Should remainers vote for the Libs?

[andymadmak]

jjlynn27 said:

andymadmak said:

You are so polite. Charm school was wasted on you.

Now, as it happens I do think that some Remain voters do want the UK to suffer for the reasons I have stated, and certainly some Remain voters have said that they want Brexit voters to suffer personally - on this very forum. They represent a tiny minority in my view, but they exist nevertheless. You do of course remember the lady on QT who wanted the children of Brexit voters to contract incurable illnesses so that they could see the consequences of their actions?

I do remember Lady on QT who misspoke and profusely apologised and explained what she meant. I do remember that some posters on PH thought that she would give inferior care to Brexiters, because of course, one of the questions during triage is 'how did your parents vote in referendum', 'Oh right, back of the queue'.

The level of tinfoilery displayed by some, and I do include you in that group, is astounding, but not surprising if you have dailymail headlines as your opinions.

Of course she apologised profusely. Not to have done so would have cost her her job. Misspoke? Your wilful blindness to the truly nasty nature of some Remainers says quite alot about you. One does not have to be too imaginative to have a pretty clear idea as to what your view would have been had it been a Brexit voter wishing ill on the children of Remainers.

[B'stard Child]

Likes Fast Cars said:

frisbee said:

I'm voting LD, they are very likely to regain the seat where I live. The local conservative who won the last election is very good but I don't support Brexit.

Its a shame that there is no credible opposition in this country.

So you would vote-out a very good MP just because of Brexit? Guess what - Brexit is here to stay. Why punish a good MP? It's like firing someone for doing their job and having no-one to replace them with (as you say "there is no credible opposition in this country").

Do that and you get this

Brand new Lib Dumb MP who is clueless gets reamed

[chrispmartha]

andymadmak said:

jjlynn27 said:

andymadmak said:

You are so polite. Charm school was wasted on you.

Now, as it happens I do think that some Remain voters do want the UK to suffer for the reasons I have stated, and certainly some Remain voters have said that they want Brexit voters to suffer personally - on this very forum. They represent a tiny minority in my view, but they exist nevertheless. You do of course remember the lady on QT who wanted the children of Brexit voters to contract incurable illnesses so that they could see the consequences of their actions?

I do remember Lady on QT who misspoke and profusely apologised and explained what she meant. I do remember that some posters on PH thought that she would give inferior care to Brexiters, because of course, one of the questions during triage is 'how did your parents vote in referendum', 'Oh right, back of the queue'.

The level of tinfoilery displayed by some, and I do include you in that group, is astounding, but not surprising if you have dailymail headlines as your opinions.

Of course she apologised profusely. Not to have done so would have cost her her job. Misspoke? Your wilful blindness to the truly nasty nature of some Remainers says quite alot about you. One does not have to be too imaginative to have a pretty clear idea as to what your view would have been had it been a Brexit voter wishing ill on the children of Remainers.

This, again, really.

Which is more likely?

A. A women fluffed her words in a lively debate On live TV and later apologised.

B. A women who has all her working career been in the care industry suddenly really does wish children to be ill because of how their parents voted in a referendum.

[footnote]

Tim Farron: I don't think being gay is a sin http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39644939

Now that's been finally and clearly answered, I wonder what the next Lab/Con smear attempt will be?

Teresa May's already cracked on the TV debate and will now face a live TV audience - running scared. Not going to plan this for the Cons.

Or, as TM has already framed this as 'Referendum II' then perhaps it is going entirely to plan?

TM doesn't want to go down in history as Brexit being her 'fault' so whichever way the people vote absolves her of personal responsibility - and I don't blame her, nobody would rush to have this on their head without asking 'are you sure?'

[rxe]

jonnyb said:

Or the EU saved Greece from going bust by lending to them when no one else would, and when Cyprus was faced with the same problem THEY (Cyprus) elected to remove capital from peoples bank accounts, not the EU.

I would characterise it as the EU pushing the heroin of unrealistic interest rates on a country, and then turning up the cost per hit as the patient really got into trouble. Before the ghastliness of the Euro, Greece would have printed its way out of trouble, devalued, Stavros would have not been able to afford a BMW for a few years, but the tourist money would have been flooding in.

Instead they are saddled with a debt that their great grandchildren will be paying off in 150 years.

Southern Europe is going to have to break out of the Euro, or face civil war.

[andymadmak]

chrispmartha said:

andymadmak said:

jjlynn27 said:

andymadmak said:

You are so polite. Charm school was wasted on you.

Now, as it happens I do think that some Remain voters do want the UK to suffer for the reasons I have stated, and certainly some Remain voters have said that they want Brexit voters to suffer personally - on this very forum. They represent a tiny minority in my view, but they exist nevertheless. You do of course remember the lady on QT who wanted the children of Brexit voters to contract incurable illnesses so that they could see the consequences of their actions?

I do remember Lady on QT who misspoke and profusely apologised and explained what she meant. I do remember that some posters on PH thought that she would give inferior care to Brexiters, because of course, one of the questions during triage is 'how did your parents vote in referendum', 'Oh right, back of the queue'.

The level of tinfoilery displayed by some, and I do include you in that group, is astounding, but not surprising if you have dailymail headlines as your opinions.

Of course she apologised profusely. Not to have done so would have cost her her job. Misspoke? Your wilful blindness to the truly nasty nature of some Remainers says quite alot about you. One does not have to be too imaginative to have a pretty clear idea as to what your view would have been had it been a Brexit voter wishing ill on the children of Remainers.

This, again, really.

Which is more likely?

A. A women fluffed her words in a lively debate On live TV and later apologised.

B. A women who has all her working career been in the care industry suddenly really does wish children to be ill because of how their parents voted in a referendum.

Because you are a decent and reasonable person, you will want to believe that option A is the right answer. Watch the video. She is an intelligent articulate woman. She did not misspeak in my opinion. Her track record elsewhere (you can google her) is as a passionately, ardently campaigning remainer. It is not such a stretch to see that her passion has driven her to option B "for the greater good" as she sees it.

I guess we will never know for sure, - you will want to believe her, possibly because you voted remain(?) and would not want to believe that someone who shares you view on the EU could be so extreme in her opinions. I will be somewhat more sceptical, possibly because I voted Exit, and because I have witnessed first hand the sort of vitriol and nastiness that some (a very few) on the Remain side are prepared to dish out to Brexit voters.
I remind you again that even on this very website you had Remain voters wishing economic disaster on Brexit voters. Not everyone is as nice or understanding as you may be.

[jshell]

jonnyb said:

jshell said:

ATG said:

jshell said:

bobbo89 said:

Are those voting LD to avoid a hard Brexit not concerned that what could result is an absolute mess of a deal that's worse than the hard Brexit they voted to avoid?

No, they seem unconcerned that their 'protest vote' will actually cause far more damage to the UK in the Brexit negotiations. They're the type of people that plead with a murderer to 'be nice'. The EU is not nice, they don't play nice, they won't be nice to us, they will try to fk us. 'We' need to stand up to them now and get the best deal for the UK, whether or not people support Brexit, they better get behind it as the alternative is standing beside a plane with a piece of paper in the hand!

Paranoid bilge

BS. The EU show their hand at every turn. They punished Greece, they robbed the Cypriot banks and they're trying to print themselves out of crises. They are corrupt, and bullying. They are not nice people.

Or the EU saved Greece from going bust by lending to them when no one else would, and when Cyprus was faced with the same problem THEY (Cyprus) elected to remove capital from peoples bank accounts, not the EU.

You're mental.

The strong nations of the EU are strong because the ponzi scheme allows them to lend money to poorer countries who then use the money to buy the output of the strong nations. That cycle has an end point. Greece, in particular is bust. Properly bust, but if that is ever admitted by the EU then it all comes crashing down.

Greece should have left the Euro, re-adopted the Drachma and taken the pain of repairing their economy. The EU giving money to the Greek junkie, like a short-term fix can only end in disaster. The finance minister was very clear about how he wanted to handle things, and suddenly he had to quit for personal reasons. Aye, right, the political pressures of the pseudo-communist blok of the EU will accept no challenges. No dissent. They are s.

That's why we need a strong hand to guide us, not a bunch of apologetic whiners who'll beg the EU to be nice to us.

Cyprus stole that cash upon instruction from the EU and the IMF, make no mistake. The Cypriot govt were given a choice: take it or leave it, so instead of standing up to the hand that feeds them, they stole ordinary people's cash. That will happen again elsewhere.

[jshell]

andymadmak said:

chrispmartha said:

andymadmak said:

jjlynn27 said:

andymadmak said:

You are so polite. Charm school was wasted on you.

Now, as it happens I do think that some Remain voters do want the UK to suffer for the reasons I have stated, and certainly some Remain voters have said that they want Brexit voters to suffer personally - on this very forum. They represent a tiny minority in my view, but they exist nevertheless. You do of course remember the lady on QT who wanted the children of Brexit voters to contract incurable illnesses so that they could see the consequences of their actions?

I do remember Lady on QT who misspoke and profusely apologised and explained what she meant. I do remember that some posters on PH thought that she would give inferior care to Brexiters, because of course, one of the questions during triage is 'how did your parents vote in referendum', 'Oh right, back of the queue'.

The level of tinfoilery displayed by some, and I do include you in that group, is astounding, but not surprising if you have dailymail headlines as your opinions.

Of course she apologised profusely. Not to have done so would have cost her her job. Misspoke? Your wilful blindness to the truly nasty nature of some Remainers says quite alot about you. One does not have to be too imaginative to have a pretty clear idea as to what your view would have been had it been a Brexit voter wishing ill on the children of Remainers.

This, again, really.

Which is more likely?

A. A women fluffed her words in a lively debate On live TV and later apologised.

B. A women who has all her working career been in the care industry suddenly really does wish children to be ill because of how their parents voted in a referendum.

Because you are a decent and reasonable person, you will want to believe that option A is the right answer. Watch the video. She is an intelligent articulate woman. She did not misspeak in my opinion. Her track record elsewhere (you can google her) is as a passionately, ardently campaigning remainer. It is not such a stretch to see that her passion has driven her to option B "for the greater good" as she sees it.

I guess we will never know for sure, - you will want to believe her, possibly because you voted remain(?) and would not want to believe that someone who shares you view on the EU could be so extreme in her opinions. I will be somewhat more sceptical, possibly because I voted Exit, and because I have witnessed first hand the sort of vitriol and nastiness that some (a very few) on the Remain side are prepared to dish out to Brexit voters.
I remind you again that even on this very website you had Remain voters wishing economic disaster on Brexit voters. Not everyone is as nice or understanding as you may be.

Here you go: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21PNW5z7JTs

Pretty clear in her words.

[Mario149]

jonby said:

Mario149 said:

Atomic12C said:

Mario149 said:

Brexit may well be here to stay, but the type of Brexit should def be on the table.

How is that possible?
The type of brexit is in the hands of more than one party, namely the UK government AND the EU.

You can't specify the end result if there is such a thing as a negotiation process to be had..... otherwise that would be called a one-sided demand which you are expecting the other side to roll over and accept.

It is in the UK national interest to get the best result from the negotiations. I firmly believe that the conservative government lead by TM is in the best position to get that by starting out on a 'hard' approach.


Look at the whole thing from a "sliding-scale" point of view. Generally a negotiation involves agreements on compromise, if one party starts of in a 'soft' position then they can only compromise towards a 'softer' position which would see them closer to the 'other side'.
If both parties start off in a 'hard' position then compromise is near the middle for both parties.

And this is exactly what both sides have done so far. The EU have set out a hard position against the UK. And obviously the UK is setting out a hard position against the EU.
I wouldn't have expected it to be anything otherwise.

I think you're over complicating this. If TM, during one of her Brexit announcements, had said: "Our goal is to Leave the EU, but remain part of the EEA with all its advantages and responsibilities (i.e. 4 freedoms etc) such that the UK enjoys a similar relationship to the EU as Norway/Iceland etc, with a broadly similar, but still to be exactly negotiated, per capita payment. " ....the EU would have jumped all over that. There would be no soft or hard positions, just a replication (as far as possible) of an existing arrangement already in place.

The only reason the concept of a hard or soft Brexit exists is because the UK wants to have its cake and eat it when the rules of the EU/EEA "club" are abundantly clear and have been so for years. The EU hasn't set out a hard position, it's just reiterated the one it's always had. We're perfectly entitled to our cake approach, but it creates a hard/soft Brexit problem all of our own making, no-one else's.

I find the idea that we can be seen to have in any way met the wishes of an electorate who voted to leave the EU, by having a new system that still means directly or indirectly, the 4 freedoms remain, more absurd than any other proposed solution. All that time, all that money, all that complication..............to be back where we were at the beginning.

So called 'soft Brexit' is a way of remainers getting their wish not to leave the EU, not a way of leavers (who won the referendum) having their wishes granted. Keeping the 4 freedoms, whether directly or indirectly, cannot reasonably be argued to mean we have left the EU in a meaningful way

While I would prefer to be in the EEA than outside, my example above was not arguing for that position. It was merely making the point that the hard/soft concept is a stick we've created to beat ourselves with, not one that was handed to us.

[Burwood]

I didn't think this thread would stay on top. The EU/brexit threads are THAT WAY!

Anywho- I will wager that the Lib Dems, will receive not 1%age point more in votes. I predict the Conservatives will in fact get 50%+, over 400 seats and it will be happy days. I also hope Corbyn stays in for another full term and conjures up even more whacky policy.

[Mario149]

Funk said:

TLandCruiser said:

Mario149 said:

You should vote to unseat the Tory candidate. Ideally to replace with a Lib Dem as they are opposed to Brexit (esp hard Brexit), but if a Labour candidate is more likely to win you should vote for them as even though they will support Brexit, they're anti hard Brexit and the less MPs the Tories have the more difficult it is for them to force through a hard Brexit.

Ridiculous

I'm glad I'm not the only one who thought that...!

Here's how I see it. Brexit is happening, end of. How it happens is still up for question. Voting LD could result in us ending up with a fractured coalition government again (and we saw how well that worked). There is no 'hard' or 'soft' Brexit - there is only 'Brexit'. However in order to achieve the best possible outcome for the country we need to present one united front against the EU negotiators. Any hint of dissent or weakness will give the EU negotiators the upper hand - if they think we're desperate for 'soft' Brexit (and I use that term under duress) they will take the piss wherever they can because they'd know that's what we needed.

Right now we need a united front, a government with a mandate and a solid majority and to hold our negotiating cards close to our chest.

In addition to that, do Tory voters really want to entrust the economy to the LDs or Labour again just as a 'protest'? Whilst I don't agree with any party 100%, I do think that currently the only credible party is the one in charge at the moment. Vote them back in, let them sort out the whole Brexit thing and then see if any of the other parties has managed to arrange a piss-up in a brewery by 2022.

Voting for Labour or the LDs at this stage would be idiocy; the sort of idiocy which - for example - resulted in Trump running the USA.

I don't mind having a united front, what I dislike is that if our negotiators do a poor job we might have a gov that rams through an exit which is hugely damaging to us, and having more LD/Lab etc MPs in parliament makes it less likely to happen. I don't believe in exiting the EU at all costs. I think that if it becomes manifestly obvious that leaving is going to be a disaster, we should at least have the option to join the EEA (with 4 freedoms), then re-evaluate where to go next. Brexiters can have their go at getting the UK out, but if it's a clusterfk, I don't want the arrogance and intransigent ideology of a few people in government to screw the country.

And if somehow the Lib Dems did gain a majority in parliament or form a government by a miracle (highly highly unlikely, but I'm illustrating a point), then we could safely say that the mandate to leave the EU from the ref had evaporated and that we should stay in.

[Burwood]

Mario-how is 400 seats going to, in anyway, shape or form be dictated to by a few Lib Dems. You also fail to realise that only a tiny few will actually bring themselves to vote for a party they never have. God, bring on June 8th, like tomorrow. 7 weeks of hearing Tim Farron, Corbyn and Gina Miller prattle on about changing the incumbent. I'll take bets with anyone 5:1 the Tories get over 400 seats

[jjlynn27]

andymadmak said:

jjlynn27 said:

andymadmak said:

You are so polite. Charm school was wasted on you.

Now, as it happens I do think that some Remain voters do want the UK to suffer for the reasons I have stated, and certainly some Remain voters have said that they want Brexit voters to suffer personally - on this very forum. They represent a tiny minority in my view, but they exist nevertheless. You do of course remember the lady on QT who wanted the children of Brexit voters to contract incurable illnesses so that they could see the consequences of their actions?

I do remember Lady on QT who misspoke and profusely apologised and explained what she meant. I do remember that some posters on PH thought that she would give inferior care to Brexiters, because of course, one of the questions during triage is 'how did your parents vote in referendum', 'Oh right, back of the queue'.

The level of tinfoilery displayed by some, and I do include you in that group, is astounding, but not surprising if you have dailymail headlines as your opinions.

Of course she apologised profusely. Not to have done so would have cost her her job. Misspoke? Your wilful blindness to the truly nasty nature of some Remainers says quite alot about you. One does not have to be too imaginative to have a pretty clear idea as to what your view would have been had it been a Brexit voter wishing ill on the children of Remainers.

There is no blindness at all. You have no idea if it would have cost her her job, you made that up.

You saw a conspiracy by Satchi&Satchi to portray brexiters as racist in a poster designed to encourage minorities to vote. You were proven wrong.

Don't judge everyone by your own, demonstrably low, standards. You are paranoid. Get help.

[jjlynn27]

chrispmartha said:

This, again, really.

Which is more likely?

A. A women fluffed her words in a lively debate On live TV and later apologised.

B. A women who has all her working career been in the care industry suddenly really does wish children to be ill because of how their parents voted in a referendum.

I'm afraid you are wasting your time with logic. Once paranoia sets in, the enemies are everywhere.

[andymadmak]

jjlynn27 said:

There is no blindness at all. You have no idea if it would have cost her her job, you made that up.

You saw a conspiracy by Satchi&Satchi to portray brexiters as racist in a poster designed to encourage minorities to vote. You were proven wrong.

Don't judge everyone by your own, demonstrably low, standards. You are paranoid. Get help.

You think someone who works at a children's hospital could have kept their job if she had not apologised and retracted what she said?
I fear you're the one that needs help. Or perhaps you just agree with her sentiments? You're pretty obnoxious most of the time so it would not surprise me.

As for the campaign you reference, https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/may/25/eu-r...
I think the intention is pretty clear. Even the Guardian recognised the controversy surrounding it.

Edited to add - show me this proof that proved me wrong!

[///ajd]

Leggy said:

Simple question. Would they be the best opposition to keep the Conservatives in check?

As much as I resent his unacceptable position on gay marriage - which as soon as he was appointed leader I considered a fatal weakness - the LibDems appear to be the only party standing for a "remain friendly" brexit.

Despite Keir having some merit, the Labour party are all over the place on brexit and generally. It is a total shambles that makes Foot and Kinnock look "ready for power" (and they clearly weren't).

So yes, I think LibDem is probably the only vote a remainer with significant concerns over Brexit can make. I suspect that a fair chunk of the 48% may be resigned to brexit and will let May try and make the best of it, but who knows.

I can see an argument to say that May should be allowed to have the best crack at Brexit and see what "the best deal" really looks like.

I still personally think it is such a bad outcome for the country it should be stopped, but I also realise I'm in a minority.

[Mario149]

ATG said:

Those long-time Conservative voters who are seriously considering voting Lib Dem, please let your local party know your intention. The sooner they start getting this feedback, the more impact your opinion will have.

Very good point

[jjlynn27]

andymadmak said:

jjlynn27 said:

There is no blindness at all. You have no idea if it would have cost her her job, you made that up.

You saw a conspiracy by Satchi&Satchi to portray brexiters as racist in a poster designed to encourage minorities to vote. You were proven wrong.

Don't judge everyone by your own, demonstrably low, standards. You are paranoid. Get help.

You think someone who works at a children's hospital could have kept their job if she had not apologised and retracted what she said?
I fear you're the one that needs help. Or perhaps you just agree with her sentiments? You're pretty obnoxious most of the time so it would not surprise me.

As for the campaign you reference, https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/may/25/eu-r...
I think the intention is pretty clear. Even the Guardian recognised the controversy surrounding it.

Edited to add - show me this proof that proved me wrong!

No idea if she could have kept her job. You have no idea either. You are presenting your opinion as a fact. I do understand, like any normal person would, her explanation.

I don't think that people who wish ill on other people kids end up working in childcare. Unlike you, I just don't see conspiracies everywhere.

As for the poster; I know, it's shocking, NF thinks it's 'disgusting'. It was designed to be 'hard-hitting' and it was designed to be noticed.

The site that was linked to the poster describes equally, and they went to great length to ensure that it was equal, pros and cons of voting for either of the binary options, thus proving you wrong.

I'm sure you are able to use the search facility on PH to find the thread in question.

[blindswelledrat]

andymadmak said:

You can if you are a passionate Remain voter who is looking to grasp at any straw that might thwart the leaving process.
You can see that people like Mrr T genuinely want to believe that the EU holds all the cards, and that somehow the UK is going to be completely stuffed by Brexit. They have to believe these things because to concede otherwise would be to accept that there is precious little reason for the UK to stay in the EU. The next step along is for them to WANT the UK to fail in the negotiations, to actually WANT the UK to suffer massive economic damage post Brexit, simply so that they can say "I told you so".
.

What moronic arse-about-face logic.
Talking for myself, if anything whatsoever made me think we are not guaranteed to be worse off then I would happily be a 'leave' voter. I would be 100% delighted to be proved wrong on this issue.
As it stands though, the inflation resulting from Brexit means that more or less all the people in the country are currently worse off.
Banks are starting to the process of moving their centres to Europe.
Any European *thing* based here is leaving.
It appears to be certain that immigration will remain the same after Brexit.
The country is utterly divided.
Racist crimes are on the increase.

All off the top of my head and these are the consequences of merely intending to leave, let alone leaving.
In the meantime the only Economic report which suggested we would be better off has been thoroughly debunked.
And to my knowledge not one single positive has occurred.
I cannot see one iota of silver lining to this debacle other than a few blokes on the internet saying "Yay, this will be great. Loads of opp0ortunity will come to us" and quite literally nothing to support that optimism.

Your belief that people like myself actually want the country to fk up is ludicrous even by your standards. Every single person like me would love to be wrong

[Mario149]

andymadmak said:

jjlynn27 said:

andymadmak said:

You can if you are a passionate Remain voter who is looking to grasp at any straw that might thwart the leaving process.
You can see that people like Mrr T genuinely want to believe that the EU holds all the cards, and that somehow the UK is going to be completely stuffed by Brexit. They have to believe these things because to concede otherwise would be to accept that there is precious little reason for the UK to stay in the EU. The next step along is for them to WANT the UK to fail in the negotiations, to actually WANT the UK to suffer massive economic damage post Brexit, simply so that they can say "I told you so".

To this end, doing everything you can right now to undermine the UK negotiating position, to demand what you know to be undeliverable, but which you pretend represents the reasonable, to witter on about "hard Brexit" as if it has any meaning whatsoever, to declare that you know why people voted why they did and more specifically what they voted for and did not vote for (thereby allowing you to interpret the vote against your position as somehow actually representing a vote FOR your position) - - - - all of this makes eminent sense to the passionate Remain voter.

Yes, people want UK to suffer massive economic damage, just to say on random car forum 'I told you so'.

If you actually believe that you are an idiot. Even if you don't, and just post that to make some imaginary point, you are an idiot.

You are so polite. Charm school was wasted on you.

Now, as it happens I do think that some Remain voters do want the UK to suffer for the reasons I have stated, and certainly some Remain voters have said that they want Brexit voters to suffer personally - on this very forum. They represent a tiny minority in my view, but they exist nevertheless. You do of course remember the lady on QT who wanted the children of Brexit voters to contract incurable illnesses so that they could see the consequences of their actions?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJg1QRxU0Z8

Edited by andymadmak on Wednesday 19th April 18:13

Frankly, if Brexit goes tits up, I'd rather no-one suffered as a result. But that said, this is the real world, so if it does go tits up, personally I'd rather it was the people that voted for it that got the sttiest end of the stick, karma and all that.