There really is no point trying to persuade Leavers....

[Closertotheheart]

As the title suggests really. There is no point trying to reason a debate with them as they are totally tunnel-visioned. Loads of them seem to think we should leave without a deal and go on to WTO rules.

They blame the Remainers in parliament for us having not left yet.

They blame Remainers in general for, well, seemingly anything and everything.

They blame the EU for us not having left yet.

They spout myth as if it was fact.

I despair. There really is no point trying to reason with them.

I'm at the point where I feel there is nothing left to say on the topic so let them have their 'victory' so at least they will have no one to blame.

Just read that Canada isn't likely to roll over its trade deal with the EU to the UK. How is that the EU's fault?

I think that headline itself sounds like nonsense and posting it is just part of the "look how stupid those leavers are" spiel which alienates sensible leavers. So not helping anyone to post it, or engage with it.

Isn't Dominic Raab one of those prominent leavers? Oh so you pick and choose who you debate with and that's part of the solution is it?

As long as we're clear megan

Add Hunt to the EU blaming list as well.

“Frankly,” he added, “I think future generations, if this ends in acrimony, people will say the EU got this wrong, and I really hope they don’t.”

Hunt on R4 in March this year.

Hi there Pere - as I'm here (popping in) I'll answer that question (that Ken did ask a few days ago).

The unification of Europe in the post-war (that's WW2) period has been fundamental to keeping the Peace in Europe - and comparing the past 50-60 years to any previous 50-60 years segment of time would agree that this has never been achieved before. A very positive thing and why amongst many reasons that I think the EU/EC/EEC has been a very good thing indeed.

It is now highly unlikely that Germany/France/Italy/Poland et al would even think about 'warring' against each other again. Job done.

And so, they don't need the UK to be a member any more to help maintain their Peace - they know how to do it now.

Borders - are one of the main things that people want to kill other people over. Also religion and other differences.

And so, whilst the EU likes to perceive itself as being 'borderless' it isn't at all because it is now trying to harden, and has been hardening the EU Border, also wishing to create an Army to defend it. Not only does this follow the same old, same old pattern towards War - it also begs the question what is the EU Border defending itself against?

NI/RoI Border - the nitty/griity question. Hardly anybody who lives either side wants to re-instate a Border, nor hardly anyone residing in the UK mainland, nor most sensible people do. Whilst most of the 'border' is created by rivers, the main idea of it is a man-made concept.

It currently works as well as it could in terms of Peace. The EU played a part in reaching GFA but it wasn't the chief negotiator, it's role was to provide the 'mechanism' through EU Membership, that allowed the UK and RoI (and othe interested parties) to agree to it. And primarily they all have and it's worked.

And so, similar to Continental Europe, learning by doing, living in Peace, so has NI/RoI - just not for so long.

If Peace was the ultimate Aim, then obviously no-one would want to feck about with the GFA. The only people that want to are the EU - who really should have agreed from the outset of Brexit that the RoI/NI no-Border situation as it is via GFA should be maintained.

But they haven't, and have plummeted in my estimation because of their stance on this. They're using it as a bargaining chip and maybe easy for them, over there in Brussels, so far removed, but shows to me how little regard the EU actually has in regards to Peace.

Isn't Dominic Raab one of those prominent leavers? Oh so you pick and choose who you debate with and that's part of the solution is it?

As long as we're clear megan
I'm not sure what your point is. Obviously yes, it is sensible to pick and choose who you engage with. Your post indicates that's a bad thing but we only needed to shift the opinion of some of the people in the middle ground to get a positive polling result. The problem with branding all leavers as thick is that you alienate those people in the middle ground along with the more extreme leavers.

I wrote a reply to HateIs and it disappeared, so I will try again

I take issue with the statement that the EU are the ones who want to feck about with the RoI/NI border. The DUP and Michael Gove are against the GFA and if destroying it fecked the border I question how much they would care.

As for Germany, France, Poland won't go to war - when Torville and Dean were winning in the Winter Olympics in 1984, I never thought that less than 10 years later that country would be plunged into Civil War and break apart. Micha Glenny did predict this and was called Micha Gloomy as a result. Micha Glenny was right.

Couldn't care less whether my opinion alienates people to be honest

That basically answers your own OP

Best post so far.

Nobody has to explain to anyone else the reasons why they chose which way to vote. It called freedom of choice which is an essential part of Democracy.

Duty of Government is to preserve Democracy by implementing the result of a Vote. A point that was made on QT by the actor John Rhys- Davies on QT a few weeks ago. Brought the house down.

Are Voters entitled to change their minds as time passes? Of course they are. It has happened for as long as I can remember. Ted Heath, Conservative, voted out in 1974. Callaghan, Labour, voted out in 1979. Major, Conservative, voted out in 1997. Brown, Labour, voted out in 2010. However, in each case the result of a Vote was enacted and the party (or any coalition formed) that had the most seats was placed in power. Non of the General Elections here re-run due to the losing parties saying that the winners did not win by a big enough margin.

Voters can do the same with respect to EU and new parties have been established for that purpose.

Brexit Party - Pro Leave
Change UK - Pro Remain

As for previous parties

Conservatives - Pro Leave overall
Labour - Not clear
Lib Dems - Pro Remain
Greens - Pro Remain
Plaid Cymru - Seems to mostly Remain

So the options are available.

What?? Have you read the thread?? It was a Leaver (LifeContinues) that shared this nugget with the group. She said her parents did it.

They did because they are entitled to their own opinion. It is their view that UK will be better off out of the EU and therefore future generations will be better off.

Their choice and hence their vote.

And my point is, I don't think Leavers can be persuaded (as has been proven)

People chose for themselves how they will vote.

But to stick with the original theme of the thread, don't blame others when reality kicks in. Own your actions

People do. It is called voting differently in future General Elections if they think their previous vote was, with the benefit of hindsight, an incorrect decision.

Again @LifeContinues , more attempts to rehash arguments around the referendum.
Are you against No Deal? And, if you are, what are you doing to stop it? I voted Remain but supported the Withdrawal Agreement because it respected the democratic decision of the referendum that we Leave. No Deal would be a dreadful thing-even Phillip Hammond - the Chancellor (not some internet random like you or me) - says so.
I don't pretend that avoiding No Deal can only be achieved by Revoke. That's another reason why I supported WA. However, threats of economic self harm will not make me support this path.

Job done.

Well, Hate, How about Northern Ireland? Job done there too?

If Peace was the ultimate Aim, then obviously no-one would want to feck about with the GFA. The only people that want to are the EU - who really should have agreed from the outset of Brexit that the RoI/NI no-Border situation as it is via GFA should be maintained.

Whilst there are still Leavers who operate under the mentality of ‘they need us more than we need them’ and the above ‘if we don’t want a border and they don’t want a border then we don’t need a border’ then there really is no hope.

I am genuinely pleased to see that HateIs gave us a full reply. If this was before the Referendum and I was wondering how to vote it would have given a starting point for a productive discussion.

LifeContinues - there are quite a number of points which can be debated in your reply.

Duty of Government is to preserve Democracy by implementing the result of a Vote.

So what then does the Government do when faced with a result which asks for mutually contradictory results to be implemented?
Since we have a Parliamentary democracy IMO it ought to be their duty to thrash out an agreement as to the way forward. More than three years on, they haven't yet been able to do this.

Since the Referendum Theresa May has been to the Country to ask whether we liked her vision of hard Brexit. She lost her majority so that answer was No. Labour put up a wishy -washy alternative and the answer to that was No also. Hence the impasse.

Non of the General Elections here re-run due to the losing parties saying that the winners did not win by a big enough margin.

It could happen - no party gets a majority, none of the party leaders can cobble enough support together to form a Government and we would have to have another GE. That is effectively what happened in 1974 - Harold Wilson initially formed a minority Government. Minority Governments are unstable. A few months later he called another. He did get his majority then but it was slender.

Local elections can and are voided where it can be shown that there was corruption involved.

So the options are available.
Indeed and in the EU elections Farage's people got 29 seats and the pro-Remain parties got 29 seats. As for Labour and the Tories, it probably splits as two thirds Labour Remain MEPs, Tories two thirds Leave MEPs, so the result ends up being a tie. Back to the impasse.

They did because they are entitled to their own opinion. It is their view that UK will be better off out of the EU and therefore future generations will be better off.

No no no, that's not what you said. You said they only thought about themselves when casting their vote. They didn't consider the impact. You told us so.

And @MeganBacon I haven't called anyone thick. I said someone made a stupid argument. Not the same thing.

Why aren't you lambasting leavers for alienating remainers? you surely realise it cuts both ways? Or are you that biased you can only see it in one direction?

{I take issue with the statement that the EU are the ones who want to feck about with the RoI/NI border.}

The UK remaining in the EU does away with the necessity for a GOODS border, which is required by either the EU at it's perimeter, or by the WTO. It is the UK that is creating the need for this border by attempting to leave the EU.
The mention of the peace aspect of the EU extends to the GFA in that having the UK and Ireland dissipates the need for a hard border, much the same way as between France/Italy/Spain etc.

It is plainly obvious that 'leavers' see the EU and the UK as 'opposite sides' without understanding that the UK IS the EU in the same way that the Welsh, Irish (NI), Scots and English are all one.
Auropeans understand that they are European AND German/Dutch/spanish etc.

So what then does the Government do when faced with a result which asks for mutually contradictory results to be implemented?

Admit they did not research thoroughly enough before the Vote was called to check if a particular outcome was possible to implement or not.

Since we have a Parliamentary democracy IMO it ought to be their duty to thrash out an agreement as to the way forward. More than three years on, they haven't yet been able to do this

So the default outcome is to leave EU and reply on WTO.

Since the Referendum Theresa May has been to the Country to ask whether we liked her vision of hard Brexit. She lost her majority so that answer was No. Labour put up a wishy -washy alternative and the answer to that was No also. Hence the impasse

Same as before the default outcome is WTO. Nothing about Hard or Soft or Deals listed on the ballot paper. Choices were leave or remain.

Harold Wilson initially formed a minority Government. Minority Governments are unstable. A few months later he called another. He did get his majority then but it was slender

Exactly. So the same person ended up in power anyway. Wilson won in the October 1974 by a 3.4% spread. A smaller spread than the 2016 EU referendum, but nobody demanded it was run a third time as Wilson did not win by a big enough margin. You have to be consistent.

Indeed and in the EU elections Farage's people got 29 seats and the pro-Remain parties got 29 seats

This bit is factual

As for Labour and the Tories, it probably splits as two thirds Labour Remain MEPs, Tories two thirds Leave MEPs, so the result ends up being a tie

This is a guess.

What LifeContinues actually said was:

Maybe mother and father at age of 76 and 85 respectively think they are entitled to vote for what they think is in their interests as opposed to others?

Nothing there about future generations and nothing actually to say that this was the parents' opinion. It's LifeContinues opinion that if they want to think only of themselves it's up to them. Backed up by the statement at 13:40 yesterday:

Nothing, but when I am in my 70's or 80s I can't see myself voting for what is better for others in preference to what I think is better for myself.

Which as I said, being considerably nearer 70 (perish the thought) than most on these threads, is not a sentiment I share. Nor was I alone, and I don't think that is a Remain/Leaver position either.

I voted Remain but supported the Withdrawal Agreement because it respected the democratic decision of the referendum that we Leave

MP's did not agree so it was voted down three times by; 230, 149 and 58 majorities.

That T May attempted to hide the details of the Legal position of the WA convinces me it was not leave, but remain.

No Deal would be a dreadful thing-even Phillip Hammond - the Chancellor (not some internet random like you or me) - says so

Former Bank of England Governor, Mervyn King, says the opposite to Hammond. Is he an internet random? No he is not. Link is;

www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/mar/29/uk-should-leave-eu-with-no-deal-says-former-bank-of-england-governor

I don't pretend that avoiding No Deal can only be achieved by Revoke

How does Revoke deliver the referendum result?

but nobody demanded it was run a third time as Wilson did not win by a big enough margin. You have to be consistent.

That is though effectively what happened - by then Callaghan had taken over. His majority disappeared and in 1978 before the five years were up, a Confidence vote was called and he won. Another one was called in March 1979 and he lost by one vote hence the GE was called. They didn't stagger on until his five years were up.

What LifeContinues actually said was:

Maybe mother and father at age of 76 and 85 respectively think they are entitled to vote for what they think is in their interests as opposed to others?

Nothing there about future generations and nothing actually to say that this was the parents' opinion. It's LifeContinues opinion that if they want to think only of themselves it's up to them

Well done to Peregrina for paying attention to detail.

Well done to Peregrina for paying attention to detail.

Glad to be of service to people. Saves them the bother of scrolling back!

Why aren't you lambasting leavers for alienating remainers? hmm you surely realise it cuts both ways? Or are you that biased you can only see it in one direction?

You asked why leavers don't change their minds. I pointed out that this thread is an opportunity to do that and why I think it has been less effective than it could have been. The drive of your OP is not about changing remainers' minds, and leavers don't have the numbers to gang up on remainers on this board anyway. My point (again) is that in three long years of free media and ample opportunity for democratic debate, and heaps of expert opinion, and having the power of apparently being "right" on their side, remainers have failed to swing the dial in the polls. That's a monumental fail, far worse than the original referendum. Leavers didn't need to go round convincing people because they had already won.