Yep they wanted hard Brexit, which is the only true Brexit. Any other agreements can be made later from a position of strength later rather than current weakness, weakness due to establishment remainers/politicians trying to keep us shackled to the EU against our countries interests. The exit negotiations have been impossible because it's like trying to negotiate divorce with a controlling partner who doesn't want you to leave and because they're so charismatic they've got most of your family on their side, you need the strength to leave in your own best interest and cause upset or you'll never get out.
Boris and the burka
- Thread starter koolpc
- Start date
Yep they wanted hard Brexit, which is the only true Brexit. Any other agreements can be made later from a position of strength later rather than current weakness, weakness due to establishment remainers/politicians trying to keep us shackled to the EU against our countries interests. The exit negotiations have been impossible because it's like trying to negotiate divorce with a controlling partner who doesn't want you to leave and because they're so charismatic they've got most of your family on their side, you need the strength to leave in your own best interest and cause upset or you'll never get out.
You'd have a point if the referendum was on hard Brexit. But it wasn't. So you're just claiming to speak for millions of people in order to claim authority for your position.
Hard Brexit would not put us in a position of strength relative to the EU. It might be possible. Our economy might survive and in time it might strengthen. Or it might collapse as most trade goes to the bigger market. It's not essential to have the major European financial centre in London, for example. It was in the past, but it isn't now. Maybe it will move into the EU. There are several cities that could have the necessary infrastructure to support it. If that happens, we're screwed because it's a big part of our economy. Nobody really knows what would happen. Any absolute claim either way is just made up.
Are all your posts written for a five year old audience? "Bonker Boris" sounds like he should be living a few doors up from Fireman Sam and Postman Pat.
I do think it's fair to say that some Brexit scenarios would be Brexit in name only and make a mockery of the referendum - regardless of what the referendum "did" and "didn't" mean.
And when you start taking into account which "Brexit" is best for the economy (short-term), and (Labour esp) start using phrases such as "The people didn't vote to be poorer," then you know that many simply don't want a meaningful Brexit at all (since they are all so terrified of short-term harm to the economy).
It can (and is) be argued that the referendum outcome is subject to interpretation - some even going so far as to say it was used as a protest vote against the establishment, and many leave-voters were horrified that leave won. However this also cannot be proved.
In the absence of definitive proof one way or the other, it only makes logical sense to enact Brexit as wholly and completely as possible. Anything less and you might as well dispense with the pretence that you're trying to enact the result of the referendum, and simply ignore it and carry on inside the EU.
Enough people aren't sufficiently stupid that a "Brexit in name only" would be seen as anything other than the deliberate dismissal of the referendum result, and with it the idea that the people are trusted to make such decisions.
Bwahaha!
HaHa!
HaHahHaHaHaHaHa!!!
etc.
Did you get Trump to write that for you?
A full analysis would take too long and inflict too much damage on my aching sides. However, a few highlights:
"they wanted hard Brexit, which is the only true Brexit" At what point before the referendum did the Leave campaign make it unequivocally clear to voters that hard Brexit was the only Brexit outcome? Where is the evidence that Leave voters wanted and still want hard Brexit?
"Any other agreements can be made later from a position of strength later rather than current weakness"
So we should just leave quickly without agreements in place and endure the humiliation of seeing essential supply chains break, border traffic gridlocked, our economy tank etc. and then when the country is on its knees and a global laughing stock somehow we will be in a position of strength to negotiate?
"weakness due to establishment remainers/politicians trying to keep us shackled to the EU against our countries interests"
Please, please, please explain what the fact based UK negotiating position was/is/should have been, that doesn't involve a cake and eat it fantasy where the other 27 countries of the EU all agree to abandon its core values to appease the country that has decided to leave but still wants to enjoy the benefits of membership? It's been well over two years now and I still haven't seen any sign of it from Boris, Davis, Farage, JRM...
I'm done for now - there is only so much ******** you can handle in one post.
I think that is the crux of where I disagree.
In the absence of definitive proof one way or the other it only makes logical sense to obtain relevant evidence, i.e. conduct a referendum on what is actually on offer.
Anything less and you might as well dispense with the pretence that you're trying to enact the will of the people because you're just doing what you want and pretending that a referendum on a different offer is relevant.
The things that got the most attention in the referendum were stopping immigration (which isn't really on offer) and adding £400M a week to the NHS budget (which isn't really on offer).
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2006
- Posts
- 12,130
If it makes them comprehensible to someone who spends his days watching children's cartoons, then great.
As it happens, "Bonker Boris" seems to me succinctly to cover the fact that the man is mad, selfish, unfaithful, untrustworthy, totally lacking in morals and generally a despicable being . . . or were you perhaps questioning my use of the word Boris rather than Alexander or de Pfeffel? I will have to work on De Piffle . . .
Seems to me you've described perfectly the mandatory requirements for becoming an MP.
Boris doing a good job deflecting attention from his marital issues once again his choice of language is unnecessary but once again his supporters will just say it's Boris being Boris! What I'd really like to see is Boris putting forward an alternative a well reasoned thought out and believable solution for Brexit and the myraid of issues it brings which of course he won't do as he like everyone else doesn't have a clue!
Plenty of people or it wouldn't be splashed all over the papers!
Permabanned
- Joined
- 23 Apr 2014
- Posts
- 23,553
- Location
- Hertfordshire
If you agree with someones stance then their morals are not held to account.
Is you disagree with someones stance then burn them as a witch.
Is you disagree with someones stance then burn them as a witch.
So that ultimately means... What does that say about individuals in society... (? Intentionally left off)
I've no idea I've not read a newspaper in years, far too much nonsense in them.
Boris is just a mess, the man is embarrassing all this snipping from the side lines without ever offering alternatives. He could be in the middle of this driving brexit through to a design of his imagination but instead he has chosen to sit on the sidelines chucking hand grenades while positioning himself for an I-told-you-so tilt at the leadership after May leads us over the precipice. Whats the solution? I haven't got a clue anymore but then I don't pretend to want to lead our country!
Apparently it is in the public interest, after he tried to prevent reports of the child he'd fathered following one of his affairs, using a 'super injunction', and failed. This followed earlier reports of another child resulting from another affair.
It was argued that there was a public interest because this was reckless behaviour and therefore questioned the fitness to hold public office. The three judges who refused the gagging order did not disagree.
Personally I think that there's plenty going on in his political life that demonstrates that he's unfit for public office without having to scrutinise his public life as well, but clearly there's a public interest in the latter.
Voters, this has pretty much killed any shot he had at replacing Theresa May, and in turn boosted Corbyn's chances in 2022.
That's the kind of far reaching effect something like this can have at the high level.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 28 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 10,697
- Location
- Shropshire
Permabanned
- Joined
- 23 Apr 2014
- Posts
- 23,553
- Location
- Hertfordshire
Good point, look at how senile Trump is at 72.
Soldato
- Joined
- 7 Jul 2011
- Posts
- 4,418
- Location
- Cambridgeshire
Do they really care about this kind of thing though? I'd be surprised if anyone can be exposed to Boris for more than a few minutes without coming to the conclusion that he's likely your typical randy old Etonian with a walk in closet full of skeletons, it doesn't seem to have put them off so far more's the pity.