Does anyone else sense a change of mood re Brexit?

[twofingerstoGideon]

I was rather astounded following the referendum that politicians of all shades weren't making noises about Brexit needing parliamentary scrutiny etc., but at last - after almost four months - it's as if people are waking up, noticing the shambles and saying "Hang on a minute... I'm not sure we should be doing this..." It was shocking to see the lack of reaction to the xenophobia and the way politicians of all shades seemed to be saying we had to blindly obey the very slim majority. The lack of disgust expressed by the press/politicians about the barefaced lies used by the Leave campaign (not to mention that poster) was also mind-blowing.

Has anyone else noticed a change in the air? I'm starting to feel slightly hopeful for the first time since 24th June that the country isn't just going to jump off a cliff in order to follow 'the will of the people'.

Anyone else, or am I deluded?

Smallfox: Claudia might have something to say here - she's not impressed by posters who don't have 'arguments'.

Sapphire: it's pointless to parse it: let me give you an example. German car manufacturers are now coming out in favour of punitive trade responses even though it will hurt them more in terms of car sales. Even though they previously demonstrated a more positive approach; even though a normal (non punitive) trade deal would benefit German people and British people. Why?

There can be no other reason for this than punitive. And the punitive reasoning springs from a belief that it will prevent any other EU nations taking the same path. And this springs from a desire to retain the EU as an aspiring single nation state - to achieve political union.

No individual benefits from this approach. No German person, no British person, not Germany, not the UK. The only beneficiary of this is the EU; and that's not an economic benefit, it's a political benefit.

It is about power, and deepening and embedding that power.

WinchesterWoman UK has badly unbalanced, indebted economy with a very large (record) current-account deficit - it's an unsustainable position - kept afloat only by market whim and absolute faith in house prices as an indicator of wealth

Now this is where I come back for the nth time to point out that the UK economy was not kept afloat by market whim but by those sectors of the economy that are in surplus, namely financial services, Science and tech and higher education, and the competitive advantages they gave us in the world economy. These are the sectors potentially, and in the case of Science tech and higher education already being, most badly affected by Brexit. Devaluation will get us nowhere if we do not have the things to sell that the world wants to buy and our deficit will just get larger. So how would you propose to address that issue? How do we stop Brexit making Britain an economy that is even less able to earn it's living?

Whilst you are at it how can you support a man who is psychologically and morally unfit to represent the American people and will worsen the lives of just about every racial and gender minority?

This is where WinchesterWoman either posts a kneejerk irrelevent respinse or pisses off entirely.

" When so many Remainers have a cotton candy Kumbaya-style faith in the altruism of a body that's shown itself to be anything but altruistic."

In fact many remainers felt that there were faults with the EU, but as with all organisations that it would be best to change progressively from the inside rather than flounce out all together.

The pragmatism of the remain campaign was shown that the vast majority of British business backed remaining, CBI, BCC, IOD etc etc.

The leave campaigns post truth arguments basically told each specialist interest group that their vested interests would be the highest priority.

In the end it won't just be remainers that are disappointed with life outside the EU, but the vast majority of leave voters too.

Except WW, she'll be happy with her unicorn.

By the way I have it all on the clipboard so I keep asking and will keep asking with minimal effort.......

smallfox She still won't give up her tin hat though, there be dragons.....

Rondo I do believe I've said this to you multiple times but you keep posting the question as if to pretend I was ignoring you. It's not an attractive habit and makes you look petty.

I'm attracted very much to the movement behind Trump. I don't like him: I don't think he's as bad as you think: but he's not as bad as Hillary Clinton by a very long way. She is cruel, and corrupt, racist, she despises people, she is venal and she is obsessed with power. I can think of plenty of others I would rather see through the primaries: apart from Kasich and Bush, any of them. But they didn't make it. He did. So I'm willing to hold my noses.

In fact I was much more ambivalent before having these arguments on these threads. But reading the contempt that posters have for the people who are behind Donald Trump, has given me a real understanding of his appeal.

Why do you always resort to insults? Why? I can't imagine posting the sorts of things you do. It's unbelievable - I do assume you are grown women.

Why do you always post reactionary rhetoric that is blatantly untrue.

You deny the usage of post truth yet your posts are full of emotive hyperbole and have little factual basis whilst you ignore fact based rebuttals of your posts.

You are the essence of post truth!

"The pragmatism of the remain campaign was shown that the vast majority of British business backed remaining, CBI, BCC, IOD etc etc. "

It's not pragmatism: it's the venality of corporations who prefer to see human beings as capital property.

Plenty of unions and tough left-wingers were Brexiteers.

It's not blatantly untrue: that's why you're posting insults because you ran out of arguments.

Post - truth is a phenomenon in certain desperate circles.

In less romantic commentary it's not a phenomenon at all. The only phenomenon is people pretending that normal political discourse and debate is something new. It's not new: there've been (at least) two sides to every political and economic argument since forever : one is believed and voted in, the other isn't. Some forecast turn out to be prescient: some aren't. Twas ever thus.

The reason it's being described as post-truth is because liberal commentators haven't been winning the arguments any more - and they have no idea what to do. So they made up a disdainful phrase to more pithily express their contempt for ordinary people.

Erm no. We have only had this short exchange on here on the Trump issue, it is there for all to see. Perhaps you are getting me mixed up with someone else who finds it hard to believe that you cannot see the blatant unfitness to govern of a man who has a clear case of narcissistic personality disorder and some very unpleasant attitudes towrards our gender and other races, I did see that there were several posters raising those issues with you elsewhere. You have not addressed the issue that Trump is psychologically and morally unfit to represent people. It is entirely divorced from having respect for the reasons some of the people who support him do so. It is as far as I am concerned not a relativist issue. He is as mad as a box of frogs, and that has been apparent to anyone who watched The Apprentice, irrespective of press coverage etc.

The issue I do keep repeatedly putting to you is the economic one, and no you have not responded on that one except to say why would we not continue with the current deficit, except my point is that Brexit will destroy our ability to even manage that.

lurking "On a serious note, can the Lib Dems come back ?"

I think so. They got a massive swing in Witney last night. I'm not expecting them to win but another hung parliament forced on a remain ticket would certainly trigger a review of "brexit".
I think what the government are saying is pretty unreliable as they won't want to tip their hand to the EU. So I take all the hard brexit talk with a massive pinch of salt.

smallfox 100% agree

So I take all the hard brexit talk with a massive pinch of salt.

I don't - I think Theresa May is stubborn and having decided that is what she will now pursue, will push it through to the bitter end. When it's destroyed the country she will then do a Cameron and walk away. Like Cameron, she will still be wealthy, so won't suffer.

I answered your question as soon as you asked it before: I said I'm attracted to the movement behind Trump. Bored posters on your side will also know that I've explained many times. Fine if you want to drop in the middle of a thread but then you end up declaiming on things you just don't know about - so you've no call to sneer.

He's not morally and psychologically unfit to represent people - what on earth are you talking about?

Morally unfit - against Hillary Clinton? You've got to be kidding. Over her I'd take just about anyone. And her state of mind is far more worrying than Trump's. If she wins, she will take us to a greater conflict that we've seen so far this century by far.

I don't need to 'address that issue' - it's simply not true. If anything, you'd need to address the issue that Clinton is morally and psychologically unfit to be in the White House.

I agree the LibDem vote is good news. We need a strong opposing voice and Labour are not it right now. Tim Farron is quite articulate and he's not wishy washy like Clegg. I disagree with him on oooohhhhhhh maybe everything but that voice is needed so long as he doesn't get anywhere near number 10

Brexit will not destroy our ability to reduce the deficit.

The UK could be damaged by deliberately punitive nationalistic protectionism from the European Union. But you're a big fan of that. All Remainers here seem to think - 'but of course, why not?' when vindictiveness in negotiations is raised. So basically Remainers are all in favour of damaging the UK economy by punitive deals. This is what I'm reading here.

They got a massive swing in Witney last night

Which is completely expected in a by election tbh.

Labour lost a seat in Wales last night, I believe, to PC. not sure if it was a significant seat or not though

I'm certainly not out of arguments.

"It's not pragmatism: it's the venality of corporations who prefer to see human beings as capital property. "

You think coming out of the EU is going to stop this? What do yiou think all the talk of "free trade" is about.

Most Unions backed remain, lexiters are essentially like Corbyn and a group of people who haven't moved on from 1978, they want to leave because they think that we will one day renationalise industries etc. Not, going to happen.

"The reason it's being described as post-truth is because liberal commentators haven't been winning the arguments any more - and they have no idea what to do."

No the reason it is used is because there is little to no truth in the arguments that are laid out and certainly not in your arguments.

You don't like the term because it accurately describes the the majority if not all of the reasons laid out buy the leave campaign. Very little of it had factual evidence, all of it made appeals to emotion, and when challenged they ignored it. See Boris when challenged on the £350 million, see the way that Cameron talking about the EU keeping the peace in Europe for 50 years was turned into the WW3 quote repeated by leavers.

The whole campaign, and Trump's is post truth, all of your posting is too.

.

So you agree that the desire to stay in the EU is driven by the venality of corporate bodies? Can i just get that clear?

The UK could be damaged by deliberately punitive nationalistic protectionism from the European Union

But that was discounted by the Leave campaign at the time of the vote.

"Don't worry" they said "it won't happen. Project fear" they said.

So,

(a) did they lie ?
(b) were they mistaken ?
(c) it's not really happening, and everything is going according to plan.

It's not because there is little to no truth - it's because liberal commentators think there's little to no truth and they have absolute contempt for the people who disagree with them.

"So you agree that the desire to stay in the EU is driven by the venality of corporate bodies? Can i just get that clear?"

Would that be the venial corporate body that is the NHS? Or most of our charities? Or our Universities? Or the majority of trade unions?

Those venial corporate bodies?

"they have absolute contempt for the people who disagree with them."

Not true, and a fine example of post truth appeal to emotions.

Well I didn't lie. I knew exactly what would happen. Westminster would have done the same to Scotland. It was / is predictable.

There was some hope that EU leaders might not act wholly in opposition to the needs of their own people but obviously it was a hope in vain.