Cont: Brexit: Now What? The Perfect 10.

Status
Not open for further replies.

The Guardian has a circulation of about 100,000. The Sun and Mail have about 2.5m between them.

Its not unlikely that YOU have seen the arguments and facts, the problem is that the majority either haven't or have been primed to dismiss them as lies by the media they actually listen to.
 
Incorrect. The only institution of the EU that is able to propose policy in the European parliament is the Commission. The public cannot lobby their MEP to propose legislation, only to amend reject or approve legislation.

The Commission aren't elected by the public, if they were I'd be a supporter, but they aren't.

If that's enough for you, that's fine. But it's not good enough for me.
And "the lies" I read, are the statements on the EU Commission website ec.europa.eu

Cabinet Ministers and the PM are not elected by the public. House of Lords are not elected by the public.

What is your point?
 
Cabinet Ministers and the PM are not elected by the public. House of Lords are not elected by the public.

What is your point?

The civil service is not elected, neither was Dominic Cummings. The latter has had more influence over the government's policy regarding Brexit than any elected MP.
 
Odd how I have managed to read all of those things and more in the UK-ian press, heard them on the BBC (the lies over Brexit have been a staple of gags from pretty much every comedian on a topical show, even including Geoff Norcott who is in favour of Brexit). It's more relevant that most English (sic) folk just don't care.

I think your liberal left wing bubble might be showing again.

I think the average UK-ian would ask 'who the F is Geoff Norcott' and most of those Brexiteers who know him from Mash Report would probably agree with Andrew Neil that the show is "self-satisfied, self-adulatory, unchallenged left-wing propaganda"
 
And of course now we are getting complaints because Starmer wants to vote for the deal. Some people really don't seem to understand that its this deal or No Deal and Starmer has no intention of lining up with the die hard Tory Brexiteers and potentially delivering a No Deal Brexit. That would basically be Boris' dream come true, a No Deal Brexit to make his chums happy and Labour as the whipping boy for every negative consequence.

And Starmer doesn't seem to understand the purpose of being in opposition. The deal will pass whether Starmer and Labour vote for it or not. Giving it his seal of approval is pathetic BS from a party that is a master of pathetic BS and has been throughout the Brexit process. At least they won't abstain this time I guess.
 
And Starmer doesn't seem to understand the purpose of being in opposition. The deal will pass whether Starmer and Labour vote for it or not. Giving it his seal of approval is pathetic BS from a party that is a master of pathetic BS and has been throughout the Brexit process. At least they won't abstain this time I guess.

I think with a day to go he has to support this rather than risk no deal.

He couldn't be sure that the ERG and other Tory backbenchers would not oppose the deal.

I agree that Labour's Brexit strategy has been a complete mess from the start, but most of that can be blamed on Corbyn's "leadership".
 
Because without Corbyn's idiocy Johnson wouldn't have been elected with an unassailable majority and imposed his insane Brexit on the UK.

Citation needed.

Boris Johnson was is and will be the UK's most popular politician for quite some time and would have beaten Labour no matter who the leader was in my opinion. Unless it was someone from Strictly or whoever won I'm A Celebrity.

If there was an election tomorrow Boris would probably win an even bigger majority.

Because the people of the UK are idiots.
 
Incorrect. The only institution of the EU that is able to propose policy in the European parliament is the Commission. The public cannot lobby their MEP to propose legislation, only to amend reject or approve legislation.

The Commission aren't elected by the public, if they were I'd be a supporter, but they aren't.

If that's enough for you, that's fine. But it's not good enough for me.
And "the lies" I read, are the statements on the EU Commission website ec.europa.eu

Well, even if that is true, I don't think there is any "sovereignty" issues up for grabs. The UK pretty much will have to abide by what the EU decide anyway, only now without their (priveleged) seat at the table.
 
I didn't vote leave because of foreigners, I voted leave because of democracy and experience tells me that the only way to have democratic freedom of choice in policy areas controlled by the EU, is to not be in it.

Take the railways, I would like to bring back a wholly state owned passenger railway system.

Always interesting when people post things like this. The UK goes far beyond most of the EU in terms of the level of privatisation and fragmentation of the railways. Privatisation is a religion for the Tories and the very people who were funding the Leave campaigns. So by leaving the EU all you have done is hand the railways, NHS and every other public service over to the people who want to sell them off. And conveniently left the country with less money to fund them so as to give them and excuse to do it. Genius!

https://www.tssa.org.uk/en/whats-new/news/index.cfm/rail-across-europe-public-private-and-beyond
 
The Guardian has a circulation of about 100,000. The Sun and Mail have about 2.5m between them.

Its not unlikely that YOU have seen the arguments and facts, the problem is that the majority either haven't or have been primed to dismiss them as lies by the media they actually listen to.

Not the same thing as Vixen has been saying. That is what I am arguing against.
 
Incorrect. The only institution of the EU that is able to propose policy in the European parliament is the Commission. The public cannot lobby their MEP to propose legislation, only to amend reject or approve legislation.

The Commission aren't elected by the public, if they were I'd be a supporter, but they aren't.

If that's enough for you, that's fine. But it's not good enough for me.
And "the lies" I read, are the statements on the EU Commission website ec.europa.eu

The Commission are appointed by the national governments though. In other words the elected PM decides.

Presumably you want Westminster abolished on the grounds that the Cabinet isn't elected?
 
I think with a day to go he has to support this rather than risk no deal.

Not at all. It will pass anyway.

Presumably he could have tabled a motion or amendment that in the case the bill was not passed then Johnson would go back and ask for an extension to the transition period?

He could have done one of any million things other than rush to get his capitulation out in public minutes after the announcement of a deal was made and presumably without even reading it?
 
Not the same thing as Vixen has been saying. That is what I am arguing against.

I think it pretty much amounts to the same thing.

'It's in the Guardian' is not really much of a rebuttal to 'you won't see this in the press'. The Guardian is a rounding error in terms of media influence and the people who read it are generally not the ones who need to see the information it contains.
 
National governments in our case lost every EU election since 1994 and in my view had no remit to represent the public at EU level. The party which won the EU elections in those years should have been the ones to put forward the Commissioner.
 
Btw I would get rid of the Lords as they are not elected.
Cabinet ministers who are MPs can be sacked by their constituents.
Even the PM can be.
As such they are required to listen to constituents.
I've been able to talk to successive MPs in my constituency.

Any MP can propose legislation of their own to Parliament.

How was I supposed to be able to influence a Commissioner and talk to them about policy?
 
I think it pretty much amounts to the same thing.

'It's in the Guardian' is not really much of a rebuttal to 'you won't see this in the press'. The Guardian is a rounding error in terms of media influence and the people who read it are generally not the ones who need to see the information it contains.

Watch those goalposts fly!
 
I think your liberal left wing bubble might be showing again.

I think the average UK-ian would ask 'who the F is Geoff Norcott' and most of those Brexiteers who know him from Mash Report would probably agree with Andrew Neil that the show is "self-satisfied, self-adulatory, unchallenged left-wing propaganda"

What the BBC is now a liberal left wing bubble? After all those years of Nick Robinson and Laura Kuensberg brown-nosing Tory governments, Evan Davis running in the direction of away from asking challenging questions of ministers or refusing to call out absolute lies? That BBC? What about the one which seemed to have Farage trotting out his xenophobic Little Englander schtick on every programme? That BBC? The BBC with Question Time on?

Living in Berwick constituency with my ERG MP? Next door to folk who vote for her and think Johnson is doing a good job? With local press who lap up and regurgitate without question every little thing our MP says and does? Being harangued in Alnwick (when I was still at work) by the local UKIP useful idiot pretty much every week (we shared a building with local social services, so he figured everyone who worked their was some class of lefty and came to shout at us)?

FFS, if this is a left wing, liberal bubble...
 
Last edited:
Same reason most of the Labour voters I know* didn't support him and I (as a Labour member) voted for Starmer. He was unelectable and yes, the media did a really unfair hatchet job on him, but he was never a leader. I know canvassers for Labour who were on peoples doorsteps trying to explain WTF "constructive ambiguity" meant to people who "expect a little more back for their taxes like school books, beds in hospitals and peace in our bloody time All they get is old men grinding axes".



*skewed sample. Most of us are of an age to remember when Labour was run by people who preferred ideological purity to actually helping people.

I so disagree. In a General Election people should be voting for the party and the policies/manifesto. It should not be about personalities or individuals, The party leader is merely a figurehead. Here today gone tomorrow.
 
Because Corbyn was, and is, an unelectable, imbecile, Brexiteer, redolent with the stench of lunatic anti-semitism, who cannot pass an inane, ideological bandwagon without jumping on-board.


Because without Corbyn's idiocy Johnson wouldn't have been elected with an unassailable majority and imposed his insane Brexit on the UK.

I see you have sucked up the Murdoch message. I am pro-Israel but virtually all my friends are pro-Palestine, some of them fiercely so. They are not for one second 'anti-Semitic' - there are plenty of Jews who are against the Israel occupied state and they are no more racist than the average educated person.

Johnson is not exactly a wonderful person himself and compared to Corbyn he is a disgusting dog whistle racist. I am politically neutral and it is clear to me Corbyn was unfairly and exaggeratedly painted as a marxist terrorist. You would think Diane Abbott was the biggest buffoon ever seen to read the UK press. I have met her and she is a lovely, warm person. I personally like her characteristic way of talking.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom