Leavers rejoice

[Coppersulphate]

The Brexit Party are doing really well in the polls. I just hope they do as well in the election.
I think their slogan should be "Tell them again".
I would like to see a clean sweep of Brexiteers but I know that is not going to happen.
I have sent off my postal vote.

{Does not really matter because we leave first. Become an independent country again. And then we can talk to the EU about a trade deal for as long as is needed, maybe we will not even want to agree to one.}

Obviously someone who has no clue whatsoever.
Everything the UK currently trades as a member has to be renegotiated as part of the WTO trading RULES. This sets the framework, not the tariffs.
These rules say that all interested parties to the trade of any particular item have to be involved in the discussions, and can veto decisions I believe. The EU is an interested party in most things the UK trades.
This is why trade deals take so long. Greenland, with a population of 50,000 trying to get a trade deal on only fish, took 3 years.

Also wto rules require a secure border, which we won't have unless we put up a hard border in NI.

Also wto rules require a secure border

WTO doesn’t require borders, but it does require all trading partners to be treated equally unless there is a trade agreement in place.

walkingdead how come you understand all this, yet many experts (head of the Bank of England, Chancellor of the exchequer, innumerable business CEOs) see hard Brexit as hugely damaging to Britain, economically? In what possible grounds can your point of view be as valid as theirs? How do you manage to tell yourself that your opinions are right?

I watched the sky news clip of the journalist at the Brexit party rally, and it really chilled me. The whole audience are completely convinced that they have been lied to, that the press are the enemy. It was like the worst of the Trump rallies.

They are all happy to leave the EU at whatever cost.

I guess my question is what is going to make all of this stop. None of them looked like changing their minds any time soon!

Bucking,
All of these "experts" are personally invested in the EU and want us to stay for their own personal reasons.
Just because they are trying to spread fear and panic does not turn their opinion into fact.

Most of the MPs standing for leader are Brexiteers which is good.

Sarfe,
Leaving the EU will make it stop.

The BBC. Not being so pro Remain (by the language it uses) will make it stop.
The BBC is so clearly pro Remain it is astonishing. They pretend to have a balanced view but say things like "unemployment is down yet again, despite Brexit" . "The economy is doing well despite Brexit" talk of cliff edges shows bias.

Sky clip is here

@Coppersulphate

All of these “experts” are personally invested in the EU and want us to stay for their own personal reasons.

Can you back this up, please? Point to some evidence?

Making that kind of general statement, without pointing to specifics doesn’t strengthen your point; it weakens it.

Evidence? Lol

With all due respect, anyone who is still asking for evidence 3 years down the road does not really understand what is happening.

The only thing that will stop the true believers in their tracks is a really, good hard Brexit in which they and their families and friends lose their jobs, see the value of their assets slashed and/or go without healthcare.

(Even then they will blame the EU).

Mistigri nothing will stop the true believers, that's how indoctrination works.

I think the true believers are a small number (and mostly insulated from the impacts).

30% of the population is not going to just shrug if jobs are lost and healthcare impacted.

They may blame the EU, but whoever is in power will also get blamed.

This is one of the reason why the BP has been successful - it has no policies and no political record, so for the time being it can avoid blame. But that won't be the case if it becomes part of mainstream politics. Just as UKIP did not survive contact with political reality, neither will the BP.

In what way are experts “personally invested” in the EU.? Evidence?
Why is Fragit on the BBC every 5 minutes? It’s not known as the Brexit Broadcasting Corporation for nothing. funny how things look from a different point of view.

@mistigri

Thanks for the needless attack.

You’ve divined through two sentences and no other context that I “don’t really understand what’s happening”.

Possibly step back, look at your assumptions before you wrote that, and ask yourself if perhaps you’re behaving in the exact same way as the people you’re railing against.

Assertion: I don’t understand what is happening.

Evidence: This is for you to provide. Although, I’d suggest that a couple of sentences written to someone else, without any wider context of who I am isn’t enough.

Her red lines were not the problem, her negotiating skills around those red lines were

Of course the red lines were the problem - she just found out you can’t negiotae a deal with incompatible elements.

(although to be fair to TM I have my doubts whether anyone can negotiate a Brexit with the EU that involves actual ‘leaving’)

Which is because it isn’t possible to leave and retain all the nice bits.

When is that going to sink in?

Well done Dominic Rabb. Great on Andrew Marr.
I'm liking him more and more, hope he will get to the last two.

Bobiana, not intended as an attack, just as a commentary on the lunacy of attempting to counter cult beliefs with evidence.

We're on the same side, I think.

I don't really understand why we are still trying to counter Brexit with evidence and rational argument. It doesn't work.

On these threads, I think a bit of gentle trolling is all that really can be achieved.

she just found out you can’t negiotae a deal with incompatible elements.

I think the most amazing thing about the Tory leadership election is the number of would-be Canutes who are lining up to have a go at holding back the tide. It's almost as it an expensive private education is not worth the money. Or maybe all those years at public school just left them with a fetish for public humiliation.

As far as I can tell the only non-Canute candidate is Rory Stewart who despite looking like an overeager sixth form politics student is the sane person's pick (and therefore has less chance than Larry the Cat of being the next prime minister).

{Just because they are trying to spread fear and panic does not turn their opinion into fact. }

When you have an overwhelming majority thinking/saying/doing the same thing it becomes 'fact'. Peer review and constant 'testing' of the assertions posed takes it as close to 'fact' as is possible.
While there might be one or two small areas where the UK might do a bit better by leaving, the vast majority of the negative impacts will totally drown them out.
One kid in a playground may have an idea. If the other 99 have come to a different conclusion through discussion and examining all possibilities the one kid is unlikely to be correct.

{All of these “experts” are personally invested in the EU}

So why do you think JRM and many other ERG members have put their investments into either the EU (if they are happy to declare it and continue to use it as part of legitimate business) or into tax havens outside the UK?

When is that going to sink in?

It sunk in long ago and by looking at the BP numbers I am not the only one to conclude that no deal is better than a bad deal (or revoke).

There is a fundamental disconnect between the mostly clueless members of the public who are no-deal fans, and the Tory candidates, who mostly understand that no-deal is not possible (a deal will be required: the only question is whether it occurs before or after stepping off the cliff).

The Tory candidates (and I think many of the Tory party members who will elect the next PM) are mostly coming from a position that threatening no deal loudly and often enough will being those pesky Europeans to heel. Don't they know who won the war, what?

{It sunk in long ago and by looking at the BP numbers I am not the only one to conclude that no deal is better than a bad deal (or revoke).}

Everyone needs to get over the fact the WA is not a 'deal'.
The negotiations for a deal have not started yet, the UK hasn't made it to first base yet.

Due to constant lying, the real implications of what a 'no deal' would look like, is not in the UK's heads.
You could saart off by deciding how a 10% hike in the average cost of all imports (that's about half the food) will hit households.
Then significant unemployment as business shuts down.
Continued decline of the NHS even before it gets sold off to American businesses.
If that is what you really want, then you are welcome to it, but don't expect those who wished to remain to be happy about it.

1tislleclerc
Everyone needs to get over the fact the WA is not a 'deal'

I’ve changed my post for you:

It sunk in long ago and by looking at the BP numbers I am not the only one to conclude that no WA is better than a bad WA (or revoke).

(Don't they know who won the war, what?)
Eisenhower, who masterminded 'D day' apparently had a speech written up and in his wallet on June 5th which if the D day landings had been a disaster was an apology for the failure. Even he accepted that it was not going to be a forgone conclusion.
So, That's an American directing the 'Sovereign' UK and the commonwealth troops.