To think the government are trying to double bluff their way out of no deal Brexit

[Bearbehind]

• ‘Leaked’ assessments of the impact of no deal which they then under play

• Insisting FOM will end immediately on 1st November

• Refusing to publish other assessments on impact

It’s all sounding to me like it’s designed to get Leavers to actually start to get concerned about no deal to then give the government an excuse to back down on it.

I can’t see it working though; Leavers aren’t going to accept any of the consequences as anything other than Project Fear

I can’t wait to see how Johnson finds his way out of this one.

Bearbehind

Ask you keep asking for proof, where is yours?

boney my proof is in the fact we’ve spent 3 years trying to secure a deal and didn’t leave the day after the referendum

I realise you’d argue black was white with me just for the sake of it but this is ridiculous - there’s absolutely no evidence to suggest the majority of leave voters wanted no deal therefore I can’t provide you with any. All the talk was about ‘the easiest deal in history’ etc

If you believe this isn’t the case then surely you have evidence for that

Whilst it’s not relevant what people’s reasons for the vote was now, it is relevant that the majority did not want no deal.

Remainers obviously never did and, you can deny it all you like, but leave would not have won if their strap line had been ‘it’ll be a bit bumpy for a while’

Having said that, I do still think no deal is now the only option because of endless conversations like this that go nowhere - you and your fellow Leavers will only accept the consequences when they’ve happened so we just need to get on with it

The whole thing is terrifying. I think there is a big ‘head in the sand’ mentality. There is no chance we could leave on the 31 Oct and be prepared for it. I hope to god this is a bluff but Johnson has been so bullish and the cabinet so hardline that I think it e see careering to disaster.

The referendum was completely flawed.

Leave voters want to leave (clearly!) but leave what for what is entirely opaque.

I kind of agree with Bear that Johnson could easily be bluffing, but does he control the end game? Also, if it is a huge Machiavellian conspiracy, where are the other conspirators? And no leaks whatsoever, in the internet age?!

I do, however, believe that the UK and EU are actively negotiating through back channels.

Bearbehind
my proof is in the fact we’ve spent 3 years trying to secure a deal and didn’t leave the day after the referendum

That isn't proof, it it what you have inferred from what has been implied.

You give out opinions as facts with no data to support your thinking.

You even say there’s absolutely no evidence to suggest the majority of leave voters wanted no deal therefore I can’t provide you with any.

And this is the point that I am making there is absolutely no evidence either way.

You go on to state

*...it is relevant that the majority did not want no deal.

Remainers obviously never did and, you can deny it all you like...*

You have changed the parameters of your "fact", you have moved from just leavers to all that voted.

but leave would not have won if their strap line had been ‘it’ll be a bit bumpy for a while’

Again your opinion, you and others have attributed leave winning to racism, the side of the bus, ignorance, stupidity etc.

you and your fellow Leavers will only accept the consequences when they’ve happened

Again that is a very broad brush that you are painting us all with.

I wonder if Boris is unable to get a deal he’ll put it to the people to finally decide if we leave or stay. I think we need another referendum once we know what exactly we’re voting for. My mother voted to leave but didn’t think about how it would effect NI, she bitterly regrets her decision and would vote differently now, I think a lot of people would. I’m pinning my hopes on this.

boney it’s pointless discussing this with you - all you ever do is just twist things round to avoid answering questions.

You can deny it all you want but if leave had been based on no deal from the start, it wouldn’t have won

Leave won because they were promised all the upsides of membership with none of the downsides.

As I said before, if that isn’t true why did we not leave straight away, or at least in the 2 previous dates we could have done?

The fact you’re arguing against that just proves that there is no mandate for any type of leave because everyone had, and still has, different perceptions of what it means.

And the eternally frustrating thing is those who claim the current state of affairs is exactly what they wanted, even though it keeps on descending from what was initially promised.

if it is a huge Machiavellian conspiracy, where are the other conspirators? And no leaks whatsoever, in the internet age?!

If it’s true then that’s the genius of it - it doesn’t need a conspiracy as it’s being done in broad daylight

Bearbehind
boney it’s pointless discussing this with you - all you ever do is just twist things round to avoid answering questions.

Its a forum opposing views are what you signed up for, and I am pointing out that your 'facts' are not facts.

You can deny it all you want but if leave had been based on no deal from the start, it wouldn’t have won

I do actually agree with this but again you can't state it as a solid fact, but we can extrapolate and infer this from the information provided by various sources

Leave won because they were promised all the upsides of membership with none of the downsides.

Yup, its called campaigning, (remain should have done better etc. etc.) and it is also not a legal requirement to stick to these manifesto promises.

As I said before, if that isn’t true why did we not leave straight away, or at least in the 2 previous dates we could have done?

Because as you have stated (and is provable) 66% (ish including those that didn't vote) didn't vote to leave and ministers should be doing there job to fight for the opinions of their constituents.

The fact you’re arguing against that just proves that there is no mandate for any type of leave because everyone had, and still has, different perceptions of what it means.

I agree, and this is backed by opinion polls, interviews, forum posts etc.

And the eternally frustrating thing is those who claim the current state of affairs is exactly what they wanted, even though it keeps on descending from what was initially promised.

All that was promised was to leave, the rest is all up for interpretation. I have many complaints and concerns about how we have got to this point and what will happen. (but according to you I don't)

As for people saying that people are saying this is exactly what they wanted
IMO (simple to put) most of these are either people that
1/ did want this but have never felt safe saying so.
2/ people who didn't but now just want to leave/get it over with.
3/ Trolls that want to piss you off.

Bear,

No, if the intention is not to leave whilst asserting an intention to leave, that, as you say is a bluff (not sure where the double comes from).

If Johnson is bluffing, does no one else know? If so it would be truly Machiavellian.

I did read a broadsheet article ages ago saying that might be his strategy. After all he was initially a remainer and really only changed his mind for self promotion. The slightly scary thing is that one could easily see him messing up and then joining a U.S broadcaster on big money in the states...

boney you don’t want to discuss this, you just want to try and prove me wrong at every turn.

On the first page of this thread you said that I should have ‘some’ Leavers, as some were already worried.

You’re not interesting in an actual discussion here, you just want to argue against everything I say just for the sake of it.

I’m bored of it so it’s very likely others reading it are too - although obviously you will now say I can’t prove that either 🤔

larry the double part came from the fact BJ never actually supported Leave in the first place.

I’m pretty sure BJ really doesn’t care and will just press on with no deal unless the EU capitulates. This isn’t Nixon’s red button, this is BJ and brexit (as opposed to nuclear weapons).

Bearbehind

What I would really like is for you to be consistent in your terminology,
Not change your point to incorporate other sections without admitting that is what you are doing
And actually provide some sort of evidence for your points when you are claiming it to be a fact.

I actually agree with much of what you say but that doesn't make it a what you say a fact either.

FGS boney stop being so fucking pedantic for the sake of it.

Of course it’s accepted that there are no actual figures on who wants what but it’s fair to make general comments, which you even acknowledge you agree with, and most people, except clearly you, understand that they are just general, based on the evidence available.

Tbh i hope this is the demise of the Tories.
Of course leavers i know are saying it's the faultbof the EU...yawn.

I don’t believe that BJ or the last two prime ministers really cared about the EU relationship with that much depth.

Their prime goals have always been, IMO, to maintain the Tory government.

Boris Johnson’s position has been a populist one - he’s trying to keep the party and his voters onside. This isn’t about delivering what the country actually needs.

Brexit - if you look at it from a purist perspective - is just about completely removing our relationship with the EU.

However, we will still be trading with the EU and that requires mutually agreed rules. We cannot impose unilateral rules on the EU, no more than they can on us.

The backstop is being help up as an instance of them doing exactly that, but they really aren’t. It’s an agreement between us, the EU and Ireland. I’m convinced people don’t appreciate that Ireland is a separate country to the UK 🤦🏻‍♀️

I don’t think people are thick for not understanding all of the ins and outs of Brexit. But I think they’re fucking lazy for not actually reaching out beyond Facebook, Twitter and god forbid forums like MN to find out more. I have more respect for leavers who at least try and either construct a decent argument or just admit that this is about immigration.

Bearbehind

Maybe if you stopped telling people what they think then you would get better responses.

I'm sick of hearing about no deal as if that was an end point.

If we leave with no deal, item one on the itinerary will be - seek a trade deal with the EU. Not exactly from a position of strength.

It's either deal before or after brexit really. Or the same option of not leaving at all.

@BoneyBackJefferson , here's a Brexit solution - NI special economic area/border in the sea (the Irish Sea if your geography is shonky). Can you live with that? Because I can.

bellinisurge

You have asked before, and I said yes then and the same now.

TBH, I would have preferred to stay in the SM and CU, just withdrawing from the political aspects of the EU, that way there would be no need for a backstop at all.

just withdrawing from the political aspects of the EU

Trouble is for the brexits is that the political aspects of the EU include Human Rights, eg Belfast Agreement.

Limiting access to trade deals unless countries abide by Human Rights is long established protocol in western democracies.

It's pretty simple choice for the brexits:
You can have Human Rights and easy access to trade (and or food and medicines) or neither.

woman19

Why do we have to ditch human rights if we leave the EU?

Human rights should be universal and not based on based on being part of the EU.

I'm inclined to agree , and I really hope it's true!