This looks worrying for Number 10 and the Tories – politicalbetting.com

Leon said:

Nigelb said:

Leon said:

Scott_xP said:

Brexit is a shitshow.

You were warned, and voted for it anyway.

And here we are.

A generation to undo the damage caused by the selfish few.

52%

Hardly “the few”

53%, actually.
Versus the 33% who still think it a good idea.

I'll put you down as one of the don't knows.

I agree. These numbers are starkly in favour of Shit, Brexit is crap, let’s go back.

I personally know several Brexit voters who regret their vote

I suspect a lot of if it just because Brexit unfortunately collided with a plague and then a massive war so it’s all turned out worse, and felt worse, than it might have done otherwise, nonetheless the numbers are the numbers and there SHOULD be a serious party campaigning for a new referendum and Rejoin, in the next GE, as it is clearly the wish of millions of people

I can’t for the life of me understand why the Lib Dems aren’t seizing this position and making it their territory. What is the point of them otherwise?

I get why Starmer can’t quite be so courageous but if Labour at some point take up this stance then good luck to them

We Brexited, democratically, and if the British people decide to reverse that in another vote, so be it. Fair enough. That’s what makes us different from the EU (and to my mind democratically superior) - WE DO NOT IGNORE OR OVERRULE REFERENDUMS

Leon said:

WhisperingOracle said:

Leon said:

Pulpstar said:

Leon said:

williamglenn said:

TOPPING said:

Leon said:

The big difference between Leavers and Remainers is that Leavers are stupid and Remainers are just as stupid - see @TOPPING et al - but Remainers are haughtily convinced they are much cleverer. This, in a weird way, makes Remainers even stupider - in practise - than Leavers, who are genuinely stupid

Once you understand that, the entire farcical madness of Brexit is explicable, right down to the daily debates on here, still ongoing

Leavers or remainers may or may not be stupid.

People who don't understand that it is perfectly democratic to ask the people about a decision that you previously asked them, nor that parliaments cannot bind successive parliaments, nor that parliament is sovereign are, however, very, very stupid indeed.

You can't step into the same river twice.

2016 was a one-off fork in the road. We can't go back and change our minds, and the previous status quo isn't on offer anyway.

Any new attempt to join the EU needs to start with a party winning an election with a commitment to negotiate accession and everything that comes with it. It doesn't start with rerunning the 2016 vote.

The absolute madness of the Euroref 2nd voters can be revealed if you simply game out what would have happened if, say, the Scots had voted YES in 2014 then a bunch of YOON politicians had said Nah, that’s a stupid decision, we’re gonna make Scotland vote again, without even enacting independence in the first place

A small but significant number of Nats would have realised that British/Scottish democracy was a sham, and could never deliver Indy, and they would have turned to violence. Scotland would have become Ireland in 1916-1920

Would the Brits have done the same if the Brexit vote had been overruled and a 2nd vote ordered, without us Brexiting? Probably, possibly, who knows - remember there was violence before the first Brexit vote: an MP was killed

Even if civil strife had been averted, millions of Leave voters would have boycotted the 2nd vote, correctly assuming that the whole thing was a fix, and their will would never be honoured, and democracy was a lie, and what’s the fucking point. Turnout in future elections would have plunged. Basically it would have shattered British democracy for a generation, maybe forever. Utter utter madness

That’s what I mean when I say hardcore Remainers weren’t just stupid, like Leavers, they were dangerously stupid because they thought their ludicrous shenanigans were “clever”

The madness was attempting to have a second vote before the first was implemented.

A second vote is entirely possible now to my mind, precisely because we've left.

The hardcore remainer scenario was the equivalent of say Corbyn winning the GE and then proceeding to have a 'confirmatory vote' before he ever stepped into office.
The equivalent now would be to have a vote after say 4 or 5 years of him having been in office (Say he'd won GE19) which of course is completely democratic.

The key for me is that Brexit has happened as an event. Which makes a vote to rejoin now perfectly democratic. A vote prior to leaving properly (Which was 31st January 2020) would have been unconscionable.

Political reality is it's not going to happen for a while now, but democratically anything after 31st Jan 2020 to rejoin is/was fine.

Yes, of course

We have now brexited. The vote is honoured. British democracy works. It sticks to promises made by the prime minister, no less. Your Vote Will Count. This Is It. So it is still worth voting in future elections and referendums because it makes a difference. it matters. YOU, the voter, YOU MATTER

Now we’ve done that, Remainers/Rejoiners are free to start campaigning for an immediate 2nd referendum to go straight back in. Heck, if they are persuasive enough, I might even vote for them

But we HAD to honour the first vote. Anything else was insane self harm and would have sent us to a terrible place

We've had this discussion so many times, however. It's much less simple than this because many people would argue the first vote was not honoured. A large number of leavers believed they were voting for a reasonably close economic and trading relationship.

No, we voted on what we were offered. Leave or Remain, with no details. Neither side wanted details because Remain would have had to spell out exactly how we avoided further integration and Leave would have split between Hard Brexiteers and EFTA types


The whole referendum was a shoddy mess for which Cameron must take much of the blame, He did his shitty non-renegotiation, he decided to call the referendum in the slapdash way he did, he decided there would be no 2nd referendum of what kind of Brecit we wanted if it was Leave, and so on and so forth. The essay crisis prime minister produced a D grade essay. That will be Cameron’s terrible epitaph, he totally fucked up the one big job he had

But we could only vote on what the government offered us. Leave or Remain. And thus we voted

Any future government is now free to finesse the deal, of course, and I imagine that will be possible. The EU has it seems finally moved on from its Brexit Britain Must Be Punished attitude (which was understandable from an EU point of view, albeit spiteful and vindictive)

kinabalu said:

williamglenn said:

kinabalu said:

williamglenn said:

TOPPING said:

Leon said:

The big difference between Leavers and Remainers is that Leavers are stupid and Remainers are just as stupid - see @TOPPING et al - but Remainers are haughtily convinced they are much cleverer. This, in a weird way, makes Remainers even stupider - in practise - than Leavers, who are genuinely stupid

Once you understand that, the entire farcical madness of Brexit is explicable, right down to the daily debates on here, still ongoing

Leavers or remainers may or may not be stupid.

People who don't understand that it is perfectly democratic to ask the people about a decision that you previously asked them, nor that parliaments cannot bind successive parliaments, nor that parliament is sovereign are, however, very, very stupid indeed.

You can't step into the same river twice.

2016 was a one-off fork in the road. We can't go back and change our minds, and the previous status quo isn't on offer anyway.

Any new attempt to join the EU needs to start with a party winning an election with a commitment to negotiate accession and everything that comes with it. It doesn't start with rerunning the 2016 vote.

Another Referendum is all it takes.

"Should the United Kingdom remain in no man's land or leave to join every other European country in the European Union?

Tick one box only:

Leave
Remain

The government will implement whatever the majority decide."

You sound like the people who were eagerly waiting for Nicola Sturgeon to give them another referendum on Scottish independence and thought that's all it would take.

I'm saying there's no need to overthink it. Party wins a GE promising an In/Out referendum. Same as last time. The only difference is it's the insurgent IN that triggers the EU negotiation process rather than the status quo of OUT. Instead of an exit deal the mandate is to agree an entry deal. This will happen in the medium term and IN will win comfortably as the country collectively screws its head back on.

MoonRabbit said:

Anabobazina said:

The next step for the Conservative Party is now clear.

A renaissance, if you will, nears.

A woman, a queen, a lady awaits the call.

The high priestess of all that is right, fair and true.

Step forward Mary Elizabeth Truss.

Mother. Monarch. Mistress.

You were were wise before your time.

But now your time has come.

T



R



U



S



S

Stop that. 😠 You know you will end up in the spam bin again.

I’m beginning to think you can’t help yourself.

Scott_xP said:

williamglenn said:

Thank you for illustrating my point.

Your point being that Remainers "Project Fear" said we be out of the single market, and Leavers said we would not.

Leavers lied.

Good point.

williamglenn said:

You're not making any attempt to engage with reality.

RochdalePioneers said:

If we get those, it is worth the change. What we do after that is likely too difficult to achieve without some kind of national crisis where we all have a "where do we go from here" conversation. Covid could have been that, but we had Boris in government.

bigjohnowls said:

Driver said:

Benpointer said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Benpointer said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Majority Union vote for pay deal

All bar 2 of 14 unions vote for it

Er, which of the many pay disputes is that Big_G?

Really

The NHS dispute and the government have just confirmed it will now implement the deal

Unison have just said the lump sums will be in the June pay packets

So HMG are imposing a real-terms pay cut of 5% on those lauded NHS workers?

They're giving them a pay rise of 5% more than many in the private sector have had.

Driver said:

Benpointer said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Benpointer said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Majority Union vote for pay deal

All bar 2 of 14 unions vote for it

Er, which of the many pay disputes is that Big_G?

Really

The NHS dispute and the government have just confirmed it will now implement the deal

Unison have just said the lump sums will be in the June pay packets

So HMG are imposing a real-terms pay cut of 5% on those lauded NHS workers?

They're giving them a pay rise of 5% more than many in the private sector have had.

Although of course private Sector Pay has risen much more than Public Sector Pay since 2010.

Also its not a race to the bottom

Also as a Tory you should surely understand supply and demand and the Market

Vacancies at all time high, is the market working!!

williamglenn said:

Scott_xP said:

williamglenn said:

has been mythologised as *nobody* saying that we would leave the single market, even though both Leave and Remain campaigns were clear before the referendum that this is what would happen.

It's not mythology, it's cold, hard fact

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/open-britain-video-single-market-nigel-farage-anna-soubry_uk_582ce0a0e4b09025ba310fce

Thank you for illustrating my point.

Michael Gove says leaving EU would mean quitting single market
- https://www.ft.com/content/0c5c74bc-151e-11e6-b197-a4af20d5575e

Cameron: ‘I’ll pull UK out of the single market after Brexit’
- https://www.politico.eu/article/david-cameron-bbc-andrew-marr-ill-pull-uk-out-of-the-single-market-after-brexit-eu-referendum-vote-june-23-consequences-news/

turbotubbs said:

Vanilla again...

RochdalePioneers said:

pigeon said:

RochdalePioneers said:

bigjohnowls said:

https://twitter.com/TheProleStar/status/1653385787398815744

Meh. And?

It's a fair point. Largesse for students is just one more policy that can be added to the lengthy list of things that supposedly cannot be afforded because of the state of the public finances, those "difficult choices" that "have to be made" whilst rich old farts' triple locked pensions are maintained and their vast property wealth goes almost entirely untaxed.

All decisions like this do is confirm that you couldn't put a cigarette paper between the Tories and Labour. They're both bunches of third rate office seeking troughers who are only very distantly acquainted with the truth, and the main aims of both are to sit in ministerial offices and collect fat salaries for doing nothing of any value, whilst defending existing privilege.

The Shadow Cabinet is going to have to do better than endlessly shitting all over its own supporters if it wants to construct a stable electoral coalition. If I were a student who had been flirting with supporting that shower, I'd be sorely tempted to extend the middle finger in the general direction of Keir Starmer and either abstain or lodge a protest with the Greens.

There are some *massive* structural problems in this country. And if you propose a policy platform to (from your perspective) fix them, you either get laughed off stage (Corbyn) or booted out (Truss).

Our political system no longer allows for divergence from our managed national decline. So of course there is an ever-narrowing gap between the parties. My minimal expectations for the incoming Labour government is to treat people with basic human dignity and not be a cesspool of incompetent corruption.

If we get those, it is worth the change. What we do after that is likely too difficult to achieve without some kind of national crisis where we all have a "where do we go from here" conversation. Covid could have been that, but we had Boris in government.

Roger said:

Leon said:

Anabobazina said:

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

WhisperingOracle said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

I suppose these results with change once Starmer experiences the terrible backlash over hiring Sue Gray.

TheScreamingEagles said:

I suppose these results with change once Starmer experiences the terrible backlash over hiring Sue Gray.

There's little else that people are talking about. In drivetime phone-ins in Lothian, bowling clubs in surrey, and all-night kebab shops in Islington, my first-hand experience is that people are furious.

It's going to change everything, for Sunak.

I've had exactly the same personal experience recently in the youth clubs of Builth Wells, the sushi bars of West Byfleet, and the veterinary surgeons' waiting rooms of Largs. Something is in the air.

The taverns of north London, the houseboats on the banks of the Lea, even the wilds of Epping Forest, are thick with murmur.

Graygate hangs over Starmer like a shroud. If Currygate was the squall, Graygate is the storm.

I’m sipping a martini in a wine bar on soi 8, Sukhumvit and there’s a table of Brits next to me who’ve stopped watching the Liverpool game so - no joke - they can discuss “Greygate”

One guy just said he’s flying home two weeks early to vote Tory when he’s normally Plaid Cymru, just because of Greygate. Another guy said Yeah Starmer’s Ok but Sunak looks so HEALTHY

Bet accordingly

It really makes you want to be there.

Like the tax office in Hartlepool

williamglenn said:

I agree that they tried to be constructively ambiguous about what Leave would mean, but when forced to take a position, they did commit to leaving the single market.

Sean_F said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:

Leon said:

Scott_xP said:

Brexit is a shitshow.

You were warned, and voted for it anyway.

And here we are.

A generation to undo the damage caused by the selfish few.

52%

Hardly “the few”

53%, actually.
Versus the 33% who still think it a good idea.

I'll put you down as one of the don't knows.

I agree. These numbers are starkly in favour of Shit, Brexit is crap, let’s go back.

I personally know several Brexit voters who regret their vote

I suspect a lot of if it just because Brexit unfortunately collided with a plague and then a massive war so it’s all turned out worse, and felt worse, than it might have done otherwise, nonetheless the numbers are the numbers and there SHOULD be a serious party campaigning for a new referendum and Rejoin, in the next GE, as it is clearly the wish of millions of people

I can’t for the life of me understand why the Lib Dems aren’t seizing this position and making it their territory. What is the point of them otherwise?

I get why Starmer can’t quite be so courageous but if Labour at some point take up this stance then good luck to them

We Brexited, democratically, and if the British people decide to reverse that in another vote, so be it. Fair enough. That’s what makes us different from the EU (and to my mind democratically superior) - WE DO NOT IGNORE OR OVERRULE REFERENDUMS

It doesn't matter now. It's not in the gift of any British government to reverse Brexit. Why would Starmer, or any other PM, wish to spend years negotiating terms of accession with the EU, when a referendum on rejoining might well be lost, and when the EU wouldn't want a lukewarm member anyway?

The moving hand hath writ.

williamglenn said:

Leon said:

williamglenn said:

Scott_xP said:

williamglenn said:

has been mythologised as *nobody* saying that we would leave the single market, even though both Leave and Remain campaigns were clear before the referendum that this is what would happen.

It's not mythology, it's cold, hard fact

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/open-britain-video-single-market-nigel-farage-anna-soubry_uk_582ce0a0e4b09025ba310fce

Thank you for illustrating my point.

Michael Gove says leaving EU would mean quitting single market
- https://www.ft.com/content/0c5c74bc-151e-11e6-b197-a4af20d5575e

Cameron: ‘I’ll pull UK out of the single market after Brexit’
- https://www.politico.eu/article/david-cameron-bbc-andrew-marr-ill-pull-uk-out-of-the-single-market-after-brexit-eu-referendum-vote-june-23-consequences-news/

Cameron knew he would have to resign, immediately, if he lost the Brexit vote (tho he denied it for obvious reasons) so I don’t think his stupid opinion counts for much, as to what he would have done “after Brexit”

Senior Brexiteers like Hannah DID say we would stay in the Single Market. I can’t remember Boris’s position, I imagine it was constructively ambiguous

On this point we disagree. Leavers knew that the vaguer they were, the more votes they would get

I agree that they tried to be constructively ambiguous about what Leave would mean, but when forced to take a position, they did commit to leaving the single market.

My point is more about the subsequent rewriting of history by people who seem to think the question was never addressed before the referendum at all, and see it as the result of some kind of 'coup' after the fact.

rcs1000 said:

williamglenn said:

Leon said:

williamglenn said:

Scott_xP said:

williamglenn said:

has been mythologised as *nobody* saying that we would leave the single market, even though both Leave and Remain campaigns were clear before the referendum that this is what would happen.

It's not mythology, it's cold, hard fact

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/open-britain-video-single-market-nigel-farage-anna-soubry_uk_582ce0a0e4b09025ba310fce

Thank you for illustrating my point.

Michael Gove says leaving EU would mean quitting single market
- https://www.ft.com/content/0c5c74bc-151e-11e6-b197-a4af20d5575e

Cameron: ‘I’ll pull UK out of the single market after Brexit’
- https://www.politico.eu/article/david-cameron-bbc-andrew-marr-ill-pull-uk-out-of-the-single-market-after-brexit-eu-referendum-vote-june-23-consequences-news/

Cameron knew he would have to resign, immediately, if he lost the Brexit vote (tho he denied it for obvious reasons) so I don’t think his stupid opinion counts for much, as to what he would have done “after Brexit”

Senior Brexiteers like Hannah DID say we would stay in the Single Market. I can’t remember Boris’s position, I imagine it was constructively ambiguous

On this point we disagree. Leavers knew that the vaguer they were, the more votes they would get

I agree that they tried to be constructively ambiguous about what Leave would mean, but when forced to take a position, they did commit to leaving the single market.

My point is more about the subsequent rewriting of history by people who seem to think the question was never addressed before the referendum at all, and see it as the result of some kind of 'coup' after the fact.

"There is a free trade area from the Baltic to the Atlantic, and the UK will be a member of it."

I believe those were the exact words in the Brexit leaflet.

Creatively ambiguous would be generous.

rcs1000 said:

williamglenn said:

Leon said:

williamglenn said:

Scott_xP said:

williamglenn said:

has been mythologised as *nobody* saying that we would leave the single market, even though both Leave and Remain campaigns were clear before the referendum that this is what would happen.

It's not mythology, it's cold, hard fact

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/open-britain-video-single-market-nigel-farage-anna-soubry_uk_582ce0a0e4b09025ba310fce

Thank you for illustrating my point.

Michael Gove says leaving EU would mean quitting single market
- https://www.ft.com/content/0c5c74bc-151e-11e6-b197-a4af20d5575e

Cameron: ‘I’ll pull UK out of the single market after Brexit’
- https://www.politico.eu/article/david-cameron-bbc-andrew-marr-ill-pull-uk-out-of-the-single-market-after-brexit-eu-referendum-vote-june-23-consequences-news/

Cameron knew he would have to resign, immediately, if he lost the Brexit vote (tho he denied it for obvious reasons) so I don’t think his stupid opinion counts for much, as to what he would have done “after Brexit”

Senior Brexiteers like Hannah DID say we would stay in the Single Market. I can’t remember Boris’s position, I imagine it was constructively ambiguous

On this point we disagree. Leavers knew that the vaguer they were, the more votes they would get

I agree that they tried to be constructively ambiguous about what Leave would mean, but when forced to take a position, they did commit to leaving the single market.

My point is more about the subsequent rewriting of history by people who seem to think the question was never addressed before the referendum at all, and see it as the result of some kind of 'coup' after the fact.

"There is a free trade area from the Baltic to the Atlantic, and the UK will be a member of it."

I believe those were the exact words in the Brexit leaflet.

Creatively ambiguous would be generous.

Anabobazina said:

MoonRabbit said:

Anabobazina said:

The next step for the Conservative Party is now clear.

A renaissance, if you will, nears.

A woman, a queen, a lady awaits the call.

The high priestess of all that is right, fair and true.

Step forward Mary Elizabeth Truss.

Mother. Monarch. Mistress.

You were were wise before your time.

But now your time has come.

T



R



U



S



S

Stop that. 😠 You know you will end up in the spam bin again.

I’m beginning to think you can’t help yourself.

Step forward.

Roger said:

Leon said:

Anabobazina said:

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

WhisperingOracle said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

I suppose these results with change once Starmer experiences the terrible backlash over hiring Sue Gray.

TheScreamingEagles said:

I suppose these results with change once Starmer experiences the terrible backlash over hiring Sue Gray.

There's little else that people are talking about. In drivetime phone-ins in Lothian, bowling clubs in surrey, and all-night kebab shops in Islington, my first-hand experience is that people are furious.

It's going to change everything, for Sunak.

I've had exactly the same personal experience recently in the youth clubs of Builth Wells, the sushi bars of West Byfleet, and the veterinary surgeons' waiting rooms of Largs. Something is in the air.

The taverns of north London, the houseboats on the banks of the Lea, even the wilds of Epping Forest, are thick with murmur.

Graygate hangs over Starmer like a shroud. If Currygate was the squall, Graygate is the storm.

I’m sipping a martini in a wine bar on soi 8, Sukhumvit and there’s a table of Brits next to me who’ve stopped watching the Liverpool game so - no joke - they can discuss “Greygate”

One guy just said he’s flying home two weeks early to vote Tory when he’s normally Plaid Cymru, just because of Greygate. Another guy said Yeah Starmer’s Ok but Sunak looks so HEALTHY

Bet accordingly

It really makes you want to be there.

Like the tax office in Hartlepool

Scott_xP said:

williamglenn said:

I agree that they tried to be constructively ambiguous about what Leave would mean, but when forced to take a position, they did commit to leaving the single market.

No, they didn't.

They did the opposite in fact

Roger said:

Leon said:

Anabobazina said:

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

WhisperingOracle said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

I suppose these results with change once Starmer experiences the terrible backlash over hiring Sue Gray.

TheScreamingEagles said:

I suppose these results with change once Starmer experiences the terrible backlash over hiring Sue Gray.

There's little else that people are talking about. In drivetime phone-ins in Lothian, bowling clubs in surrey, and all-night kebab shops in Islington, my first-hand experience is that people are furious.

It's going to change everything, for Sunak.

I've had exactly the same personal experience recently in the youth clubs of Builth Wells, the sushi bars of West Byfleet, and the veterinary surgeons' waiting rooms of Largs. Something is in the air.

The taverns of north London, the houseboats on the banks of the Lea, even the wilds of Epping Forest, are thick with murmur.

Graygate hangs over Starmer like a shroud. If Currygate was the squall, Graygate is the storm.

I’m sipping a martini in a wine bar on soi 8, Sukhumvit and there’s a table of Brits next to me who’ve stopped watching the Liverpool game so - no joke - they can discuss “Greygate”

One guy just said he’s flying home two weeks early to vote Tory when he’s normally Plaid Cymru, just because of Greygate. Another guy said Yeah Starmer’s Ok but Sunak looks so HEALTHY

Bet accordingly

It really makes you want to be there.

Like the tax office in Hartlepool

Leon said:

Roger said:

Leon said:

Anabobazina said:

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

WhisperingOracle said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

I suppose these results with change once Starmer experiences the terrible backlash over hiring Sue Gray.

TheScreamingEagles said:

I suppose these results with change once Starmer experiences the terrible backlash over hiring Sue Gray.

There's little else that people are talking about. In drivetime phone-ins in Lothian, bowling clubs in surrey, and all-night kebab shops in Islington, my first-hand experience is that people are furious.

It's going to change everything, for Sunak.

I've had exactly the same personal experience recently in the youth clubs of Builth Wells, the sushi bars of West Byfleet, and the veterinary surgeons' waiting rooms of Largs. Something is in the air.

The taverns of north London, the houseboats on the banks of the Lea, even the wilds of Epping Forest, are thick with murmur.

Graygate hangs over Starmer like a shroud. If Currygate was the squall, Graygate is the storm.

I’m sipping a martini in a wine bar on soi 8, Sukhumvit and there’s a table of Brits next to me who’ve stopped watching the Liverpool game so - no joke - they can discuss “Greygate”

One guy just said he’s flying home two weeks early to vote Tory when he’s normally Plaid Cymru, just because of Greygate. Another guy said Yeah Starmer’s Ok but Sunak looks so HEALTHY

Bet accordingly

It really makes you want to be there.

Like the tax office in Hartlepool

Soi 8 Sukhumvit is fucking brilliant. Superb restaurants and bars, full of all nationalities, and cuisines, with that intense vivacity of nightlife that only Bangkok delivers

I agree with Janan Ganesh of the FT on the greatest cities in the world - London and Bangkok - I just demur on his third choice: Los Angeles. No

rcs1000 said:

williamglenn said:

Leon said:

williamglenn said:

Scott_xP said:

williamglenn said:

has been mythologised as *nobody* saying that we would leave the single market, even though both Leave and Remain campaigns were clear before the referendum that this is what would happen.

It's not mythology, it's cold, hard fact

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/open-britain-video-single-market-nigel-farage-anna-soubry_uk_582ce0a0e4b09025ba310fce

Thank you for illustrating my point.

Michael Gove says leaving EU would mean quitting single market
- https://www.ft.com/content/0c5c74bc-151e-11e6-b197-a4af20d5575e

Cameron: ‘I’ll pull UK out of the single market after Brexit’
- https://www.politico.eu/article/david-cameron-bbc-andrew-marr-ill-pull-uk-out-of-the-single-market-after-brexit-eu-referendum-vote-june-23-consequences-news/

Cameron knew he would have to resign, immediately, if he lost the Brexit vote (tho he denied it for obvious reasons) so I don’t think his stupid opinion counts for much, as to what he would have done “after Brexit”

Senior Brexiteers like Hannah DID say we would stay in the Single Market. I can’t remember Boris’s position, I imagine it was constructively ambiguous

On this point we disagree. Leavers knew that the vaguer they were, the more votes they would get

I agree that they tried to be constructively ambiguous about what Leave would mean, but when forced to take a position, they did commit to leaving the single market.

My point is more about the subsequent rewriting of history by people who seem to think the question was never addressed before the referendum at all, and see it as the result of some kind of 'coup' after the fact.

"There is a free trade area from the Baltic to the Atlantic, and the UK will be a member of it."

I believe those were the exact words in the Brexit leaflet.

Creatively ambiguous would be generous.

williamglenn said:

To believe this, you have to believe that the referendum had nothing to do with ending free movment of people, which I know you don't believe.

Leon said:

Roger said:

Leon said:

Anabobazina said:

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

WhisperingOracle said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

I suppose these results with change once Starmer experiences the terrible backlash over hiring Sue Gray.

TheScreamingEagles said:

I suppose these results with change once Starmer experiences the terrible backlash over hiring Sue Gray.

There's little else that people are talking about. In drivetime phone-ins in Lothian, bowling clubs in surrey, and all-night kebab shops in Islington, my first-hand experience is that people are furious.

It's going to change everything, for Sunak.

I've had exactly the same personal experience recently in the youth clubs of Builth Wells, the sushi bars of West Byfleet, and the veterinary surgeons' waiting rooms of Largs. Something is in the air.

The taverns of north London, the houseboats on the banks of the Lea, even the wilds of Epping Forest, are thick with murmur.

Graygate hangs over Starmer like a shroud. If Currygate was the squall, Graygate is the storm.

I’m sipping a martini in a wine bar on soi 8, Sukhumvit and there’s a table of Brits next to me who’ve stopped watching the Liverpool game so - no joke - they can discuss “Greygate”

One guy just said he’s flying home two weeks early to vote Tory when he’s normally Plaid Cymru, just because of Greygate. Another guy said Yeah Starmer’s Ok but Sunak looks so HEALTHY

Bet accordingly

It really makes you want to be there.

Like the tax office in Hartlepool

Soi 8 Sukhumvit is fucking brilliant. Superb restaurants and bars, full of all nationalities, and cuisines, with that intense vivacity of nightlife that only Bangkok delivers

I agree with Janan Ganesh of the FT on the greatest cities in the world - London and Bangkok - I just demur on his third choice: Los Angeles. No

williamglenn said:

kinabalu said:

williamglenn said:

kinabalu said:

williamglenn said:

TOPPING said:

Leon said:

The big difference between Leavers and Remainers is that Leavers are stupid and Remainers are just as stupid - see @TOPPING et al - but Remainers are haughtily convinced they are much cleverer. This, in a weird way, makes Remainers even stupider - in practise - than Leavers, who are genuinely stupid

Once you understand that, the entire farcical madness of Brexit is explicable, right down to the daily debates on here, still ongoing

Leavers or remainers may or may not be stupid.

People who don't understand that it is perfectly democratic to ask the people about a decision that you previously asked them, nor that parliaments cannot bind successive parliaments, nor that parliament is sovereign are, however, very, very stupid indeed.

You can't step into the same river twice.

2016 was a one-off fork in the road. We can't go back and change our minds, and the previous status quo isn't on offer anyway.

Any new attempt to join the EU needs to start with a party winning an election with a commitment to negotiate accession and everything that comes with it. It doesn't start with rerunning the 2016 vote.

Another Referendum is all it takes.

"Should the United Kingdom remain in no man's land or leave to join every other European country in the European Union?

Tick one box only:

Leave
Remain

The government will implement whatever the majority decide."

You sound like the people who were eagerly waiting for Nicola Sturgeon to give them another referendum on Scottish independence and thought that's all it would take.

I'm saying there's no need to overthink it. Party wins a GE promising an In/Out referendum. Same as last time. The only difference is it's the insurgent IN that triggers the EU negotiation process rather than the status quo of OUT. Instead of an exit deal the mandate is to agree an entry deal. This will happen in the medium term and IN will win comfortably as the country collectively screws its head back on.

Issue one in the campaign: is a vote to rejoin a mandate to join the Euro?

Rejoin would have to say "no" in order to avoid holing their campaign below the waterline, but what if the EU doesn't recreate our opt-outs?

williamglenn said:

rcs1000 said:

williamglenn said:

Leon said:

williamglenn said:

Scott_xP said:

williamglenn said:

has been mythologised as *nobody* saying that we would leave the single market, even though both Leave and Remain campaigns were clear before the referendum that this is what would happen.

It's not mythology, it's cold, hard fact

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/open-britain-video-single-market-nigel-farage-anna-soubry_uk_582ce0a0e4b09025ba310fce

Thank you for illustrating my point.

Michael Gove says leaving EU would mean quitting single market
- https://www.ft.com/content/0c5c74bc-151e-11e6-b197-a4af20d5575e

Cameron: ‘I’ll pull UK out of the single market after Brexit’
- https://www.politico.eu/article/david-cameron-bbc-andrew-marr-ill-pull-uk-out-of-the-single-market-after-brexit-eu-referendum-vote-june-23-consequences-news/

Cameron knew he would have to resign, immediately, if he lost the Brexit vote (tho he denied it for obvious reasons) so I don’t think his stupid opinion counts for much, as to what he would have done “after Brexit”

Senior Brexiteers like Hannah DID say we would stay in the Single Market. I can’t remember Boris’s position, I imagine it was constructively ambiguous

On this point we disagree. Leavers knew that the vaguer they were, the more votes they would get

I agree that they tried to be constructively ambiguous about what Leave would mean, but when forced to take a position, they did commit to leaving the single market.

My point is more about the subsequent rewriting of history by people who seem to think the question was never addressed before the referendum at all, and see it as the result of some kind of 'coup' after the fact.

"There is a free trade area from the Baltic to the Atlantic, and the UK will be a member of it."

I believe those were the exact words in the Brexit leaflet.

Creatively ambiguous would be generous.

Those were not the exact words. The statement talked about being "part of" a free trade zone, not a member of it.

timple said:

Leon said:

williamglenn said:

Scott_xP said:

williamglenn said:

has been mythologised as *nobody* saying that we would leave the single market, even though both Leave and Remain campaigns were clear before the referendum that this is what would happen.

It's not mythology, it's cold, hard fact

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/open-britain-video-single-market-nigel-farage-anna-soubry_uk_582ce0a0e4b09025ba310fce

Thank you for illustrating my point.

Michael Gove says leaving EU would mean quitting single market
- https://www.ft.com/content/0c5c74bc-151e-11e6-b197-a4af20d5575e

Cameron: ‘I’ll pull UK out of the single market after Brexit’
- https://www.politico.eu/article/david-cameron-bbc-andrew-marr-ill-pull-uk-out-of-the-single-market-after-brexit-eu-referendum-vote-june-23-consequences-news/

Cameron knew he would have to resign, immediately, if he lost the Brexit vote (tho he denied it for obvious reasons) so I don’t think his stupid opinion counts for much, as to what he would have done “after Brexit”

Senior Brexiteers like Hannah DID say we would stay in the Single Market. I can’t remember Boris’s position, I imagine it was constructively ambiguous

On this point we disagree. Leavers knew that the vaguer they were, the more votes they would get

But Remainers also told terrible lies: Turkey’s accession was always out of the question, etc etc, and of course the europhiles had to overcome three decades of CONSTANT lies (there is no loss of sovereignty, it’s all a tidying up exercise, we will give you a vote on the Constitution etc)

Below is a great twitter thread from 2019 documenting how the debate moved from membership or not of the SM if we chose to leave the EU being an active issue before the referendum and immediately afterwards to becoming "Both sides said" by January 2017.

https://twitter.com/EmporersNewC/status/1143227136985260039

The video showing David Davies position developing from "its a negotiation" to "both sides said" is probably enough , but there is loads more contemporary evidence besides.

https://twitter.com/EmporersNewC/status/1143227211375362048

Sorry to impose cognitive dissonance on anyone who has "remembered" differently!

Anabobazina said:

MoonRabbit said:

Anabobazina said:

The next step for the Conservative Party is now clear.

A renaissance, if you will, nears.

A woman, a queen, a lady awaits the call.

The high priestess of all that is right, fair and true.

Step forward Mary Elizabeth Truss.

Mother. Monarch. Mistress.

You were were wise before your time.

But now your time has come.

T



R



U



S



S

Stop that. 😠 You know you will end up in the spam bin again.

I’m beginning to think you can’t help yourself.

Step forward.

kinabalu said:

williamglenn said:

kinabalu said:

williamglenn said:

kinabalu said:

williamglenn said:

TOPPING said:

Leon said:

The big difference between Leavers and Remainers is that Leavers are stupid and Remainers are just as stupid - see @TOPPING et al - but Remainers are haughtily convinced they are much cleverer. This, in a weird way, makes Remainers even stupider - in practise - than Leavers, who are genuinely stupid

Once you understand that, the entire farcical madness of Brexit is explicable, right down to the daily debates on here, still ongoing

Leavers or remainers may or may not be stupid.

People who don't understand that it is perfectly democratic to ask the people about a decision that you previously asked them, nor that parliaments cannot bind successive parliaments, nor that parliament is sovereign are, however, very, very stupid indeed.

You can't step into the same river twice.

2016 was a one-off fork in the road. We can't go back and change our minds, and the previous status quo isn't on offer anyway.

Any new attempt to join the EU needs to start with a party winning an election with a commitment to negotiate accession and everything that comes with it. It doesn't start with rerunning the 2016 vote.

Another Referendum is all it takes.

"Should the United Kingdom remain in no man's land or leave to join every other European country in the European Union?

Tick one box only:

Leave
Remain

The government will implement whatever the majority decide."

You sound like the people who were eagerly waiting for Nicola Sturgeon to give them another referendum on Scottish independence and thought that's all it would take.

I'm saying there's no need to overthink it. Party wins a GE promising an In/Out referendum. Same as last time. The only difference is it's the insurgent IN that triggers the EU negotiation process rather than the status quo of OUT. Instead of an exit deal the mandate is to agree an entry deal. This will happen in the medium term and IN will win comfortably as the country collectively screws its head back on.

Issue one in the campaign: is a vote to rejoin a mandate to join the Euro?

Rejoin would have to say "no" in order to avoid holing their campaign below the waterline, but what if the EU doesn't recreate our opt-outs?

It's Leave (no man's land) not Rejoin. That's number 1. Then to the substantive point. So, fine, just as in all campaigns there'll be issues, questions, truth and lies. It will be for Leave to make their case and Remain (in no man's land) to make theirs.

The bottom line is as before. If the 'change' proposition prevails it then falls on the government to negotiate the best deal with the EU that it can. An entry deal this time rather than an exit one.

Will the details of the deal have to be known before the vote? Nope. Of course not. Did the details of the deal last time have to be known before the vote? I should cocoa.

The lesson of Brexit - to be taken to heart for any other EU referendum or indeed for the Sindy one when it comes - is that for the change campaign to win they must AVOID SPECIFICS.

rcs1000 said:

williamglenn said:

rcs1000 said:

williamglenn said:

Leon said:

williamglenn said:

Scott_xP said:

williamglenn said:

has been mythologised as *nobody* saying that we would leave the single market, even though both Leave and Remain campaigns were clear before the referendum that this is what would happen.

It's not mythology, it's cold, hard fact

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/open-britain-video-single-market-nigel-farage-anna-soubry_uk_582ce0a0e4b09025ba310fce

Thank you for illustrating my point.

Michael Gove says leaving EU would mean quitting single market
- https://www.ft.com/content/0c5c74bc-151e-11e6-b197-a4af20d5575e

Cameron: ‘I’ll pull UK out of the single market after Brexit’
- https://www.politico.eu/article/david-cameron-bbc-andrew-marr-ill-pull-uk-out-of-the-single-market-after-brexit-eu-referendum-vote-june-23-consequences-news/

Cameron knew he would have to resign, immediately, if he lost the Brexit vote (tho he denied it for obvious reasons) so I don’t think his stupid opinion counts for much, as to what he would have done “after Brexit”

Senior Brexiteers like Hannah DID say we would stay in the Single Market. I can’t remember Boris’s position, I imagine it was constructively ambiguous

On this point we disagree. Leavers knew that the vaguer they were, the more votes they would get

I agree that they tried to be constructively ambiguous about what Leave would mean, but when forced to take a position, they did commit to leaving the single market.

My point is more about the subsequent rewriting of history by people who seem to think the question was never addressed before the referendum at all, and see it as the result of some kind of 'coup' after the fact.

"There is a free trade area from the Baltic to the Atlantic, and the UK will be a member of it."

I believe those were the exact words in the Brexit leaflet.

Creatively ambiguous would be generous.

Those were not the exact words. The statement talked about being "part of" a free trade zone, not a member of it.

Apologies.

If someone says, you'll be "a part" of something, it suggests that there is a whole, of which you are a part.

Very different to being a member.

But you will concede, I hope, that some people might have read the line as suggesting that the UK would be a member of the free trade area that went from the Baltic to the Atlantic?

kinabalu said:

Selebian said:

kinabalu said:

williamglenn said:

TOPPING said:

Leon said:

The big difference between Leavers and Remainers is that Leavers are stupid and Remainers are just as stupid - see @TOPPING et al - but Remainers are haughtily convinced they are much cleverer. This, in a weird way, makes Remainers even stupider - in practise - than Leavers, who are genuinely stupid

Once you understand that, the entire farcical madness of Brexit is explicable, right down to the daily debates on here, still ongoing

Leavers or remainers may or may not be stupid.

People who don't understand that it is perfectly democratic to ask the people about a decision that you previously asked them, nor that parliaments cannot bind successive parliaments, nor that parliament is sovereign are, however, very, very stupid indeed.

You can't step into the same river twice.

2016 was a one-off fork in the road. We can't go back and change our minds, and the previous status quo isn't on offer anyway.

Any new attempt to join the EU needs to start with a party winning an election with a commitment to negotiate accession and everything that comes with it. It doesn't start with rerunning the 2016 vote.

Another Referendum is all it takes.

"Should the United Kingdom remain in no man's land or leave to join every other European country in the European Union?

Tick one box only:

Leave
Remain

The government will implement whatever the majority decide."

Given the toxicity of 'leave' that question formation could backfire spectacularly from a remain leave er... go back in point of view

Ah but no - it's clever because it leverages the grey cell deficit of 2016 Leave voters. Lots of them will just pile in and tick the same box again.

"Bastards making us vote again. We'll show em!"

TOPPING said:

Leon said:

Roger said:

Leon said:

Anabobazina said:

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

WhisperingOracle said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

I suppose these results with change once Starmer experiences the terrible backlash over hiring Sue Gray.

TheScreamingEagles said:

I suppose these results with change once Starmer experiences the terrible backlash over hiring Sue Gray.

There's little else that people are talking about. In drivetime phone-ins in Lothian, bowling clubs in surrey, and all-night kebab shops in Islington, my first-hand experience is that people are furious.

It's going to change everything, for Sunak.

I've had exactly the same personal experience recently in the youth clubs of Builth Wells, the sushi bars of West Byfleet, and the veterinary surgeons' waiting rooms of Largs. Something is in the air.

The taverns of north London, the houseboats on the banks of the Lea, even the wilds of Epping Forest, are thick with murmur.

Graygate hangs over Starmer like a shroud. If Currygate was the squall, Graygate is the storm.

I’m sipping a martini in a wine bar on soi 8, Sukhumvit and there’s a table of Brits next to me who’ve stopped watching the Liverpool game so - no joke - they can discuss “Greygate”

One guy just said he’s flying home two weeks early to vote Tory when he’s normally Plaid Cymru, just because of Greygate. Another guy said Yeah Starmer’s Ok but Sunak looks so HEALTHY

Bet accordingly

It really makes you want to be there.

Like the tax office in Hartlepool

Soi 8 Sukhumvit is fucking brilliant. Superb restaurants and bars, full of all nationalities, and cuisines, with that intense vivacity of nightlife that only Bangkok delivers

I agree with Janan Ganesh of the FT on the greatest cities in the world - London and Bangkok - I just demur on his third choice: Los Angeles. No

That may be but it looks gopping full of old white blokes drinking Tetleys.

"sipping a martini in a wine bar" sounds très élégant. My arse.

Selebian said:

kinabalu said:

Selebian said:

kinabalu said:

williamglenn said:

TOPPING said:

Leon said:

The big difference between Leavers and Remainers is that Leavers are stupid and Remainers are just as stupid - see @TOPPING et al - but Remainers are haughtily convinced they are much cleverer. This, in a weird way, makes Remainers even stupider - in practise - than Leavers, who are genuinely stupid

Once you understand that, the entire farcical madness of Brexit is explicable, right down to the daily debates on here, still ongoing

Leavers or remainers may or may not be stupid.

People who don't understand that it is perfectly democratic to ask the people about a decision that you previously asked them, nor that parliaments cannot bind successive parliaments, nor that parliament is sovereign are, however, very, very stupid indeed.

You can't step into the same river twice.

2016 was a one-off fork in the road. We can't go back and change our minds, and the previous status quo isn't on offer anyway.

Any new attempt to join the EU needs to start with a party winning an election with a commitment to negotiate accession and everything that comes with it. It doesn't start with rerunning the 2016 vote.

Another Referendum is all it takes.

"Should the United Kingdom remain in no man's land or leave to join every other European country in the European Union?

Tick one box only:

Leave
Remain

The government will implement whatever the majority decide."

Given the toxicity of 'leave' that question formation could backfire spectacularly from a remain leave er... go back in point of view

Ah but no - it's clever because it leverages the grey cell deficit of 2016 Leave voters. Lots of them will just pile in and tick the same box again.

"Bastards making us vote again. We'll show em!"

Ah, but us erstwhile remainers are smart enough to see the obvious trick and smart enough to realise it must be a double bluff, therefore we will vote Remain

Nigelb said:

Andy_JS said:

"Labour was wrong to celebrate Raab’s ousting

Labour MP Graham Stringer argues the civil service has become far too powerful."

https://www.spiked-online.com/2023/05/02/labour-was-wrong-to-celebrate-raabs-ousting/

Yes, but he's a loon.

GIN1138 said:

Anabobazina said:

MoonRabbit said:

Anabobazina said:

The next step for the Conservative Party is now clear.

A renaissance, if you will, nears.

A woman, a queen, a lady awaits the call.

The high priestess of all that is right, fair and true.

Step forward Mary Elizabeth Truss.

Mother. Monarch. Mistress.

You were were wise before your time.

But now your time has come.

T



R



U



S



S

Stop that. 😠 You know you will end up in the spam bin again.

I’m beginning to think you can’t help yourself.

Step forward.

The warning signs were always there weren't they? 😂

Cookie said:

rcs1000 said:

williamglenn said:

rcs1000 said:

williamglenn said:

Leon said:

williamglenn said:

Scott_xP said:

williamglenn said:

has been mythologised as *nobody* saying that we would leave the single market, even though both Leave and Remain campaigns were clear before the referendum that this is what would happen.

It's not mythology, it's cold, hard fact

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/open-britain-video-single-market-nigel-farage-anna-soubry_uk_582ce0a0e4b09025ba310fce

Thank you for illustrating my point.

Michael Gove says leaving EU would mean quitting single market
- https://www.ft.com/content/0c5c74bc-151e-11e6-b197-a4af20d5575e

Cameron: ‘I’ll pull UK out of the single market after Brexit’
- https://www.politico.eu/article/david-cameron-bbc-andrew-marr-ill-pull-uk-out-of-the-single-market-after-brexit-eu-referendum-vote-june-23-consequences-news/

Cameron knew he would have to resign, immediately, if he lost the Brexit vote (tho he denied it for obvious reasons) so I don’t think his stupid opinion counts for much, as to what he would have done “after Brexit”

Senior Brexiteers like Hannah DID say we would stay in the Single Market. I can’t remember Boris’s position, I imagine it was constructively ambiguous

On this point we disagree. Leavers knew that the vaguer they were, the more votes they would get

I agree that they tried to be constructively ambiguous about what Leave would mean, but when forced to take a position, they did commit to leaving the single market.

My point is more about the subsequent rewriting of history by people who seem to think the question was never addressed before the referendum at all, and see it as the result of some kind of 'coup' after the fact.

"There is a free trade area from the Baltic to the Atlantic, and the UK will be a member of it."

I believe those were the exact words in the Brexit leaflet.

Creatively ambiguous would be generous.

Those were not the exact words. The statement talked about being "part of" a free trade zone, not a member of it.

Apologies.

If someone says, you'll be "a part" of something, it suggests that there is a whole, of which you are a part.

Very different to being a member.

But you will concede, I hope, that some people might have read the line as suggesting that the UK would be a member of the free trade area that went from the Baltic to the Atlantic?

I might add that it's an odd choice of geography. "From the Baltic to the Atlantic" makes me think: Norway and Sweden.
A better pan-European descriptor might be 'from the Arctic to the Mediterranean'.

Leon said:

TOPPING said:

Leon said:

Roger said:

Leon said:

Anabobazina said:

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

WhisperingOracle said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

I suppose these results with change once Starmer experiences the terrible backlash over hiring Sue Gray.

TheScreamingEagles said:

I suppose these results with change once Starmer experiences the terrible backlash over hiring Sue Gray.

There's little else that people are talking about. In drivetime phone-ins in Lothian, bowling clubs in surrey, and all-night kebab shops in Islington, my first-hand experience is that people are furious.

It's going to change everything, for Sunak.

I've had exactly the same personal experience recently in the youth clubs of Builth Wells, the sushi bars of West Byfleet, and the veterinary surgeons' waiting rooms of Largs. Something is in the air.

The taverns of north London, the houseboats on the banks of the Lea, even the wilds of Epping Forest, are thick with murmur.

Graygate hangs over Starmer like a shroud. If Currygate was the squall, Graygate is the storm.

I’m sipping a martini in a wine bar on soi 8, Sukhumvit and there’s a table of Brits next to me who’ve stopped watching the Liverpool game so - no joke - they can discuss “Greygate”

One guy just said he’s flying home two weeks early to vote Tory when he’s normally Plaid Cymru, just because of Greygate. Another guy said Yeah Starmer’s Ok but Sunak looks so HEALTHY

Bet accordingly

It really makes you want to be there.

Like the tax office in Hartlepool

Soi 8 Sukhumvit is fucking brilliant. Superb restaurants and bars, full of all nationalities, and cuisines, with that intense vivacity of nightlife that only Bangkok delivers

I agree with Janan Ganesh of the FT on the greatest cities in the world - London and Bangkok - I just demur on his third choice: Los Angeles. No

That may be but it looks gopping full of old white blokes drinking Tetleys.

"sipping a martini in a wine bar" sounds très élégant. My arse.

I know you’ve not traveled much so I’ll give you a little tour

Soi 8 is magical because you get such a mix. This is Det 5, a garden bar which dates back to when these were dirt roads in the 1960s and this bar was full of American GIs on RnR. They have the photos in the bogs



Ten yards away is a chic Italian which does great food and is seriously pricey



Yet just across the road locals are cooking up their own food on a brazier



And all of this is surrounded by soaring skyscrapers with rooftop bars full hi-so Chinese Thai billionaire girls

noneoftheabove said:

TimS said:

turbotubbs said:

rcs1000 said:

williamglenn said:

Leon said:

williamglenn said:

Scott_xP said:

williamglenn said:

has been mythologised as *nobody* saying that we would leave the single market, even though both Leave and Remain campaigns were clear before the referendum that this is what would happen.

It's not mythology, it's cold, hard fact

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/open-britain-video-single-market-nigel-farage-anna-soubry_uk_582ce0a0e4b09025ba310fce

Thank you for illustrating my point.

Michael Gove says leaving EU would mean quitting single market
- https://www.ft.com/content/0c5c74bc-151e-11e6-b197-a4af20d5575e

Cameron: ‘I’ll pull UK out of the single market after Brexit’
- https://www.politico.eu/article/david-cameron-bbc-andrew-marr-ill-pull-uk-out-of-the-single-market-after-brexit-eu-referendum-vote-june-23-consequences-news/

Cameron knew he would have to resign, immediately, if he lost the Brexit vote (tho he denied it for obvious reasons) so I don’t think his stupid opinion counts for much, as to what he would have done “after Brexit”

Senior Brexiteers like Hannah DID say we would stay in the Single Market. I can’t remember Boris’s position, I imagine it was constructively ambiguous

On this point we disagree. Leavers knew that the vaguer they were, the more votes they would get

I agree that they tried to be constructively ambiguous about what Leave would mean, but when forced to take a position, they did commit to leaving the single market.

My point is more about the subsequent rewriting of history by people who seem to think the question was never addressed before the referendum at all, and see it as the result of some kind of 'coup' after the fact.

"There is a free trade area from the Baltic to the Atlantic, and the UK will be a member of it."

I believe those were the exact words in the Brexit leaflet.

Creatively ambiguous would be generous.

Time to show my ignorance (yet again). Do we not have free trade with the EU now? I understood that the issues are associated with ease of trade (paperwork etc) not tariffs? Please laugh at me if I have this wrong.

Depends on how you define "free trade". It's a term of art at best. We don't have completely free trade because it is restricted by regulations, quotas, visa requirements and the various bits of admin that all combine to make up non-tariff barriers. For most products and services these are most important anyway - customs duties are only material in a limited number of industries.

Anyway I've just been invited to talk on a panel at an event, the topic of which is "Brexit opportunities: what will really make a difference for business", so I'd better starting polishing my Brexit boosterism.

Lawyers, accountants, VAT consultants should all be doing bonanza trade from the extra red tape.

Sean_F said:

kinabalu said:

williamglenn said:

kinabalu said:

williamglenn said:

kinabalu said:

williamglenn said:

TOPPING said:

Leon said:

The big difference between Leavers and Remainers is that Leavers are stupid and Remainers are just as stupid - see @TOPPING et al - but Remainers are haughtily convinced they are much cleverer. This, in a weird way, makes Remainers even stupider - in practise - than Leavers, who are genuinely stupid

Once you understand that, the entire farcical madness of Brexit is explicable, right down to the daily debates on here, still ongoing

Leavers or remainers may or may not be stupid.

People who don't understand that it is perfectly democratic to ask the people about a decision that you previously asked them, nor that parliaments cannot bind successive parliaments, nor that parliament is sovereign are, however, very, very stupid indeed.

You can't step into the same river twice.

2016 was a one-off fork in the road. We can't go back and change our minds, and the previous status quo isn't on offer anyway.

Any new attempt to join the EU needs to start with a party winning an election with a commitment to negotiate accession and everything that comes with it. It doesn't start with rerunning the 2016 vote.

Another Referendum is all it takes.

"Should the United Kingdom remain in no man's land or leave to join every other European country in the European Union?

Tick one box only:

Leave
Remain

The government will implement whatever the majority decide."

You sound like the people who were eagerly waiting for Nicola Sturgeon to give them another referendum on Scottish independence and thought that's all it would take.

I'm saying there's no need to overthink it. Party wins a GE promising an In/Out referendum. Same as last time. The only difference is it's the insurgent IN that triggers the EU negotiation process rather than the status quo of OUT. Instead of an exit deal the mandate is to agree an entry deal. This will happen in the medium term and IN will win comfortably as the country collectively screws its head back on.

Issue one in the campaign: is a vote to rejoin a mandate to join the Euro?

Rejoin would have to say "no" in order to avoid holing their campaign below the waterline, but what if the EU doesn't recreate our opt-outs?

It's Leave (no man's land) not Rejoin. That's number 1. Then to the substantive point. So, fine, just as in all campaigns there'll be issues, questions, truth and lies. It will be for Leave to make their case and Remain (in no man's land) to make theirs.

The bottom line is as before. If the 'change' proposition prevails it then falls on the government to negotiate the best deal with the EU that it can. An entry deal this time rather than an exit one.

Will the details of the deal have to be known before the vote? Nope. Of course not. Did the details of the deal last time have to be known before the vote? I should cocoa.

The lesson of Brexit - to be taken to heart for any other EU referendum or indeed for the Sindy one when it comes - is that for the change campaign to win they must AVOID SPECIFICS.

That would be the big problem for the Rejoin campaign. It would be open to their opponents to pin all manner of charges on the Rejoiners.

And, you'd have a very bemused EU leadership thinking "Why the hell do we want to go through this, all over again?" with perhaps a very fractious set of negotiations to follow a Rejoin vote in the referendum, with the possibility of a change of government in the intervening years.

turbotubbs said:

kinabalu said:

turbotubbs said:

kinabalu said:

williamglenn said:

TOPPING said:

Leon said:

The big difference between Leavers and Remainers is that Leavers are stupid and Remainers are just as stupid - see @TOPPING et al - but Remainers are haughtily convinced they are much cleverer. This, in a weird way, makes Remainers even stupider - in practise - than Leavers, who are genuinely stupid

Once you understand that, the entire farcical madness of Brexit is explicable, right down to the daily debates on here, still ongoing

Leavers or remainers may or may not be stupid.

People who don't understand that it is perfectly democratic to ask the people about a decision that you previously asked them, nor that parliaments cannot bind successive parliaments, nor that parliament is sovereign are, however, very, very stupid indeed.

You can't step into the same river twice.

2016 was a one-off fork in the road. We can't go back and change our minds, and the previous status quo isn't on offer anyway.

Any new attempt to join the EU needs to start with a party winning an election with a commitment to negotiate accession and everything that comes with it. It doesn't start with rerunning the 2016 vote.

Another Referendum is all it takes.

"Should the United Kingdom remain in no man's land or leave to join every other European country in the European Union?

Tick one box only:

Leave
Remain

The government will implement whatever the majority decide."

No - the conditions would need to be said too - otherwise when we lose the pound, are forced into the Euro, lose our central bank, pay lots more into the EU budget, have no rebate etc, then the whole shitshow starts again.

Make an honest case of the pros (trade, jobs for those who wish to work in Europe, boost to GDP etc) vs cost (being a net contributer to the budget, no check on Europeans moving to the UK). Otherwise it sets up the next 20 years of arguments.

We're talking practical politics not an exam question. For the Change proposition to win it should stay vague and simplistic and aspirational. It should also avoid engaging with difficult questions. Look at 2016. Would Leave have won if it'd been defined. Nope. And would Leave have won if there'd been a rigorous, informed and intelligent debate? Not a chance. Everybody knows this. THAT is the lesson of the EU referendum, none of this "next time we should be all elevated and thoughtful" wishcasting. That's naive or it's virtue-signalling or (when it comes from unreformed Leavers) it's pure and simple trolling.

But can't you see the issue with the BiB? Do that and you set the future argument up right there.

kinabalu said:

turbotubbs said:

kinabalu said:

williamglenn said:

TOPPING said:

Leon said:

The big difference between Leavers and Remainers is that Leavers are stupid and Remainers are just as stupid - see @TOPPING et al - but Remainers are haughtily convinced they are much cleverer. This, in a weird way, makes Remainers even stupider - in practise - than Leavers, who are genuinely stupid

Once you understand that, the entire farcical madness of Brexit is explicable, right down to the daily debates on here, still ongoing

Leavers or remainers may or may not be stupid.

People who don't understand that it is perfectly democratic to ask the people about a decision that you previously asked them, nor that parliaments cannot bind successive parliaments, nor that parliament is sovereign are, however, very, very stupid indeed.

You can't step into the same river twice.

2016 was a one-off fork in the road. We can't go back and change our minds, and the previous status quo isn't on offer anyway.

Any new attempt to join the EU needs to start with a party winning an election with a commitment to negotiate accession and everything that comes with it. It doesn't start with rerunning the 2016 vote.

Another Referendum is all it takes.

"Should the United Kingdom remain in no man's land or leave to join every other European country in the European Union?

Tick one box only:

Leave
Remain

The government will implement whatever the majority decide."

No - the conditions would need to be said too - otherwise when we lose the pound, are forced into the Euro, lose our central bank, pay lots more into the EU budget, have no rebate etc, then the whole shitshow starts again.

Make an honest case of the pros (trade, jobs for those who wish to work in Europe, boost to GDP etc) vs cost (being a net contributer to the budget, no check on Europeans moving to the UK). Otherwise it sets up the next 20 years of arguments.

We're talking practical politics not an exam question.. It should also avoid engaging with difficult questions. Look at 2016. Would Leave have won if it'd been defined. Nope. And would Leave have won if there'd been a rigorous, informed and intelligent debate? Not a chance. Everybody knows this. THAT is the lesson of the EU referendum, none of this "next time we should be all elevated and thoughtful" wishcasting. That's naive or it's virtue-signalling or (when it comes from unreformed Leavers) it's pure and simple trolling.

Driver said:

turbotubbs said:

kinabalu said:

turbotubbs said:

kinabalu said:

williamglenn said:

TOPPING said:

Leon said:

The big difference between Leavers and Remainers is that Leavers are stupid and Remainers are just as stupid - see @TOPPING et al - but Remainers are haughtily convinced they are much cleverer. This, in a weird way, makes Remainers even stupider - in practise - than Leavers, who are genuinely stupid

Once you understand that, the entire farcical madness of Brexit is explicable, right down to the daily debates on here, still ongoing

Leavers or remainers may or may not be stupid.

People who don't understand that it is perfectly democratic to ask the people about a decision that you previously asked them, nor that parliaments cannot bind successive parliaments, nor that parliament is sovereign are, however, very, very stupid indeed.

You can't step into the same river twice.

2016 was a one-off fork in the road. We can't go back and change our minds, and the previous status quo isn't on offer anyway.

Any new attempt to join the EU needs to start with a party winning an election with a commitment to negotiate accession and everything that comes with it. It doesn't start with rerunning the 2016 vote.

Another Referendum is all it takes.

"Should the United Kingdom remain in no man's land or leave to join every other European country in the European Union?

Tick one box only:

Leave
Remain

The government will implement whatever the majority decide."

No - the conditions would need to be said too - otherwise when we lose the pound, are forced into the Euro, lose our central bank, pay lots more into the EU budget, have no rebate etc, then the whole shitshow starts again.

Make an honest case of the pros (trade, jobs for those who wish to work in Europe, boost to GDP etc) vs cost (being a net contributer to the budget, no check on Europeans moving to the UK). Otherwise it sets up the next 20 years of arguments.

We're talking practical politics not an exam question. For the Change proposition to win it should stay vague and simplistic and aspirational. It should also avoid engaging with difficult questions. Look at 2016. Would Leave have won if it'd been defined. Nope. And would Leave have won if there'd been a rigorous, informed and intelligent debate? Not a chance. Everybody knows this. THAT is the lesson of the EU referendum, none of this "next time we should be all elevated and thoughtful" wishcasting. That's naive or it's virtue-signalling or (when it comes from unreformed Leavers) it's pure and simple trolling.

But can't you see the issue with the BiB? Do that and you set the future argument up right there.

You also risk the EU saying "non".

RochdalePioneers said:

bigjohnowls said:

SKS fans please explain why it was OK to condemn Boris for being a liar but you will defend the man who makes him look like an amateur on that front!!
https://twitter.com/Agitate4Change/status/1653338593417482243

Not an SKS fan. Not voting for his party. But:
1 Boris was lying to the public. Over and over. As people had their lives upended and saw their relatives died. A big deal
2 Starmer was lying to an electorate of trot entryists knowing that once he secured the leadership most would leave and thus could be discarded.

Starmer lying to you isn't the same as Boris lying to the nation.

Driver said:

TimS said:

bigjohnowls said:

SKS fans please explain why it was OK to condemn Boris for being a liar but you will defend the man who makes him look like an amateur on that front!!
https://twitter.com/Agitate4Change/status/1653338593417482243

So far SKS has mainly lied to his party membership, whereas Boris lied to everyone including the country. I can see that for a Labour member that's one and the same thing, but for non members like me there's a difference.

Now it's quite possible he will go on to lie to us all and not deliver on his winning manifesto, but we're not there yet.

Still, as a Lib Dem I'm very pleased to see him changing his mind on tuition fees. It means nobody can ever point the finger at us again.

That assumes there will be anything in his manifesto...

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

Leon said:

TOPPING said:

Leon said:

Roger said:

Leon said:

Anabobazina said:

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

WhisperingOracle said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

I suppose these results with change once Starmer experiences the terrible backlash over hiring Sue Gray.

TheScreamingEagles said:

I suppose these results with change once Starmer experiences the terrible backlash over hiring Sue Gray.

There's little else that people are talking about. In drivetime phone-ins in Lothian, bowling clubs in surrey, and all-night kebab shops in Islington, my first-hand experience is that people are furious.

It's going to change everything, for Sunak.

I've had exactly the same personal experience recently in the youth clubs of Builth Wells, the sushi bars of West Byfleet, and the veterinary surgeons' waiting rooms of Largs. Something is in the air.

The taverns of north London, the houseboats on the banks of the Lea, even the wilds of Epping Forest, are thick with murmur.

Graygate hangs over Starmer like a shroud. If Currygate was the squall, Graygate is the storm.

I’m sipping a martini in a wine bar on soi 8, Sukhumvit and there’s a table of Brits next to me who’ve stopped watching the Liverpool game so - no joke - they can discuss “Greygate”

One guy just said he’s flying home two weeks early to vote Tory when he’s normally Plaid Cymru, just because of Greygate. Another guy said Yeah Starmer’s Ok but Sunak looks so HEALTHY

Bet accordingly

It really makes you want to be there.

Like the tax office in Hartlepool

Soi 8 Sukhumvit is fucking brilliant. Superb restaurants and bars, full of all nationalities, and cuisines, with that intense vivacity of nightlife that only Bangkok delivers

I agree with Janan Ganesh of the FT on the greatest cities in the world - London and Bangkok - I just demur on his third choice: Los Angeles. No

That may be but it looks gopping full of old white blokes drinking Tetleys.

"sipping a martini in a wine bar" sounds très élégant. My arse.

I know you’ve not traveled much so I’ll give you a little tour

Soi 8 is magical because you get such a mix. This is Det 5, a garden bar which dates back to when these were dirt roads in the 1960s and this bar was full of American GIs on RnR. They have the photos in the bogs



Ten yards away is a chic Italian which does great food and is seriously pricey



Yet just across the road locals are cooking up their own food on a brazier



And all of this is surrounded by soaring skyscrapers with rooftop bars full hi-so Chinese Thai billionaire girls

Personally speaking, would prefer to hang with the folks at the card table, provided they'd let me.

TimS said:

Driver said:

TimS said:

bigjohnowls said:

SKS fans please explain why it was OK to condemn Boris for being a liar but you will defend the man who makes him look like an amateur on that front!!
https://twitter.com/Agitate4Change/status/1653338593417482243

So far SKS has mainly lied to his party membership, whereas Boris lied to everyone including the country. I can see that for a Labour member that's one and the same thing, but for non members like me there's a difference.

Now it's quite possible he will go on to lie to us all and not deliver on his winning manifesto, but we're not there yet.

Still, as a Lib Dem I'm very pleased to see him changing his mind on tuition fees. It means nobody can ever point the finger at us again.

That assumes there will be anything in his manifesto...

The "they have no policies" trope is one of the more puzzling ones about Starmer's Labour, over a year out from an election. They've been relatively speaking pretty policy-heavy so far compared with most mid term oppositions. Indeed we're all talking about an actual policy change today.