Previous polling has indicated a huge fall in support for Boris if he were to miss

[Monty92]

the 31st Oct deadline for exiting the EU, which we now know he will.

Now that a GE is in the offing it will be extremely interesting to see what happens in the polls after Thursday. I suspect/hope the GE will take the sting out of things for Boris and help sustain his support.

And we wait to see what the Brexit Party are actually gonna do. How will they rationalise handing Brexit to Corbyn and losing it forever?

[Burney]

the 31st Oct deadline for exiting the EU, which we now know he will.

Now that a GE is in the offing it will be extremely interesting to see what happens in the polls after Thursday. I suspect/hope the GE will take the sting out of things for Boris and help sustain his support.

And we wait to see what the Brexit Party are actually gonna do. How will they rationalise handing Brexit to Corbyn and losing it forever?

I think you're right that getting the election will be seen as a big win for Boris and will offset much of the disappointment with not leaving. The tories have a major advantage that their messaging of 'Get Brexit Done' cuts through and is overwhelmingly popular even with many of those who voted Remain. The messages of the other parties are more ambiguous and can only promise more uncertainty, conflict and delay.

The Brexit Party core vote now comprises the rump of the thickest and most pig-headed percentile of the Leave vote - I'd say some of those votes will fall away due to common sense and that by December a Venn diagram of it and the freaks who were still voting UKIP under Gerald Batten wouldn't look dissimilar to a circle.

Nothing certain, though.

[Ash]

Nothing certain, though.

Certainly nothing certain about a Tory MP keeping his or her word on Brexit. See also: Labour.

Why should disaffected Labour voters who have been betrayed by the Labour MP they voted in trust a Tory instead? They might reasonably prefer to vote for a Brexit Party MP to ensure that parliament actually represents them.

[Ash]

The Brexit Party core vote now comprises the rump of the thickest and most pig-headed percentile of the Leave vote - I'd say some of those votes will fall away due to common sense and that by December a Venn diagram of it and the freaks who were still voting UKIP under Gerald Batten wouldn't look dissimilar to a circle.


Can you show the data on which this assessment is based, please?

[Monty92]

Can you show the data on which this assessment is based, please?

Recent polling showed that a sizable majority of Brexit Party voters support Boris's deal, leaving only the "rump", as described by Bernadette.

[WES]

Recent polling showed that a sizable majority of Brexit Party voters support Boris's deal, leaving only the "rump", as described by Bernadette.

Said rump obviously includes Farage who really has done the most remarkable about face. All through the referendum it was emphasized that we were going to leave with a really wonderful deal as they need us more than we need them etc etc.

And he's now moved to no deal is the only option, the utter cretin. It's almost as though he's nothing more than a self-serving, superficial, sound bite oriented moron whose sole ability is to be able to appeal to the thickest members of our society.

[Pokster]

Said rump obviously includes Farage who really has done the most remarkable about face. All through the referendum it was emphasized that we were going to leave with a really wonderful deal as they need us more than we need them etc etc.

And he's now moved to no deal is the only option, the utter cretin. It's almost as though he's nothing more than a self-serving, superficial, sound bite oriented moron whose sole ability is to be able to appeal to the thickest members of our society.

Perfect modern politican then

[Monty92]

Said rump obviously includes Farage who really has done the most remarkable about face. All through the referendum it was emphasized that we were going to leave with a really wonderful deal as they need us more than we need them etc etc.

And he's now moved to no deal is the only option, the utter cretin. It's almost as though he's nothing more than a self-serving, superficial, sound bite oriented moron whose sole ability is to be able to appeal to the thickest members of our society.

I'm not necessarily a defender of Farage, but he would argue that had No Deal ever been a legitimate threat (and not taken off the table by remainer saboteurs) then a deal more in keeping with his idea of a meaningful Brexit would have been possible.

His current position that No Deal is the only option is based on the premise that any government formed out of the current House of Commons has proved incapable of/unwilling to do what's required to achieve a deal that represents a real Brexit, and so we are left with no choice.

[Ash]

I'm not necessarily a defender of Farage, but he would argue that had No Deal ever been a legitimate threat (and not taken off the table by remainer saboteurs) then a deal more in keeping with his idea of a meaningful Brexit would have been possible.

Correct imo.

The Boris 'deal' (actually a treaty) promises to keep a 'level playing field' with the EU in key areas which strongly suggests little divergence from EU law will be permitted, to be policed by ... the ECJ, as I understand it. Fake Brexit imo. But if people vote for it vie GE in a desperate bid to end this thing them so be it. :shrug:

[Monty92]

Correct imo.

The Boris 'deal' (actually a treaty) promises to keep a 'level playing field' with the EU in key areas which strongly suggests little divergence from EU law will be permitted, to be policed by ... the ECJ, as I understand it. Fake Brexit imo. But if people vote for it vie GE in a desperate bid to end this thing them so be it. :shrug:

I agree, but as I understand it, a level playing field is and always will be inevitable once we get into the nitty gritty of an FTA with the EU.

So while we may want the ability to diverge in principle (and consider it deeply unsatisfactory that the EU is structured so that if you're not part of the club, you can't), it's simply not possible, with or without a deal.

Peter North is worth reading on this subject.

[WES]

Correct imo.

The Boris 'deal' (actually a treaty) promises to keep a 'level playing field' with the EU in key areas which strongly suggests little divergence from EU law will be permitted, to be policed by ... the ECJ, as I understand it. Fake Brexit imo. But if people vote for it vie GE in a desperate bid to end this thing them so be it. :shrug:

That's nonsense, I'm afraid. There is no such concept as 'promises' in negotiating free trade deals - you negotiate and get what you get. And no one signs a free trade deal unless both sides agree a level playing field, possibly with divergence in some areas but that needs to even itself out otherwise one side would be at a disadvantage and there would be no deal.

This is one of the great lies (or in Farage's case possibly outright stupidity) of the Leave campaign. The idea that within the EU or even when negotiating during the transition period, we would need to agree to converge with the EU on standards and regulations but outside of either we can achieve this glorious free trade deal in which we get all the access we want to their market but without giving away any control to the EU. It's absolute garbage. If we want access to the EU's market we need to converge or they won't trade with us. That will then limit our ability to get all these wonderful global trade deals signed, of course. And to not agree a free trade deal with our closest and largest market is economically stupid, very stupid indeed.

Basically, unless we want to suffer significant economic consequences, life outside the EU and inside the EU will look very similar. That's life in a global economy, I'm afraid. :shrug:

[Burney]

Can you show the data on which this assessment is based, please?

Attempting to reason with the unbelievably thick twáts, mostly. They claim to be passionate about Brexit, but won't vote Tory as they were let down (largely by May, who's now gone).

When you point out to them that voting BP will make a remain government more likely, the mad ones rant about how BP will storm to victory and sweep the tories and Labour aside; the slightly less mad ones delusionally assert that BP will win 40-odd seats and hold the balance of power; and the thick/pig-headed ones just continue ranting about 'punishing' Labour and the Tories.

As I pointed out to one today, facilitating the advent of a remain government because you're disappointed by not leaving the EU yet when there's finally a Leave leadership in place is like having a splitting headache, waiting ages for it to start to get better and then blowing your brains out because you can't be bothered waiting any longer.

They're fúcking spastics.

[Herbert Augustus Chapman]

Attempting to reason with the unbelievably thick twáts, mostly.

They're fúcking spastics.

wouldn't have come close to winning the referendum in the first place. And now their stupidity might scupper the whole thing.

When others in the past have argued that many brexiteers were nothing more slow-wits I believe you have condemned such talk as deeply reprehensible no?

[WES]

wouldn't have come close to winning the referendum in the first place. And now their stupidity might scupper the whole thing.

When others in the past have argued that many brexiteers were nothing more slow-wits I believe you have condemned such talk as deeply reprehensible no?

I know for a fact that all Leave voters are uneducated morons, Herbie. I know this because hours after the result was official Ian Harvey was all over Facebook telling everyone that it was true. :-)

How unlike Ian to compartmentalise those that disagree with him so that he doesn't have to actually think and answer questions he doesn't want to.

[Burney]

wouldn't have come close to winning the referendum in the first place. And now their stupidity might scupper the whole thing.

When others in the past have argued that many brexiteers were nothing more slow-wits I believe you have condemned such talk as deeply reprehensible no?

To talk about 17.4m Brexiteers in that way is indeed reprehensible. However, to describe certain sections of that number as spastics is simply accurate - see also #FPBE mongs who scream about the joys of EU membership while demonstrably having little or no idea what it is or what it means for further evidence.

[Herbert Augustus Chapman]

That's nonsense, I'm afraid.

Why must you start your counterpoint with an insult? What Ash has said is patently not nonsense but the considered opinion of a learned man. Your post could easily have commenced with the second sentence and nothing whatsoever is lost. Do try to be less beastly w.

[WES]

Why must you start your counterpoint with an insult? What Ash has said is patently not nonsense but the considered opinion of a learned man. Your post could easily have commenced with the second sentence and nothing whatsoever is lost. Do try to be less beastly w.

I feel terrible now, Herb. Imagine offending a man as congenial and intelligent as Ash.

I now have a complex and it may haunt me for all eternity. And it's all your fault. :cry:

P.S. the idea that Boris' deal will necessarily lead to Brino is nonsense, though

[Herbert Augustus Chapman]

I know for a fact that all Leave voters are uneducated morons, Herbie. I know this because hours after the result was official Ian Harvey was all over Facebook telling everyone that it was true. :-)

How unlike Ian to compartmentalise those that disagree with him so that he doesn't have to actually think and answer questions he doesn't want to.

Some of the cleverist people I know are leavers but they are few in number and for the most part are salivating at the prospect of a deregulated financial services sector. There are 10 million thick working class morons out there with accessible pensions waiting to be denuded and they think they'll be allowed to have at it with impunity.

I estimate about half of the leavers I know are incredibly hard of thinking and simply digest the mendacious bóllócks peddled by The Sun, Express and Mail. The last big row I had with my own dad - R.I.P - was trying to explain to him that The Sun was quite capable of simply making stuff up. "They couldn't do that son" he said "They wouldn't be allowed to". I could have wept.

[WES]

Some of the cleverist people I know are leavers but they are few in number and for the most part are salivating at the prospect of a deregulated financial services sector. There are 10 million thick working class morons out there with accessible pensions waiting to be denuded and they think they'll be allowed to have at it with impunity.

I estimate about half of the leavers I know are incredibly hard of thinking and simply digest the mendacious bóllócks peddled by The Sun, Express and Mail. The last big row I had with my own dad - R.I.P - was trying to explain to him that The Sun was quite capable of simply making stuff up. "They couldn't do that son" he said "They wouldn't be allowed to". I could have wept.

The great irony in Ian's argument was that the people he was slating are precisely those that he claims are closest to his heart as he virtue signals his was through life.

'I LOVE THE POOR! Except when they don't vote the way I want' :hehe:

[Monty92]

Some of the cleverist people I know are leavers but they are few in number and for the most part are salivating at the prospect of a deregulated financial services sector. There are 10 million thick working class morons out there with accessible pensions waiting to be denuded and they think they'll be allowed to have at it with impunity.

I estimate about half of the leavers I know are incredibly hard of thinking and simply digest the mendacious bóllócks peddled by The Sun, Express and Mail. The last big row I had with my own dad - R.I.P - was trying to explain to him that The Sun was quite capable of simply making stuff up. "They couldn't do that son" he said "They wouldn't be allowed to". I could have wept.

Did you dad like hairy fannys too? And if so, are we to assume he was attracted to your mum for this very reason?

[Burney]

Did you dad like hairy fannys too? And if so, are we to assume he was attracted to your mum for this very reason?

I know for a fact that H's mum had a repulsive, rancid and hairy fanny, m.

She named it Herbert.

[Ash]

Some of the cleverist people I know are leavers but they are few in number and for the most part are salivating at the prospect of a deregulated financial services sector. There are 10 million thick working class morons out there with accessible pensions waiting to be denuded and they think they'll be allowed to have at it with impunity.

I estimate about half of the leavers I know are incredibly hard of thinking and simply digest the mendacious bóllócks peddled by The Sun, Express and Mail. The last big row I had with my own dad - R.I.P - was trying to explain to him that The Sun was quite capable of simply making stuff up. "They couldn't do that son" he said "They wouldn't be allowed to". I could have wept.

I mentioned the other day about the power and influence of the pro-EEC media in 1975, and the power of the pro EU section of the media cannot be denied today, especially if pointing at the anti-EU tabloids.

If one is to denounce the stupidity and gullibility of the lower orders for reading newspapers that either reflect/direct* (delete according to preference) the views of that demographic, then it is only fair to call into question the susceptibility of the other side.

In short, perhaps the middle classes are not always quite as clever as they think they are, and their preferred news sources are perhaps not quite as impartial and informing as their sophisticated audiences like to believe. The Guardian is quite capable of making stuff up (beyond the scope of this post), and BBC news is very capable of giving an partial view. I'll give some examples:

The day after the referendum the BBC site had a piece explaining why the referendum was 'lost'. There were eleven points, most of which were about stupid voters and bad leave politicians, but none suggested that there was anything wrong with the EU which might cause people to vote against it.

In the months leading up to the referendum, Newsnight guests had a ratio of about 2:1 Remain:Leave.

On the night of the Euro-Parliament elections, for which I sat up for most of the night, they had three chairs. One Tory, one Labour and one rotating, where the guests were Lib Dem (Remain), SNP (Remain), Plaid Cymru (Remain) and Green (Remain). At no point did they have a Brexit Party guest - the party which won the most seats that night. At one point they had an external piece where the war criminal Alastair Campbell was allowed to accuse the Brexit Party of being funded by Moscow gold without being called out or asked for proof of this ridiculous, Russophobic slur.

Now, readers of the Sun and the Express probably watch BBC news, but readers of the Guardian probably don't get any pro-Leave news sources in their 'timelines', so who had the more balanced sources?

On your other point, there may well be City types hoping for a deregulated paradise where they can steal poor people's pensions, but the EU didn't stop these banksters stealing taxpayers money in 2008, and as far as southern Europe is concerned, they have one tool in their box and it is called austerity.

Freedom of movement is and has always been a capitalist dream of a reserve army of labour to keep costs down and profits high. The buy-in of this by the fake left only mirrors their love for identity politics - which is a 'progressive' rehash of the old divide and rule policy.

Possibility of renationalising natural monopoly public utilities? Forget it. How can you nationalise anything when nations are a sin? Fancy exploring possibilities of public finance to invest in key industries for future prosperity? Nope. Looking ahead, how can you even have a National Health Service if nations have no future? I trust you have been listening to what Merkal has being saying about the future of national sovereignty? (There isn't one).

So for all one can fear-cast about a hypothetical neo-liberal post-Brexit nightmare, one can do the same about a future EU neo-liberal post-country supranational nightmare. None of us knows what will really happen, but know this: neo-liberalism (check your Hayek and von Mises) is about Thatcherism with NO democratic recourse. No chance of pesky voters getting in the way of corporate and banking profit. Whatever the perils of Brexit, the executive are answerable to the demos. The same cannot be said of the Eu exec, who are appointed by people like themselves.

As the great euro-sceptic Tony Benn said (PBUH), "If you have power, there are some questions we must ask of you:
How did you get it?
In whose interests do you wield it?
And how do we get rid of you?"

(apologies if any of this is not well-written. It is late and I may have had a drinky or two, and I don't have time at work to write much - and you have made many interesting points recently which I wanted to reply to)

[IUFG]

I mentioned the other day about the power and influence of the pro-EEC media in 1975, and the power of the pro EU section of the media cannot be denied today, especially if pointing at the anti-EU tabloids.

If one is to denounce the stupidity and gullibility of the lower orders for reading newspapers that either reflect/direct* (delete according to preference) the views of that demographic, then it is only fair to call into question the susceptibility of the other side.

In short, perhaps the middle classes are not always quite as clever as they think they are, and their preferred news sources are perhaps not quite as impartial and informing as their sophisticated audiences like to believe. The Guardian is quite capable of making stuff up (beyond the scope of this post), and BBC news is very capable of giving an partial view. I'll give some examples:

The day after the referendum the BBC site had a piece explaining why the referendum was 'lost'. There were eleven points, most of which were about stupid voters and bad leave politicians, but none suggested that there was anything wrong with the EU which might cause people to vote against it.

In the months leading up to the referendum, Newsnight guests had a ratio of about 2:1 Remain:Leave.

On the night of the Euro-Parliament elections, for which I sat up for most of the night, they had three chairs. One Tory, one Labour and one rotating, where the guests were Lib Dem (Remain), SNP (Remain), Plaid Cymru (Remain) and Green (Remain). At no point did they have a Brexit Party guest - the party which won the most seats that night. At one point they had an external piece where the war criminal Alastair Campbell was allowed to accuse the Brexit Party of being funded by Moscow gold without being called out or asked for proof of this ridiculous, Russophobic slur.

Now, readers of the Sun and the Express probably watch BBC news, but readers of the Guardian probably don't get any pro-Leave news sources in their 'timelines', so who had the more balanced sources?

On your other point, there may well be City types hoping for a deregulated paradise where they can steal poor people's pensions, but the EU didn't stop these banksters stealing taxpayers money in 2008, and as far as southern Europe is concerned, they have one tool in their box and it is called austerity.

Freedom of movement is and has always been a capitalist dream of a reserve army of labour to keep costs down and profits high. The buy-in of this by the fake left only mirrors their love for identity politics - which is a 'progressive' rehash of the old divide and rule policy.

Possibility of renationalising natural monopoly public utilities? Forget it. How can you nationalise anything when nations are a sin? Fancy exploring possibilities of public finance to invest in key industries for future prosperity? Nope. Looking ahead, how can you even have a National Health Service if nations have no future? I trust you have been listening to what Merkal has being saying about the future of national sovereignty? (There isn't one).

So for all one can fear-cast about a hypothetical neo-liberal post-Brexit nightmare, one can do the same about a future EU neo-liberal post-country supranational nightmare. None of us knows what will really happen, but know this: neo-liberalism (check your Hayek and von Mises) is about Thatcherism with NO democratic recourse. No chance of pesky voters getting in the way of corporate and banking profit. Whatever the perils of Brexit, the executive are answerable to the demos. The same cannot be said of the Eu exec, who are appointed by people like themselves.

As the great euro-sceptic Tony Benn said (PBUH), "If you have power, there are some questions we must ask of you:
How did you get it?
In whose interests do you wield it?
And how do we get rid of you?"

(apologies if any of this is not well-written. It is late and I may have had a drinky or two, and I don't have time at work to write much - and you have made many interesting points recently which I wanted to reply to)


The other danger is people being thick enough to be influenced by awful 'celebrities' via social media.

[Herbert Augustus Chapman]

I know for a fact that H's mum had a repulsive, rancid and hairy fanny, m.

She named it Herbert.
Ooh look at you two rancorous little bitches ganging up on me.

And m, why should I answer your questions about my mum's growler when you, over the last 20 years, have steadfastly refused to answer my questions about your mum's growler foliage? (and your sister's as I recall).

My questions were prompted only by academic curiousity as I had been informed that jewish ladies of a certain age were aggressive cultivators who refused even to trim for summer swim-wear.

Your questions about my mum are simply prurient and disreputable

[barrybueno]

the 31st Oct deadline for exiting the EU, which we now know he will.

Now that a GE is in the offing it will be extremely interesting to see what happens in the polls after Thursday. I suspect/hope the GE will take the sting out of things for Boris and help sustain his support.

And we wait to see what the Brexit Party are actually gonna do. How will they rationalise handing Brexit to Corbyn and losing it forever?

I agree with C, we'll never leave, the Halloween date was always a load of bollox, wish I'd TC'd it up now

mmmm Halloween, best horror ever FACT

[Herbert Augustus Chapman]

I mentioned the other day about the power and influence of the pro-EEC media in 1975, and .....
[/SIZE]

for the tabloids but I reckon The Independent would scoop you up in a trice.

When I finally got to go to Uni later in life, an excellent lecturer told me that, as a source of information, the broadsheets were actually far more dangerous than the tabloids as they often spoke with a spurious authority on practically any issue or subject and readers like me just assumed they would properly research their material. He argued that at least with tabloids, you knew it was all bóllocks.

As I became what might be called an IT expert I found this to be quite the case. Whenever the Guardian reported on anything to do with how software works, they invariably spouted the most errant, arrant tosh.

[Ash]

When I finally got to go to Uni later in life, an excellent lecturer told me that, as a source of information, the broadsheets were actually far more dangerous than the tabloids as they often spoke with a spurious authority on practically any issue or subject and readers like me just assumed they would properly research their material. He argued that at least with tabloids, you knew it was all bóllocks.


Indeed. Did you read all of my post btw, or did it get too boring?

[Herbert Augustus Chapman]

Indeed. Did you read all of my post btw, or did it get too boring?

Of course I read the whole thing old chap. I was rather aware though that you were with whisky :-)