Could UK U-turn on Referendum Result
Discussion
andymadmak said:
stop inferring that Brexit voters were in any way misled.
We don't have to infer it. We can assert it with confidence, and evidence. Leave told us that we would be able to "take back control" over immigration and law making. This is proving to be false (in two ways - we already had control and already made most of our own legislation, and secondly we can gain no further controls outside the EU which would be to our net benefit - the only new controls we could introduced would be self-harming), now that we are faced with the real exit scenarios. We would have 350m for the NHS. This was proven false on 24th June 2016 by the Leave campaign itself.How was this not misleading?
You just can't get away with statements like that. The consequences of the misleading Leave campaign, amongst other factors out here in the cold, real world, will be a U-turn on the referendum result. If they'd told the truth and won, things might be different. But they've made it easy for a politician like Theresa May now to let it run to its inevitable conclusion of a U-turn on the result with no s
t sticking to her.///ajd said:
We are debating the final deal but the fact that it might upset some brexiters seems to be why we all should "shut up".
You are kidding yourself if:
- you don't think the main message of £350m / week had an impact on brexit voters.
- you think drawing a distinction between cease and control will change the perception of brexiteers who clearly hoped for rather more than fundamentally unchanged FMOL.
The polling data suggests that before the campaign even started that "leave" was ahead by almost exactly the amount they won by. ie all the lies (on both sides) made not one iota of difference and blaming it on the "£350m which could be spent on the NHS instead" is utterly pointless. You are kidding yourself if:
- you don't think the main message of £350m / week had an impact on brexit voters.
- you think drawing a distinction between cease and control will change the perception of brexiteers who clearly hoped for rather more than fundamentally unchanged FMOL.
SilverSixer said:
andymadmak said:
stop inferring that Brexit voters were in any way misled.
We don't have to infer it. We can assert it with confidence, and evidence. Leave told us that we would be able to "take back control" over immigration and law making. This is proving to be false (in two ways - we already had control and already made most of our own legislation, and secondly we can gain no further controls outside the EU which would be to our net benefit - the only new controls we could introduced would be self-harming), now that we are faced with the real exit scenarios. We would have 350m for the NHS. This was proven false on 24th June 2016 by the Leave campaign itself.How was this not misleading?
You just can't get away with statements like that. The consequences of the misleading Leave campaign, amongst other factors out here in the cold, real world, will be a U-turn on the referendum result. If they'd told the truth and won, things might be different. But they've made it easy for a politician like Theresa May now to let it run to its inevitable conclusion of a U-turn on the result with no s
t sticking to her.andymadmak said:
///ajd said:
andymadmak said:
And yet, without asking anybody, you remain contingent seem convinced that Brexit voters did so because of 350m for the NHS etc etc.
hypocrisy much?
Why if it was only an embarrassing lie was it the key brexit message?hypocrisy much?
All over the Battle bus, plastered infront of Gove, Boris et al. Clear message the cash would goto NHS.
They were even putting leaflets in hospitals with NHS logos making it look like the NHS agreed!
Had no impact on any brexit voter you reckon?
They spent alot of money on a message everyone would ignore - according to you - didn't they!!
Infact good old Don4l wanted to stop all payments on the 24th June as I recall. He could confirm but suspect he is still banned for letting his mask slip around his crude bigotry.
You can keep bringing up WW3 if you want but no remainer ever said it - just Boris who also mentioned Hitler as I recall.
andymadmak said:
Wow. Just wow. So Remain poster after remain poster keeps posting references to the 350 million, and to "how Brexiters will be so disappointed when the immigration does not stop" etc and somehow you don't think this is relevant given that they have no evidence to support this contention? A contention that they then use to justify their bleatings? Wow.
As for the GF comment from last week (or whenever) I made an honest mistake by confusing you with another poster. As soon as it was pointed out I apologised to you for the mistake and the confusion. Shows the calibre of man that you are that you cannot accept an apology for a genuine mix up.
LOL.As for the GF comment from last week (or whenever) I made an honest mistake by confusing you with another poster. As soon as it was pointed out I apologised to you for the mistake and the confusion. Shows the calibre of man that you are that you cannot accept an apology for a genuine mix up.
See? You just can't stop yourself.
Yes, the reference is valid as it was deemed so important by Boris and Co. to put it on the side of the bus. They didn't put new free trade deals instead. Still, nobody said that applies to all brexit voters, if they did they would be, quite obviously, wrong. Interpolating of what people think, once again, from what you asked few people, is stupid. No two ways about it. And you can wow as much as you want.
As for the gf comment, you kept banging on about it even after I asked you few times 'what gf, what are you on about'. You only stopped after someone else got bored with it and told you that it was someone else.
I care as much for your apology as I care about your opinion of me. It's still funny to watch the e-rage. And you do get angry by very many things. (If you could include some reference to lefties, that would give you some extra super bonus points.)
///ajd said:
You can keep bringing up WW3 if you want but no remainer ever said it - just Boris who also mentioned Hitler as I recall.
Seriously. Just stop making st up.http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/brexit-could-...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/08/cameron...
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/may/09/is...
///ajd said:
I bet I can find alot more than 10 who thought we would stop payments to the EU, keep market access and ride off into the sunset.
Infact good old Don4l wanted to stop all payments on the 24th June as I recall. He could confirm but suspect he is still banned for letting his mask slip around his crude bigotry.
You can keep bringing up WW3 if you want but no remainer ever said it - just Boris who also mentioned Hitler as I recall.
You've got 17 million to go at. And you only needed 10. And you've given up already. PatheticInfact good old Don4l wanted to stop all payments on the 24th June as I recall. He could confirm but suspect he is still banned for letting his mask slip around his crude bigotry.
You can keep bringing up WW3 if you want but no remainer ever said it - just Boris who also mentioned Hitler as I recall.
Fastdruid said:
///ajd said:
You can keep bringing up WW3 if you want but no remainer ever said it - just Boris who also mentioned Hitler as I recall.
Seriously. Just stop making st up.http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/brexit-could-...
Fastdruid said:
///ajd said:
You can keep bringing up WW3 if you want but no remainer ever said it - just Boris who also mentioned Hitler as I recall.
Seriously. Just stop making st up.http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/brexit-could-...
Only the mirror and raging brexiters applied the tag line WW3 - presumably to exaggerate their own spin so the lazy and gullible will think that is what he actually said. Seems it worked on some!!
Funny old thing - and just above, we being told no-one believed the £350m claim. You've just proved some will lap up any old rhetoric without bothering to find out what was actually said.
jjlynn27 said:
Fastdruid said:
///ajd said:
You can keep bringing up WW3 if you want but no remainer ever said it - just Boris who also mentioned Hitler as I recall.
Seriously. Just stop making st up.http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/brexit-could-...
andymadmak said:
SilverSixer said:
andymadmak said:
stop inferring that Brexit voters were in any way misled.
We don't have to infer it. We can assert it with confidence, and evidence. Leave told us that we would be able to "take back control" over immigration and law making. This is proving to be false (in two ways - we already had control and already made most of our own legislation, and secondly we can gain no further controls outside the EU which would be to our net benefit - the only new controls we could introduced would be self-harming), now that we are faced with the real exit scenarios. We would have 350m for the NHS. This was proven false on 24th June 2016 by the Leave campaign itself.How was this not misleading?
You just can't get away with statements like that. The consequences of the misleading Leave campaign, amongst other factors out here in the cold, real world, will be a U-turn on the referendum result. If they'd told the truth and won, things might be different. But they've made it easy for a politician like Theresa May now to let it run to its inevitable conclusion of a U-turn on the result with no s
t sticking to her.SilverSixer said:
andymadmak said:
SilverSixer said:
andymadmak said:
stop inferring that Brexit voters were in any way misled.
We don't have to infer it. We can assert it with confidence, and evidence. Leave told us that we would be able to "take back control" over immigration and law making. This is proving to be false (in two ways - we already had control and already made most of our own legislation, and secondly we can gain no further controls outside the EU which would be to our net benefit - the only new controls we could introduced would be self-harming), now that we are faced with the real exit scenarios. We would have 350m for the NHS. This was proven false on 24th June 2016 by the Leave campaign itself.How was this not misleading?
You just can't get away with statements like that. The consequences of the misleading Leave campaign, amongst other factors out here in the cold, real world, will be a U-turn on the referendum result. If they'd told the truth and won, things might be different. But they've made it easy for a politician like Theresa May now to let it run to its inevitable conclusion of a U-turn on the result with no s
t sticking to her.Now that's gullible...
SilverSixer said:
andymadmak said:
SilverSixer said:
andymadmak said:
stop inferring that Brexit voters were in any way misled.
We don't have to infer it. We can assert it with confidence, and evidence. Leave told us that we would be able to "take back control" over immigration and law making. This is proving to be false (in two ways - we already had control and already made most of our own legislation, and secondly we can gain no further controls outside the EU which would be to our net benefit - the only new controls we could introduced would be self-harming), now that we are faced with the real exit scenarios. We would have 350m for the NHS. This was proven false on 24th June 2016 by the Leave campaign itself.How was this not misleading?
You just can't get away with statements like that. The consequences of the misleading Leave campaign, amongst other factors out here in the cold, real world, will be a U-turn on the referendum result. If they'd told the truth and won, things might be different. But they've made it easy for a politician like Theresa May now to let it run to its inevitable conclusion of a U-turn on the result with no s
t sticking to her.
SilverSixer said:
Fast druid is re-writing history. Plenty of polls before 23rd June had Remain in the lead, and let's not forget it was a fairly major surprise to just about everyone that Leave won. Leave was only showing ahead in polls near the end of the campaign, it was never in the lead before Boris and chums started their full campaign of misinformation, including the NHS gibberish.
I think you are mistaken. In fact i think you may have it the wrong way round completely. All the detailed data I have seen showed that Brexit had a lead right up to the last minute. It was only the final polls before the vote itself that showed Remain in the lead (this was after the Jo Cox murder) and even then the lead was only narrow. The surprise on the day that Brexit won was, possibly, driven by the fact that the final polls had shown Remain in the lead, and many assumed that the Jo Cox effect would prove to be decisive.
Fastdruid has provided the link to the data I read.http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/eu-referendum-polls/
Fastdruid said:
jjlynn27 said:
Fastdruid said:
///ajd said:
You can keep bringing up WW3 if you want but no remainer ever said it - just Boris who also mentioned Hitler as I recall.
Seriously. Just stop making st up.http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/brexit-could-...
DC said:
What happens in our neighbourhood matters to Britain. That was true in 1914, 1940, 1989.... and it is true in 2016
Hardly implying that there will be 'WW3' in case of Brexit. So; Boris 'translates' what DC says, and the headline turns into "'Brexit' could trigger World War Three, warns David Cameron".
///ajd said:
Fastdruid said:
Cameron didn't say "WW3 if Brexit!!!"
Finally got there.
But hey, my contention is not that either side is whiter than white or blacker than black. I genuinely believe that people saw through the guff from both sides and just voted the way they felt like voting. The LSE study suggests that Brexit was always in the lead, and was always going to win, before the fib fest started on all sides.
jjlynn27 said:
Sway said:
Under EEA it's unlikely, although already mooted...
Under EFTA then there really isn't a basis for FMOL - other than the Swiss signing up to it but including their restrictions which they now want to increase further. The restrictions they've applied for years were acceptable to the EU, the newly proposed ones aren't.
Which demonstrates that there is a significant degree of flexibility in application of FOML when applied to an EFTA member with a free trade deal.
Apart from the fact that they don't have access to sm for most services including financial.Under EFTA then there really isn't a basis for FMOL - other than the Swiss signing up to it but including their restrictions which they now want to increase further. The restrictions they've applied for years were acceptable to the EU, the newly proposed ones aren't.
Which demonstrates that there is a significant degree of flexibility in application of FOML when applied to an EFTA member with a free trade deal.
All these 'facts' show is that there is no basis for absolute assertions for any non EU member's relationship with the EU. Each has its own deal, nuanced and differentiated by different factors.
Which rather supports the view that prior to negotiations commencing, everything is truly on the table - the perfect solution in the eyes of many (full SM access, no FOM, no membership payments, freedom to deal and influence on a global level) through to the worst case.
This fighting the referendum result has more than a whiff of the Japanese guy still in the jungle 30 years after the end of the war and who only surrendered when his old commanding officer went in to tell him it was over. Maybe we need a PH broadcast from Nick Clegg to lay down those EU flags and let it go.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff