[Closed] Can Someone explain link between GE result and Brexit

Sometimes the fact that no-one has done something before is a big clue to whether its a good idea or not.
So you're saying the Tories have no idea what they're doing or what will happen or how to do it but they're going to carry on regardless? Doesn't sound very smart to me.

I agree with Akira, there's too much at stake for one party to run with it. The plans need to be scrutinised and debated in parliament.

The Conservatives' approach had been "we're just following the will of the people", making no concession to the 48.2% who voted remain. Indeed, the narrative in the press until now has been to force acceptance from almost half of those who voted, interestingly almost the same percentage of those who hold a degree. In the absence of rational argument, a media campaign was the only way for them.

However, efforts to circumvent parliament vis a visa sidestepping taking responsibility if hard Brexit did impact on living standards.

Senior ministers are rightly scared as to outcomes, but they'd been hitherto silenced by the party whip and the parliamentary majority. The only rational way forward is for all parties to work together.

akira - Member
Sometimes the fact that no-one has done something before is a big clue to whether its a good idea or not.

So you're saying the Tories have no idea what they're doing or what will happen or how to do it but they're going to carry on regardless? Doesn't sound very smart to me.

Cross party negotiation for Brexit is the only way we're not going to get royally shafted.

Cross party negotiation [i]against [/i]Brexit is the only way we're not going to get royally shafted.

They want to prevent Brexit happening? It's happening ...

Except, it's not, is it.

After the referendum, the first thing that happened was that the man who promised to see it through washed his hands of the matter.

Then the government had to position someone else as PM.

Then the first action they took was a protracted court battle for an attempt at an illegal power grab.

Then they finally got around to triggering A50 with a "white paper" that was back-of-an-envelope stuff like the kid who'd forgotten to do his homework and knocked it out on the bus.

Then we went to Brussels, made a load of demands and got laughed at.

Then a snap General Election, which looks like it's going to rumble on and on.

Assuming we don't have another election, we'll probably see May resign, so we'll have another leadership battle to contend with. And then I don't doubt they'll find something else to procrastinate over. The resuming of hostilities in NI, yeah, that might be a bit of a distraction.

We're, what, a year on from the referendum and we've made the square root of absolutely **** all headway into negotiations or even into defining what it is we actually "want." And now the clock is ticking, we're three months into a two year deadline with no indication that it's going to progress any time soon.

And then what happens in [s]two years[/s] fifteen months' time and we've got absolutely nothing to show for it? You'd have to be either a stone bonker or irrevocably corrupt to walk away with a "no deal" proposal.

No wonder you want us to "shut up and get on with it," you must be absolutely shitting yourself that it's not going to come to fruition.

Tories know what they are doing but the gullible don't

Shut
Up

You tell me who have knowledge of exiting EU bureaucratic system?

Tories know what they are doing

I think that it's probably for the best if our troll friend sits out the remainder of the thread, don't you guys?

Chewkw, your response is neither required, nor wanted.

PJM1974 - Member
I think that it's probably for the best if our troll friend sits out the remainder of the thread, don't you guys?

Chewkw, your response is neither required, nor wanted

Can you imagine being stuck in the same office as that clown?

£100 says he's universally despised by all his colleagues

akira - Member
So no-one has knowledge of it but the Tories know what they're doing?
My ancestors were born in Scotland and stayed there for ages, not sure what you're talking about.

Or you can say that EU bureaucrats are also clueless ...

Not exactly is in your yours ancestors but British ancestors of the past. 🙄

I think the fact that Brexit was barely mentioned in the election is very telling about how far any of the parties have got with forming any kind of plan.

Well, the Scottish Tories don't want Brexit, nor does the SNP or the Lib Dems. Labour's position is ambiguous, you get the impression that they just want the debate to go away. The Conservatives don't want Brexit, aside from a minority that until Friday morning held the keys to power. It's also clear that the pro-Brexit press was a damp squib for the first election in modern times.

This is why all parties [i]need[/i] to debate and find consensus, rather than a minority taking ownership.

ahem...
http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/singletrackworld-personal-blacklist

equals...

chewkw - Member

chewkw said something stupid.

I only have two people on my filter, no prizes for guessing the other one.

There was a great program on Radio four this afternoon in the Law in Action slot, talking about the legal implications of Brexit. The very salient point they made is that we now have 30 years of legislation to catch up with. I know the uk gov plan to fudge that with the "Great Repeal Bill" which should be more rightly named the "Great Lets Keep All The EU Regs The Public Are Too Thick To Notice Bill" but anyway I digress.

Definitely worth a listen on the podcast when it comes online, the show explains everything very well.

Sadly the chrome add on doesn't work on mobile devices 😥

Then you need to look back in history and tell your ancestors they were wrong to explore the unknown. [b]Captain James Cook why did you navigate to the end of the world where nobody been there before?[/b]

Difficult to ask Cook at the time, given that he was murdered on expedition in Hawaii. Good analogy 🙂

Thanks hels.

A huge worry for me is that we adopt the EU legislation and then some unscrupulous party decides to legislate away the bothersome stuff, while keeping the rest.

You can probably guess where I'm going with this.

But he did get a pig named after him !

And, like the country on this issue, the last incumbent of No 10 probably f***** it.

The question is who are willing to give way?

Her name rhymes with Enola Gay

Captain James Cook why did you navigate to the end of the world where nobody been there before?

At least he had the good grace not to insist that everyone in the country had to go with him on his exploratory journey.

Chewie, your efforts at trolling are appreciated, purely from a persistence standpoint. You have managed to exasperate a lot of people purely by keeping going. Well done.

Does that satisfy you?

Only when his input garners no responses will he be dissatisfied

Why feed him?

The majority on here seem to equate the failed Tory GE result to anti brexit sentiment from the disgruntled electorate.

Have you considered that other factors like those below might be a more probable explanation?

Dementia Tax
Austerity
Theresa May's arrogant stance
Free tuition fees
...

I'll take a Troll, but we need an equivalent for those of you who with such 'high and mighty' attitudes. Beggars belief.

Why free tuition fees?

Why free tuition fees

Get uni paid for then switch to Tory once I've graduated.

The majority on here seem to equate the failed Tory GE result to anti brexit sentiment from the disgruntled electorate.

May [i]did[/i] say she wanted the election to give her a mandate to go to Brussels and get the best brexit (honey nut I believe). The electorate didn't give a majority, ergo they, at the very least, don't want May to do it, or rather no one to do it.

When it gets called off this will be looked back upon as the most bizarre 3 years (more?) in politics.

To the rest o' y'all, I have 3 words for you.

Hook.
Line.
Sinker.

I hesitate to post in a political thread. But in defence of chewkw, although he might not agree with the apparent majority view on here, he's not the only one who thinks Brexit will eventually be a good thing, and he is never posts rude remarks about any one else.

Rather more than can be said for a lot of you guys.

Rather more than can be said for a lot of you guys.

What about the ones who wind the others up enough to use the insults, then go crying to [s]mum [/s] mods when they do?

It would be very easy to insult, but I'll try to be helpful instead.

It's explained here in a Tory newspaper OP, so hopefully a source you can trust...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/0/Who-are-the-DUP-democratic-unionist-party-northern-ireland/

Do let us know if you have any further questions.

I hesitate to post in a political thread. But in defence of chekw, although he might not agree with the apparent majority view on here, he's not the only one who thinks Brexit will eventually be a good thing, and he is never posts rude remarks about any one else.

Rather more than can be said for a lot of you guys.

He says what he says purely to get a rise out of people. 100% trolling

There's definitely lots of factors that affect how people vote whether it's Dementia tax, tuition fees, austerity, NHS privatisation, liking your mp, not liking Theresa, liking Jeremy

But there's a not insignificant number of people who voted tactically in the vain hope that we would end up with a coalition involving parties who's asking price would be a referendum on the final Brexit deal with the hope that Brexit gets cancelled.

That's the problem with following the advice of a very close advisory referendum (aka opinion poll). It doesn't take many people to move their vote for a completely different result and you've got enough pissed off losers to cause a lot of problems.

I'm still trying to fit together the tories repeated and effective efforts to alienate their own core segment of the electorate.

Chewkw might be trolling. But this is an Internet forum and fundamentally of no lasting importance whatsoever.

He is unfailingly good humoured and civility costs nothing.

But in defence of chekw..and he is never posts rude remarks about any one else.

Rather more than can be said for a lot of you guys.

But his behaviour on the forum leaves much to be desired, in spite of [i]constant[/i] reminders about the forum rules. He has a habit of repeating thew same facile arguments time and again. Honestly, I'm all for debate and for finding common ground with people who may share a different political view to me, but he seems to take great delight in behaving like an annoying halfwit.

What about the ones who wind the others up enough to use the insults, then go crying to mum mods when they do?

So expressing a difference of opinion is a valid excuse for insults?

I pity you chap.

Chewkw might be trolling. But this is an Internet forum and fundamentally of no lasting importance whatsoever.

He is unfailingly good humoured and civility costs nothing

Then ignore him. But the insults in this thread have gone a bit far I think.

expressing a difference of opinion is a valid excuse for insults?

I pity you chap.

I hesitate to post in a political thread. But in defence of chekw, although he might not agree with the apparent majority view on here, he's not the only one who thinks Brexit will eventually be a good thing, and he is never posts rude remarks about any one else.

Rather more than can be said for a lot of you guys.

Go look are his posting history. Quite frankly the first 6 months were the tinfoil hat wearing blitherings of someone on quite frankly epic levels of medication. Now I admit they are slightly more lucid now than then (they have probably sorted the dose out a little) but he is still totally incapable of adding much to a debate of any worth beyond a bit of goading. As my old boss would say he is a waste of a good skin, or in this case a forum name. I'm all up for a good debate with someone of opposing views, indeed I think you need that to clarify your own, but he is not that person. I think it is fair to say he is not welcome or wanted here but like the pub bore can't take the hint. To be fair if you had broadly right wing views he must be even more cringe worthy. There is a perception amongst us remoaners that brexiters are stupid, ignorant and uneducated. Sadly Chewy is the embodiment of that perception.

I do ignore him the problem is not everyone does.

As for insults if anyone posts like he does then they will get a reaction
Where it crosses the line is a decision for the mods so report away

Anyway....when did the UK actually join the EU? Anyone know without me Googling?

His posts are sometimes written in a slightly [i]unusual[/i] style. But again, it's just a forum. It doesn't really matter. It's ok to disagree with him, or even ignore him. But name calling is just a bit rude.

Hill Steet Blues/
Let's be civil out there.
/Hill Street Blues

So expressing a difference of opinion is a valid excuse for insults?

I pity you chap.

You focus on that comment, not my on topic response to your question further up?

Case rests yronour.

[quote=esselgruntfuttock ]Anyway....when did the UK actually join the EU? Anyone know without me Googling?

depends when you wish to say the EU came into existence

I am not sure anyone has claimed otherwise. have they ?

Well, I will.

I reject absolutely that it's "only the Internet," like the medium is of lesser value than others and therefore it gives you carte blanche rights to be a nob. At the end of the day, whether it's the internet, a newspaper, TV, face-to-face, whatever, you're interacting with real people with real feelings (well, mostly I suppose).

I'm loathe to censor opinion even if it's unpopular opinion, but if you're being deliberately offensive or provocative then that makes you not a very nice person. It's shouldn't be a massive challenge to treat your fellow man with basic respect, even if it is "just" the Internet (and even if you believe they're a massive plum).

For my part, I've tried to engage with the guy, to try to explain why he's causing aggravation in his posts in a reasonably friendly way. But it doesn't seem to make a bit of difference.

His posts are sometimes written in a slightly unusual style

when did the UK actually join the EU?

We didn't, we joined the EEC which morphed into the EU (one of the sticks used by leavers to hit us with). It was the early 70s (73? maybe).

even if you believe they're a massive plum

in , being polite, what was broken english.

To be fair though Junky, you're hardly in a position to throw stones there. (-:

As for insults

Okeydoke.

You have a face life a Baboons arse!

My work here is done.

gentlest insult of the night award

Wasn't an insult. I was commenting on people's opinions, not speculating as to whether that opinion had any basis in fact.

Well well. Plenty of schoolyard tittle-tattling going on by the looks of it.

I'm not playing any more, then.

Not sure 'massive plums' is really an insult at all?

Lest you're a girl...

depends when you wish to say the EU came into existence

I seem to remember 'The Common Market' being mentioned at some point in my life, but I think I was about 18/19 (1975/6) & more interested in women & motorbikes. Is the EU something to do with that? Serious q.

I'm reminded that the forum has had other eccentric characters in the past and that some forum members had cause to regret what they'd written when the state of the persons mind became clear.

What I can't understand is that folk who think they are more clever/intelligent/sane that chewkw keep him entertained by responding to his threads and quoting him.

[quote=esselgruntfuttock ]

depends when you wish to say the EU came into existence

1st January 1973.

Did you vote in the EU referendum

Yes. No idea why. Was there actually a referendum to join the common market, cos if there was, I don't remember. (I do remember Janet, Liz, Jilly & Helen, plus 4 Bultaco trials bikes & a Montesa though)

1st January 1973.

Well there you go, I was 16 not 18 so couldn't vote anyway.

The very salient point they made is that we now have 30 years of legislation to catch up with.

I have the feeling the the government think this is a find and replace EU with UK job but they will need to account for there being no uk caselaw then. It's a really seriously complicated job that is seen as a single bill.

Have you considered that other factors like those below might be a more probable explanation?

Dementia Tax
Austerity
Theresa May's arrogant stance
Free tuition fees

Ashcroft Polling showed that all age groups went corbs, including 35-44yr olds (from 35->50%), directly affected by none of the above

Considering? the ref vote was 48% in favour there's obviously plenty out there that don't agree with it

May herself framed the election as a mandate for HER Brexit, which she'd endlessly told us was going to 'hard' , NO DEAL IS BETTER ETC & she'd be bloody difficult.

Personally I want a 2nd ref and the whole thing reversed

So I'd vote lib dem... Err no wasted vote, labour with starmer as Brexit sec , corbs protecting EU rights, single market access...so I picked the labour version.

I'm not alone...

I think a lot of brexies are worried that their small majority is in danger of reversing

So far Brexit has given us more expensive petrol, Marmite, & the rest, slower growth, political instability, and Theresa may toadying up to Donald trump,
The No plan of Brexiters is giving way to the reality of decades of expensive legal wranglings and huge expansion of UK bureaucracy (despite what the massively ignorant like chewk prattle on about) no wonder the youth are against it

500000 voters turn 18 every year, 500000 OAPs die every year

Those brexies should be worried

[quote=scotroutes ]I'm reminded that the forum has had other eccentric characters in the past and that some forum members had cause to regret what they'd written when the state of the persons mind became clear.
What I can't understand is that folk who think they are more clever/intelligent/sane that chewkw keep him entertained by responding to his threads and quoting him.

Hangs head in shame

Scotsroutes makes a good point

He does 🙁

Scotsroutes makes a good point

There's a world of difference between being eccentric Vs being a deliberately disruptive troll

He's 100% at it. His mask slips though as he somehow has an amazing grasp of English language, grammar and punctuation including flawless cockney slang plus other English colloquialisms, and every so often he'll throw in some token "chinglish" to make us believe he is who he claims he is...

I seem to remember 'The Common Market' being mentioned at some point in my life, but I think I was about 18/19 (1975/6) & more interested in women & motorbikes. Is the EU something to do with that? Serious q.

@essel in fact your question and this point throws up a very important, in fact vital issue

We joined the European [b]Economic Community[/b], known to us as [b]The Common Market[/b] (as you say early 70's I recall - not googled it 🙂 ). We where repeatedly told it was that, a business arrangement and in the IN/OUT referendum that followed a couple of years later the Govt literature repeated that it was onky about business/trade and not political. Without ever being asked again via a direct referednum question the EEC has morphed into a political union project called the European [b]Union[/b]. It has also expanded dramatically with the new members increasingly poor economically vs the established group. The EU bears no resemblance to the EEC. As a point of referemce I would have voted to Remain in the EEC and I voted to leave the EU both exactly as my lifelong Labour voting parents did.

OP the truth is the GE 85% of the people voted for a hard Brexit at the GE, ie leave the EU, end freedom of movement, end single market membership, end customs union membership. 594 seats out of 650. Had Labour not supported those things the result woukd have been rather different IMO

I also never had a chance to vote, being about 9 at the time, but I was always led to believe there was a strong political thread to the EEC and it wasn't just economic.

Hard to believe otherwise, given that it was largely created as a way to ensure Europe never went to war with itself again.

Anyone who thought it was purely economic probably skipped the bit of history that covered 1939 to 1945.

OP the truth is the GE 85% of the people voted for a hard Brexit at the GE, ie leave the EU, end freedom of movement, end single market membership, end customs union membership. 594 seats out of 650.

Prove it. Even the Tories don't all support hard Brexit. Ask Ruth's 13.

By the way OP. If the GE wasn't about Brexit, why (ostensibly) did May call a snap election in an era of fixed term parliaments? Did tuition fees suddenly become an issue to deal with which needed a new mandate for the government? If Brexit wasn't happening there would not have been an election. There's yer link.

Truth is that now the media is able to pronounce hard brexit as dead. When push comes to shove and it all starts to look a bit shitty, it will become politically acceptable to have no brexit. So it goes.

the truth is the GE 85% of the people voted for a hard Brexit at the GE,

ie leave the EU

Happy to say I voted labour [ most likely to beat the tories] and dont want to leave. I doubt I am alone in voting for a party that had a different view from me on Europe.

It took you best part of week to find that soundbite is it going to be repeated like strong and stable?

If the GE wasn't about Brexit, why (ostensibly) did May call a snap election in an era of fixed term parliaments?

they know they would not get that post brexit because they will have served up an economic mess

Brexit was a smokescreen - as jamby notes everyone supported the A50 triggering pretty much [ it was no tunder threat by the house] and a corbyn led labour is not about to get all anti Brexit as many suspect he rather liked the result.

OP the truth is the GE 85% of the people voted for a hard Brexit at the GE, ie leave the EU, end freedom of movement, end single market membership, end customs union membership. 594 seats out of 650.

Let's check the Labour party manifesto:

We will prioritise jobs and living standards, build a close new relationship with the EU, protect workers’ rights and environmental standards, provide certainty to EU nationals and give a meaningful role to Parliament throughout negotiations.

We will end Theresa May’s reckless approach to Brexit, and seek to unite the country around a Brexit deal that works for every community in Britain.

We will scrap the Conservatives’ Brexit White Paper and replace it with fresh negotiating priorities that have a strong emphasis on retaining the benefits of the Single Market and the Customs Union – which are essential for maintaining industries, jobs and businesses in Britain. Labour will always put jobs and the economy first.

So the 40% who voted Labour were [b]not[/b] voting for a hard brexit.

In fact, 52% voted for parties opposed to a hard brexit.

pfft facts you trolling him now

pfft facts you trolling him now

Sorry, my bad.

I like that he's showing his working. Even if it is utter bobbins.

Just catching up on this one from 4 hours ago stands out.

The government arent dealing with Brexit properly though, they seem to have no plan and if they do they arent sharing it. Anytime theyve been questioned on it it shows they are clueless and the EU know this, we have no bargaining power and May has wasted time and money on an election that has weakened our position further.

Maybe Mrs May is maintaining her Remain stance and working from within to collapse the enthusiasm for Brexit and make it unworkable. It's a cunning ploy and very civic-minded to implode your political party and destroy your political reputation for a cause you believe in. Well done her.
Edit or she has decided Baldrick was the way to go.

I used 'ostensibly' for a reason. She didn't say "I am calling this election so that I can increase my hold on power and outflank my opponents in the Tory party"

@sandwich, is it sad that this would be the best case scenario.
Although mostly I'm just chuffed someone quoted me as it rarely happens 😀

So the 40% who voted Labour were not voting for a hard brexit.

In fact, 52% voted for parties opposed to a hard brexit.

I voted for Labour to contribute towards preventing the Tories gaining a seat in my narrowly Labour-held constituency. The notion that I voted for them as a vote in favour of any sort of Brexit at all is special pleading from the Leavers.

In what is nationally a two-horse race for all practical purposes where both parties are at least publicly pro-brexit even if many / most of their members aren't, summarily declaring all votes for either party to be blanket support for Leave is a special kind of [s]stupid[/s] [s]lies[/s] spin.

Although mostly I'm just chuffed someone quoted me as it rarely happens

And again! Best day of my life, wait till I tell the guys at work about this.