable to see things like this that might have been thought distasteful when there were still people alive who experienced the trenches first hand.
It brings to mind things like the civil war re-enactors and similar.
It is bizarre.
Mind you, some of the other poppy stuff is worse, such as the poppy christmas tree:
Poppyism has, regrettably, become a thing. Quiet reflection sacrificed on the altar of ostentatious subscription.
The trend is now that you have to be seen to be mourning/paying respect. This is a bit of a personal bugbear for me. Witnessing the fire crews who went to the Leicester City helicopter crash standing to attention, heads bowed at the scene, days later really stuck in my craw. We don't do that for Joe Public when they get killed in equally tragic circumstances. Maybe I'm just a miserable bastard, but it really irritates me.
I dropped by the King Power the other day. I am not normally a fan of the pop up shrines at the scenes of tragic sudden deaths, but this one got to me. Sure, I have had a few bits of generosity from Vichai, and the best football season of my life, but it really was quite moving seeing the young and old, the rich and the poor, the rough and the posh, all honouring the man.
It was clearly a shocking tragedy for him and the others on the helicopter, and for their families and friends. I can also see he was very much at the 'good' end of the scale of club owners.
But really, this does seem ott to me. "May your greatness live on..." ??
I suppose the first world war is slipping far enough into history now that it becomes more acceptable to see things like this that might have been thought distasteful when there were still people alive who experienced the trenches first hand.
It brings to mind things like the civil war re-enactors and similar.
It is bizarre.
Mind you, some of the other poppy stuff is worse, such as the poppy christmas tree:
Poppyism has, regrettably, become a thing. Quiet reflection sacrificed on the altar of ostentatious subscription.
The trend is now that you have to be seen to be mourning/paying respect. This is a bit of a personal bugbear for me. Witnessing the fire crews who went to the Leicester City helicopter crash standing to attention, heads bowed at the scene, days later really stuck in my craw. We don't do that for Joe Public when they get killed in equally tragic circumstances. Maybe I'm just a miserable bastard, but it really irritates me.
I dropped by the King Power the other day. I am not normally a fan of the pop up shrines at the scenes of tragic sudden deaths, but this one got to me. Sure, I have had a few bits of generosity from Vichai, and the best football season of my life, but it really was quite moving seeing the young and old, the rich and the poor, the rough and the posh, all honouring the man.
Who honours the little old lady who dies in their council flat fire? Why does the billionaire business man who dies in a high profile helicopter crash get multiple fire crews lined up at the scene mourning him, but the pensioner barely gets a mention in the Mercury? As I say, I'm probably just a miserable old git, but the "Ooh, look at me paying respect" photos on twitter and facebook wind me up!
Any remain/rejoin vote needs to explain how the poorest and most marginalised members of society will benefit from it.
Still waiting.
That argument comes down to “I really hate the EU so no matter how damaging it might be I’m willing to ignore the numerous small incremental benefits it offered so that I can continue my irrational hatred.” I get that you hate the EU. Arguing that leaving it has anything to do with the plight of the poor is just a veneer to legitimise your irrational hatred.
Except for the fact thing.
Freedom of movement impoverished the most marginal members of our society, those at the bitter end - because they were suddenly exposed to competition from people who could send their pound home where it gave them a life, rather than a mere existence which is what it is worth here. In terms of labour, supply massively increased while demand remained broadly the same, leading to huge drops in the standard of living for unskilled workers. Hence Brexit.
Brexit and Corbynism are two cheeks of the same arse, the latter of which I'll admit has come home to bite PB tories on the bum. But I still believe that the EU has impoverished the poorest in our society and remainers like yourself are still the "I'm alright jack" contingent, blind to how opening our borders has meant a race to the bottom in terms of wages and living conditions for the worst off in our society. You are yet to offer a better solution than the status quo, which benefits you - but not the majority.
Brexit and Corbynism are not the same cheeks of the same arse, Corbynism is the result of rebellion and the retaking of the soul of the Labour Party from the Blairittes and the right-wing of nu-labour. Brexit is more the rebellion of many who felt they were being ignored and overlooked by the professional ppe's and SPADS of our political system. Just wait until the Tory membership decide that they have had enough...
Corbynism is the result of a ton of university educated middle class people not getting guaranteed jobs or the ability to buy homes with whatever jobs they can get. Trades unionists in Durham were always going to vote Labour, Corbynism thrives amongst the middle classes who expeceted a certain standard of life who didn't get it.
I dont think that is true, but even if it were, why are WWC warehousemen entitled to be aggrieved by poor career opportunities and inability to afford housing, and Corbynist graduates in the same position not entitled to the same sympathy and voice?
Any remain/rejoin vote needs to explain how the poorest and most marginalised members of society will benefit from it.
Still waiting.
That argument comes down to “I really hate the EU so no matter how damaging it might be I’m willing to ignore the numerous small incremental benefits it offered so that I can continue my irrational hatred.” I get that you hate the EU. Arguing that leaving it has anything to do with the plight of the poor is just a veneer to legitimise your irrational hatred.
Except for the fact that poor people disproportionately voted against it. Perhaps leaving the EU isn't the best mechanism to lift them out of povery, but you can't deny that they were suffering while the EU that you love so much looked on and looked idle. So either the EU is to blame or the EU is powerless to change things, either way it's not much of an argument for the star spangled blue thing.
Brexit and Corbynism are two cheeks of the same arse, the latter of which I'll admit has come home to bite PB tories on the bum. But I still believe that the EU has impoverished the poorest in our society and remainers like yourself are still the "I'm alright jack" contingent, blind to how opening our borders has meant a race to the bottom in terms of wages and living conditions for the worst off in our society. You are yet to offer a better solution than the status quo, which benefits you - but not the majority.
Brexit and Corbynism are not the same cheeks of the same arse, Corbynism is the result of rebellion and the retaking of the soul of the Labour Party from the Blairittes and the right-wing of nu-labour. Brexit is more the rebellion of many who felt they were being ignored and overlooked by the professional ppe's and SPADS of our political system. Just wait until the Tory membership decide that they have had enough...
Corbynism is the result of a ton of university educated middle class people not getting guaranteed jobs or the ability to buy homes with whatever jobs they can get. Trades unionists in Durham were always going to vote Labour, Corbynism thrives amongst the middle classes who expeceted a certain standard of life who didn't get it.
Very true. The subject of a recent edition of In Our Time with Melvyn Bragg was Bernard Mandeville, and one of the things he said in about 1820 was that it's not a good idea to produce a class of people who anticipate a certain standard of living unless the types of jobs they are expecting to do are actually available.
Any remain/rejoin vote needs to explain how the poorest and most marginalised members of society will benefit from it.
Still waiting.
That argument comes down to “I really hate the EU so no matter how damaging it might be I’m willing to ignore the numerous small incremental benefits it offered so that I can continue my irrational hatred.” I get that you hate the EU. Arguing that leaving it has anything to do with the plight of the poor is just a veneer to legitimise your irrational hatred.
Except for the fact thing.
Freedom of movement impoverished the most marginal members of our society, those at the bitter end - because they were suddenly exposed to competition from people who could send their pound home where it gave them a life, rather than a mere existence which is what it is worth here. In terms of labour, supply massively increased while demand remained broadly the same, leading to huge drops in the standard of living for unskilled workers. Hence Brexit.
Brexit and Corbynism are two cheeks of the same arse, the latter of which I'll admit has come home to bite PB tories on the bum. But I still believe that the EU has impoverished the poorest in our society and remainers like yourself are still the "I'm alright jack" contingent, blind to how opening our borders has meant a race to the bottom in terms of wages and living conditions for the worst off in our society. You are yet to offer a better solution than the status quo, which benefits you - but not the majority.
Brexit and Corbynism are not the same cheeks of the same arse, Corbynism is the result of rebellion and the retaking of the soul of the Labour Party from the Blairittes and the right-wing of nu-labour. Brexit is more the rebellion of many who felt they were being ignored and overlooked by the professional ppe's and SPADS of our political system. Just wait until the Tory membership decide that they have had enough...
Corbynism is the result of a ton of university educated middle class people not getting guaranteed jobs or the ability to buy homes with whatever jobs they can get. Trades unionists in Durham were always going to vote Labour, Corbynism thrives amongst the middle classes who expeceted a certain standard of life who didn't get it.
I dont think that is true, but even if it were, why are WWC warehousemen entitled to be aggrieved by poor career opportunities and inability to afford housing, and Corbynist graduates in the same position not entitled to the same sympathy and voice?
Because being a graduate doesn't automatically entitle you to a high standard of living.
I suppose the first world war is slipping far enough into history now that it becomes more acceptable to see things like this that might have been thought distasteful when there were still people alive who experienced the trenches first hand.
It brings to mind things like the civil war re-enactors and similar.
It is bizarre.
Mind you, some of the other poppy stuff is worse, such as the poppy christmas tree:
Poppyism has, regrettably, become a thing. Quiet reflection sacrificed on the altar of ostentatious subscription.
The trend is now that you have to be seen to be mourning/paying respect. This is a bit of a personal bugbear for me. Witnessing the fire crews who went to the Leicester City helicopter crash standing to attention, heads bowed at the scene, days later really stuck in my craw. We don't do that for Joe Public when they get killed in equally tragic circumstances. Maybe I'm just a miserable bastard, but it really irritates me.
I dropped by the King Power the other day. I am not normally a fan of the pop up shrines at the scenes of tragic sudden deaths, but this one got to me. Sure, I have had a few bits of generosity from Vichai, and the best football season of my life, but it really was quite moving seeing the young and old, the rich and the poor, the rough and the posh, all honouring the man.
It was clearly a shocking tragedy for him and the others on the helicopter, and for their families and friends. I can also see he was very much at the 'good' end of the scale of club owners.
But really, this does seem ott to me. "May your greatness live on..." ??
It was in the small things that we saw his greatness. He would put whisky and glassesout each mach in the garden of remembrance before matches, and following the Hinckley rd explosion supported the only survivor of the dead family, and many other unpublicised kindnesses. No doubt he was a rather ruthless businessman, but he was more than that.
Comments
But then, I wish Aurelian had never been assassinated.
What's wrong with Tony Blair?
May excluded all opinions on how to proceed, apart from the upper echelons of the Tories.
She owns the process, and by excluding others has allowed them to lob brickbats at her version.
A multi-party committee including all devolved nations would have been better, even though thrashing out a common position clearly not easy, before A50 was served.
She chose not to do so. She owns Brexit. It will be her poisonous legacy, though I still expect it to go with a whimper rather than a bang.
Mind you, some of the other poppy stuff is worse, such as the poppy christmas tree:
https://twitter.com/BBCEngland/status/1055454956415868928?s=19
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/sick-and-tired-of-trump-heres-what-to-do/2018/10/31/72d9021e-dd26-11e8-b3f0-62607289efee_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.ef0c62e3a66a
I have just seen this earlier unpleasant intervention from TSE.
Perhaps the moderators should consider this
https://tinyurl.com/y9vd2ze4
I'd suggest that the moderators remove the post.
I was triggered by all the racist abuse from the Welsh rugby fans.
Plus you're confused, too much alcohol in your system?
Because you say you've only just seen this intervention.
You saw it a few hours ago, and replied to it, a few hours ago.
Nonetheless, May did not even attempt it. She chose to make it a partisan issue, and even called an election so that she could ram through her own version of Brexit. Having made it partisan she cannot cry partisan at others.
If they fail, Trump has ownership of everything and if it goes wrong, noone to blame but himself to blame if it goes wrong, and with the clock ticking on a recession there's got to be a good chance of that happening.
It may not come across by reading the UK press or the NYT/WP, but one of Trump's biggest assets is the Dems - they're a mess. A resounding failure may lead them to sort themselves out and coalesce around a sensible candidate - and if they do, Trump should be very beatable.
If the Dems take the house, pile in on Trump in 2020 - if the Reps hold on, bet the other way.
If they had failed to engage then May could have gone over their heads directly to the people, by following Ireland's example with the abortion referendum and convening a citizens' assembly.
She did neither. She was not interested in forging a national consensus. She attempted to use the situation for party advantage, was inept and we stymied by the voters. But even then she did not listen and change course. She acted as though she had a landslide majority when she did not. It's a massive failure of her making.
My view hasn't changed. UK democracy is functioning well. There's plenty of opposition to Brexit, including the recent large march in London; various elements of the process have been tested in the courts and the Lords are holding the government's feet to the fire. I'm genuinely puzzled that the Lib Dems aren't doing better in the polls, but as I'm a political anorak I probably mix in the wrong circles.
Only a fool would argue that the negotiations have gone well, and the leading Brexiteers have all fallen on their faces. However, barring an Act of God, the UK will exit on March 29th, and the ardent EUrophiles will have to turn their attention to article 49. Then we'll see whether the Rejoin manifesto is electorally attractive.
The reality of Leaving being a terrible mistake might just swing it on its own.
A decade of Brexit induced economic ruin might do the trick.
Racist "banter" is unpleasant.
If you suffered abuse from Welsh rugby fans, than I sympathise.
You should have made a complaint at the time to the relevant authorities & you would have received my full support.
Racist banter is not funny, it is racism. It is not funny to talk of "Jocks" and Sheepshaggers": and "Micks".
I am making a request to the moderators to remove the post.
You could also delete the post yourself.
https://politicalbetting.vanillacommunity.com/discussion/comment/2074387/#Comment_2074387
But, it hardly matters. It is still a racist post.
Please remove it.
I sympathise if you have been the victim of racist abuse from Welsh rugby fans. But that doesn't excuse your post.
I'm not sure why failure would lead them to coalesce around a good candidate more than success would. I see no indication that they even really understand why Clinton was a bad candidate, so I'm not sure what the process is by which they have this revelation. Whatever the result, the different wings of the party will spin it to back up their preferred type of candidate.
Just look at the Leavers who welcome WTO Brexit.
https://twitter.com/yashar/status/1058435760389378048
I agree though with the second paragraph, Blind Brexit is the destination, so that once that rubicon is crossed it is not easy to return, no matter how crap the deal.
For many people, the last decade - or more - *has* been economic ruin. The hollowing out of town centres. Year after year of below inflation pay rises. Zero hours contracts. Not being able to get a doctor's appointment this side of next month. That b*stard somehow getting on the property ladder because he's got rich parents while you're living hand to mouth with no chance of ever saving the twenty or so grand (outside of London) you need for a deposit.
I have said it before but it bears re-stating, a vote for remain (or rejoin) is a vote for the status quo. What we need are radical solutions to fix the fact that, for a long time, society clearly hasn't been working for everyone. Brexit is a radical solution, in a sense, although in reality it is more of a protest vote. Corbynism is another solution, although I feel it is the wrong one.
Remaining in (or rejoining) the EU isn't a solution, it is a vote for I'm alright jack.
It isn't clear at all that Brexit will help, and indeed it is very likely that the differences will be exacerbated.
https://twitter.com/JamesMelville/status/1032926581910589440?s=19
"A drama or literary work in which the main character is brought to ruin or suffers extreme sorrow, especially as a consequence of a tragic flaw, moral weakness, or inability to cope with unfavorable circumstances."
Still waiting.
In the meantime, Corbynism, then Auf Weidersehen Pet.
They just need to make shit up. It worked for Leave.
Removing a gangrenous leg would mean difficulty walking out of the wood, cutting off a gangrenous arm may well be a challenge one handed. Either is likely to lead to rapid death from exsanguination or infection.
But that's probably the limit of the metaphor!
For many people, the last decade - or more - *has* been economic ruin. The hollowing out of town centres. Year after year of below inflation pay rises. Zero hours contracts. Not being able to get a doctor's appointment this side of next month. That b*stard somehow getting on the property ladder because he's got rich parents while you're living hand to mouth with no chance of ever saving the twenty or so grand (outside of London) you need for a deposit.
I have said it before but it bears re-stating, a vote for remain (or rejoin) is a vote for the status quo. What we need are radical solutions to fix the fact that, for a long time, society clearly hasn't been working for everyone. Brexit is a radical solution, in a sense, although in reality it is more of a protest vote. Corbynism is another solution, although I feel it is the wrong one.
Remaining in (or rejoining) the EU isn't a solution, it is a vote for I'm alright jack.
I think you make some good points here. Not sure about the conclusion though.
I'd suggest that there are some positive aspect from Brexit that might help
- Brexit breaks the mould, and might engender some new thinking.
- Getting out of the EU takes away some of the big EU risks
I do agree that radical solutions are needed. The difficulty is that almost every radical solution involves substantial changes to what the state gives out - benefits, health, pensions etc. In the long-term the current arrangements are doomed, but such a huge part of the electorate is dependent on these arrangements that their self-interest will outweigh rational solutions.
It starts much deeper though. We give Mr Miggins money because in some sense he deserves it. Some sort of a human right to whatever. It's a somewhat weird spin-off from religion, but enhanced to cost us the earth. I'm sure noone has intrinsic rights. They particularly don't have an intrinsic right to a lawyer. (Imagine if it was an intrinsic right to a coffee shop)
Edit: sorry i messed up the blockquote stuff here - please refer to originals backthread
If you're a working guy in a warehouse or driving a van or in a factory, you need the £7-10 an hour to buy you a bare-minimum life in the UK, a decent enough house to live in, some clothes for the baby, a couple of pints on the weekend... who knows.
Everything changed when the EU enlarged and a huge number of people realised that while £7-10 quid went nowhere over here, in terms of a decent life, you could send that back to Poland or wherever. A reverse auf wiedersehen pet, if you like. Suddenly you had people competing for jobs who were very happy for £7 an hour because it bought them a decent family life back home while you were f***ing f***cked son.
The EU enlargement was probably a net gain for all economies concerned, but it certainly wasn't for all people. Hence Brexit.
http://hurryupharry.org/2018/11/02/labour-blog-publishes-half-of-hitlers-manifesto/
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2018/house/2018_elections_house_map.html
Edging closer to the inevitable Brexit fudge?...
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/nov/02/uk-and-ireland-signal-irish-border-brexit-deal-could-be-agreed-soon
As long as they don't start persecuting Jews it's all good, oh wait a minute.................
Just 1% of the population think Brexit is doing very well, yet very few leavers make the logical inference that Brexit is a bad idea in itself. It is easy to throw "cognitive dissonance" at people as an insult, but when it applies to half the population, it's probably not a useful label.
https://twitter.com/BBCSport/status/1058308133024604160?s=19
Other characteristics include a common language or geographical origin. A more recent case from 2001 confirmed that the Scots and the English are separate racial groups, defined by reference to their national origins.
Therefore, under the UK’s main anti-discrimination legislation, the Welsh people qualify as a distinct racial group (as well as the Scots and the English and the Irish. for that matter).
In any case, let's take a look at the kind of characters who indulges in anti-welsh "banter" about sheep shaggers and funny language.
Piers Morgan, Anne Robinson, Jeremy Clarkson, AA Gill, Rod Liddle, Eddie Jones and TSE.
I rest my case.
Who would really want to add their name to that list?
But, it doesn't entitle you to vent anti Welsh prejudice on a blog and make racist remarks about ram shaggers.
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10334691
The advert is surely lacking in taste, but it is not racist.
As far as I am concerned Welsh people are equal to English people in every regard, and you're far better in many others. There is an exception though - you are rubbish at rugby.
I would like to be in a society where every race. colour, creed, sex, or rugby-playing talent could hold their heads up high and just feel robust in themselves. I think we're getting closer, but we're far from there yet.
I was mistaken for English.
Freedom of movement impoverished the most marginal members of our society, those at the bitter end - because they were suddenly exposed to competition from people who could send their pound home where it gave them a life, rather than a mere existence which is what it is worth here. In terms of labour, supply massively increased while demand remained broadly the same, leading to huge drops in the standard of living for unskilled workers. Hence Brexit.
Brexit and Corbynism are two cheeks of the same arse, the latter of which I'll admit has come home to bite PB tories on the bum. But I still believe that the EU has impoverished the poorest in our society and remainers like yourself are still the "I'm alright jack" contingent, blind to how opening our borders has meant a race to the bottom in terms of wages and living conditions for the worst off in our society. You are yet to offer a better solution than the status quo, which benefits you - but not the majority.
Brexit was won because of them. If you want to cancel it, what will you do to make their lives better?
However I think the Democrats are almost certain to take the House on Tuesday even if the GOP hold the Senate
No Deal however sees over 5% of GDP lost in all regions bar London (which still loses 3.5%) and 4 regions losing over 10% of GDP with a FTA in between
Will be at the Leicester game. Doubt that we will hear that chant tomorrow for a change.
Are countries now accepting that Trump can decide who can trade with Iran?
If so does that include the UK?
The picturesque Magdalen Bridge with its adjoining deer park is 85 miles west of the punt touters on Magdalene Bridge.
"There's a difference between Spurs fans self-describing themselves as Yids and someone calling someone a Yid as an insult,"
https://twitter.com/foxinsoxuk/status/1057985362805559297?s=19
It was clearly a shocking tragedy for him and the others on the helicopter, and for their families and friends. I can also see he was very much at the 'good' end of the scale of club owners.
But really, this does seem ott to me. "May your greatness live on..." ??
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0000t3y
https://twitter.com/TheNewsGlobe/status/1056970210513743873?s=19