Let's Get Political!

[Pax Romana]

I will once the Express write one for him in short words.  

Its like those girls who get groomed, desperately believing the nonsense they are told as it makes them feel important.

Problem is that your point of view is precisely that, a point of view not a statement of fact.  You cherry pick your 'facts' with as much impunity as SRK does.  

The Yellowhammer report has been widely quoted as if the worst case scenarios are inevitable.  They aren't.

The people writing that report were (at the very least) of the same mind-set that drove the overblown disaster projections that preceded the original vote and thereby enabled the leavers to rightly claim that you can't trust the government projections.  It's the same problem as climate change; the OTT projections of doom have fuelled the people who wish to dispute that it is happening.  

Yes the British people are wiser now than 3 years ago, but in both directions.

I believe that the effects of Brexit will haunt this country for decades but I don't know that and neither do you.

[pauld]

Problem is that your point of view is precisely that, a point of view not a statement of fact.  You cherry pick your 'facts' with as much impunity as SRK does. 

Although with considerably more consideration and logic. Bit harsh to compare horlock to SRK.

[pauld]

Ruth Davidson reported to be quitting as leader of Scottish Tories in protest at Johnson's proroguing parliament.

[Nemo]

Ruth Davidson reported to be quitting as leader of Scottish Tories in protest at Johnson's proroguing parliament.

Not a surprise (and not really because of today, she just doesn't get on with Johnson) but does make the Conservative path to a majority much, much harder as the idea of Scotland returning 13 Conservatives with a Johnson led party and no Davidson is... a long shot.

They'll need to take a whole bunch of Northern English town seats from Labour to offset losing Scotland back to the SNP and leafy remain University cities to the Lib Dems.

It's a shame about the geography of it all really, because you'd think everyone would be much happier with Scotland, London, Bristol/Bath, Cambridge and Oxford going it one way as an EU state and the Home Counties and most of the rest of the country going to the Independent Brexiteer Nation of Britannia.

[Pax Romana]

Bit harsh to compare horlock to SRK.

Ok.  Point taken.  I've texted a private apology to SRK.   

[Sir red ken]

Ok.  Point taken.  I've texted a private apology to SRK.   

Good man, thanks

[Legends-Lounge]

First opportunity i’ve had today so forgive me 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

[pauld]

Proroguing parliament goes against everything that the veterans of D-Day who waded on to those beaches fought and died for

[pauld]

You don't deliver democracy by trashing democracy - you can't just shut down parliament

[horlock07]

Although with considerably more consideration and logic. Bit harsh to compare horlock to SRK.

Don't worry, entirely used to personal insults from those who still believe in unicorns.

[horlock07]

Problem is that your point of view is precisely that, a point of view not a statement of fact.  You cherry pick your 'facts' with as much impunity as SRK does.  

Not sure why I am bothering with this but hey ho it less taxing that what I am supposed to be doing at work this morning.... If you want to attack someone for not using facts its usually common practice and courtesy to actually use facts in ones response....

The Yellowhammer report has been widely quoted as if the worst case scenarios are inevitable.  They aren't.

Yelllowhammer is not the worst case scenario, its is to quote Civil Service speak 'the most realistic assessment of what the public face with no deal. These are likely, basic, reasonable scenarios - not the worst case.' - see from that most remainy of newspapers The Times.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/operation-chaos-whitehalls-secret-no-deal-brexit-plan-leaked-j6ntwvhll

The person who has been rolled out to claim it is worst case is Michael Gove, he also said this...



and this



So what is correct? FWIW Gove also claimed it had been leaked by a 'former minister', although its now been confirmed it dated from August and thus the Johnson government and thus no former ministers would have a copy, so again further discrediting the habitual liar Gove.

The people writing that report were (at the very least) of the same mind-set that drove the overblown disaster projections that preceded the original vote and thereby enabled the leavers to rightly claim that you can't trust the government projections.  It's the same problem as climate change; the OTT projections of doom have fuelled the people who wish to dispute that it is happening.  

Care to evidence this piece of conjecture, I have no idea who the author was. FWIW much of what was stated pre-referendum was based upon us actually leaving the EU a process that has been thwarted as much by hard line brexiteers as any remainer.

Bringing Climate Change into it is interesting, as its just another case of hoping that things will be OK, normally based upon the projections of discredited 'scientists' (whose research tends to be funded by the fossil fuel companies like Koch) and bizarrely in this country Nigel Lawson its now fairly well confirmed within the scientific community that it is happening see https://www.theguardian.com/science/2019/jul/24/scientific-consensus-on-humans-causing-global-warming-passes-99

Yes the British people are wiser now than 3 years ago, but in both directions.

I believe that the effects of Brexit will haunt this country for decades but I don't know that and neither do you.

I would be inclined to agree on both these points, therefore I will ask a simple question that many have refused/been unable to answer. Can you please provide evidenced examples whereby it can be shown that Brexit will bring a positive benefit to the population of this country.

[horlock07]

First opportunity i’ve had today so forgive me 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

I have to admit that was my first response to it as well, although probably for different reasons.

Proroguing parliament goes against everything that the veterans of D-Day who waded on to those beaches fought and died for

Indeed I imagine there are a number of historical figures who tried to bring Britain to their knees in the past laughing their tits off upstairs watching us do it to ourselves.

I imagine Hatt Mancock is fuming as well, although apparently not enough to resign.

https://twitter.com/dcakraemer/status/1166676234211905536

Looks like things could get even more amusing...

https://www.buzzfeed.com/alexwickham/boris-johnson-brexit-extreme-measures

This deserves the pissing oneself with laugher emoji as well.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-parliament-suspended-eu-rule-law-investigation-latest-a9082606.html

[pauld]

I imagine Hatt Mancock is fuming as well, although apparently not enough to resign.

Indeed, I was (slightly mis-)quoting the great principled Health Secretary

[horlock07]

Indeed, I was (slightly mis-)quoting the great principled Health Secretary

TBF he isn't the only one with the backbone of rubber...

https://twitter.com/ianbirrell/status/1166821141207494656

[Pax Romana]

I would be inclined to agree on both these points, therefore I will ask a simple question that many have refused/been unable to answer. Can you please provide evidenced examples whereby it can be shown that Brexit will bring a positive benefit to the population of this country.

No I can't.  Two reasons.
  
1.  I do accept that there are some potential advantages to Brexit of which the most easily measureable is probably the elimination of our (net) EU contribution, a much quoted one is the increased autonomy it gives us, a more speculative one is avoiding the gradual move to a Federal Europe and my own favourite which is to ensure we stay out of the euro which I believe (but have no evidence to prove) is an accident waiting to happen.  However I don't believe that it is likely that Brexit will "bring a [net] positive benefit to the population of this country".   The biggest myth, I believe, is the EU contribution which I think will be dwarfed by the underlying cost of going it alone, in particular wrt our ability to negotiate equally advantageous trade deals when we have a fraction of the financial muscle of the EU.
 
2.  All of the above is riddled with "I believe" this and "I think" that which is all it can be because opinions are all we have right now.  Anyone who claims they can "provide evidenced examples whereby it can be shown that Brexit will [anything] " before it actually happens doesn't understand the difference between fact and projection.    Furthermore Brexit has no real historical equivalence (that I can think of) so it is not like, say, projecting that it will rain in Wales in 2020 based on historical rainfall data.

I think that you & I probably have reasonably similar views on the (un)desirability of Brexit.  I think that we have very different views on how much the strength with which we hold those views entitle us to deride those who disagree.

The world seems to be increasingly dominated by people who believe that it is not just their right but their patriotic duty to decry anyone who appears to disagree with them (however marginally) as a fascist/commie, homophobe/faggot, misogynist/feminazi, sjw/alt-right who deserves to be insulted, intimidated, milk-shaked, fired, assaulted, threatened with rape, shot dead all in the name of ….. whatever.    By Any Means Necessary as one US group proudly titles itself.

I think (rather pompously) that this is uncivilised and more importantly that it is counter-productive.  How many people, having been called a moron, have ever clapped their hand to their forehead and exclaimed “By god you’re right, I’ll come around to your way of thinking immediately”?

You describe SRK as “like those girls who get groomed, desperately believing the nonsense they are told as it makes them feel special.”

PaulD believes that this demonstrates that you have “considerably more consideration”.  I struggle with that.