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.

remainers have failed to swing the dial in the polls.

I am not entirely sure of that - in the Local Elections around here the Tories got an absolute thrashing. We don't have much Labour presence where I am, but they had a poor night electorally. You can't generalise from Local to General Elections but it does show the way the land is lying.

E.g. Locally, going back to about 1990 the Tories had held the Parliamentary seat since the Year dot, but during the early part of that decade they were wiped out on the Local Council. The Tory got back in in 1992 but then lost in 1997. In 2010 the Tories got back in, after a dirty campaign but only got a 176 majority.

megan could you please explain how you think Remainers could have done anything more to convince Leavers when Leavers resolutely refuse to acknowledge any of the realities of Brexit?

And, like you say, they’d already won so had no interested in listening.

{Former Bank of England Governor, Mervyn King, says the opposite to Hammond}

Hammond has the figures relating to the UK NOW, not from the time when Mervyn King was in position.
You also need to read all of what Mervyn said as although the start of his piece looks like a glowing reason to leave, later on he starts to admit some of the critically damaging effects that actually leaving will produce.
Like so many of the Pro Leave campaigners, the first few lines of their speeches sound good, which is all that 'leave followers' bother to hear, but the 'experts' (rather than politicians) usually sneak the downsides at the end of their piece (if they are being truthful). You also have to read the full context and take into account what other areas of the economy are doing.
Patrick Minford (an advisor to ERG) says leaving would be wonderful but only if the UK continues to focus on financial services (which are getting broken up due to the requirement for many of them to have head office in EU jurisdiction) and accept that manufacturing will be decimated.

The obvious problem is that most leavers can't be bothered with 'details' or 'facts' and simply go with the headlines, which as is obvious are manipulated.

{leavers don't have the numbers to gang up on remainers on this board anyway}

What, 17.4 Million fervent leavers and none have the ability to put forward properly structured and referenced 'discussion points' to leave?

megan could you please explain how you think Remainers could have done anything more to convince Leavers when Leavers resolutely refuse to acknowledge any of the realities of Brexit?

You maybe need one of those impact and influence courses Bear. You know in asking that question that no-one could summarise effectively in a short post what they are about. What it definitely doesn't involve is alienating people by indicating they don't care about their children's futures (I know that wasn't you). I know it's not easy but these are desperate times and I have worried continually about Brexit and tried to engage positively with people around me, but I'm one tiny voice. This board is potentially far more powerful but the tone set has been quite destructive.

What, 17.4 Million fervent leavers and none have the ability to put forward properly structured and referenced 'discussion points' to leave?
Like I said, they don't have to convince the remainers, it's the remainers who needed to convince the leavers. This post just demonstrates your determination to demonise Leavers, thereby alienating them and missing an opportunity to engage positively.

You know in asking that question that no-one could summarise effectively in a short post what they are about.

megan isn’t that convienient 🤔

The obvious problem is that most leavers can't be bothered with 'details' or 'facts' and simply go with the headlines, which as is obvious are manipulated.

Yes headlines are manipulated, hence the building mistrust of anything we read in the papers, affects both sides.
Expert opinions are largely predictions and anyone can criticise those. That's why Mervyn King knows he can disregard what the Mark Carney says - he is familiar (broadly) with the assumptions that those models are built on.
If Mervyn King and Mark Carney can disagree, this tells me that the outcome on balance considering everything that may influence the wellbeing of the country is currently unknowable. Which means it was actually all to play for over the past three years.

Bear
Leavers are not a homogenous bunch though. Some leavers will not listen, others will. Where you come across one who doesn't listen, maybe be sensitive on the board to the fact that lurkers will include leavers who will listen, and your response to the ones who don't should not alienate the silent ones who will.

This is a very (embarrassingly) obvious answer to a question you didn't really want me to answer. I am sure you know as well as I do how to engage with people, but that's not what you want to get out of this board. Which is fine. My comment is only that I think it's a lost opportunity.

megan I don’t need you to patronise me than you very much.

I never actually know which side you are on as your posts are so contradictory.

If there were sensible, rational benefits to Brexit we’d know about them by now.

I had hoped that some Leavers would now see that but most haven’t, they’ve just doubled down, which isn’t conducive to any discussion really.

So enough with your psycho-babble.

Leavers: Shut up Remainers , we won, you lost, get over it!

Also Leavers: Whyyyyy won't Remainers help take responsibility for Brexit? If it goes wrong, it'll be your fault for not engaging!

Also Leavers: But Brexit will not go wrong, because by definition it's great and any negative occurrences would have happened anyway!

Also Leavers: What do you Remainers mean you're engaging and taking responsibility for mitigating Brexit issues, by suggesting a softer Brexit without May's stupid Red Lines? Don't you know that the Only True Brexit is a No Deal Crash Out and something something WTO? By suggesting UnTrue Brexit, you're traitors against The Will of The People!

To Le Clerc

Where in the article does King say leaving has critically damaging effects?

The former governor of the Bank of England, Mervyn King, has attacked MPs over their handling of Brexit and called for Britain to leave the EU without a deal after six months of preparation.

In an extraordinary intervention, Lord King said it appeared Britain’s political class had “suffered a collective nervous breakdown” and accused MPs of exaggerating the economic risks of no-deal Brexit.

“MPs have rather somehow lost the plot when we hear of people talking about the consequences of leaving without a deal as national suicide,” he told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme.

He said it was not clear that a no-deal Brexit would trigger job losses across the country and that, with adequate preparation, the long-term economic costs of leaving without a deal would not be very different from staying in the bloc.

Saying the costs to the economy would depend on how well-prepared the country was for leaving without a deal, he said there could be some “short-run dislocation costs”, but added: “The more wild, exaggerated view that somehow we’re going to have queues of lorries on the M20 for five years or more is pretty absurd.”

The Bank’s former governor, who was replaced by Mark Carney in 2013, said the government should tell the EU that Britain intended to leave without agreeing a deal following a set period of time, which could be as long as civil servants said might be required to prepare.

“My own personal preference would be to go back to Europe and say we have a clear strategy, which is we want to leave without a deal, but we would like to take six months to complete the preparations to avoid the dislocation,” he said.

Speaking on the day the UK was originally scheduled to leave the EU, King blasted ministers for having failed to adequately prepare for a no-deal departure. He said a decision by Philip Hammond, the chancellor, not to accelerate spending to prepare the country for such a scenario had been “disastrous” and had cost the UK’s bargaining power in talks with Brussels.

Nothing about Hard or Soft or Deals listed on the ballot paper. Choices were leave or remain.

And the official Vote Leave campaign (Johnson, Gove, Stuart, Hannan, Jenkin etc) claimed that the UK would remain in the EEA free trade area and that the UK would leave with a deal.

Wasn’t true, was it?

{To Le Clerc

Where in the article does King say leaving has critically damaging effects?}
It was in a previous article discussed on Westminsterenders several months back.
But ignoring that, the UK gov did not do what Mervyn said would be his preference, so the flipside being that the UK gov have still failed by ignoring experts.

{Like I said, they don't have to convince the remainers, it's the remainers who needed to convince the leavers.}

No, the leavers have to demonstrate to Remainers How they are going to make the UK BETTER than it is while in the EU. So far we are going backwards and we haven't exited yet, so LEAVERS had better start coming up with real solutions.

From that quote by Mervyn:

{“My own personal preference would be to go back to Europe and say we have a clear strategy, which is we want to leave without a deal, but we would like to take six months to complete the preparations to avoid the dislocation,” he said.}

Too little too late and the UK gov still after 3 years has NO clear idea of where it wants to go, with no clear strategy.

And the official Vote Leave campaign (Johnson, Gove, Stuart, Hannan, Jenkin etc) claimed that the UK would remain in the EEA free trade area and that the UK would leave with a deal

Not relevant. What was on the ballot paper people used to make their choice counts. Comments made before people choose are for information only. Certainly not binding as has been demonstrated many time.

T May said over 100 times that UK would leave EU on 29 March 2019 also said that No Deal better than a Bad Deal. So far neither has happened.

Not relevant

In your opinion.

What was on the ballot paper people used to make their choice counts.

And therein lies the problem.

“Leave” is nebulous and undefined and means different things to different people.

and the UK gov still after 3 years has NO clear idea of where it wants to go, with no clear strategy

Correct. The mess is due to the implementation of the referendum as opposed to the outcome of the referendum.

No plan before the referendum was called in the event of a leave result

No check if a leave result could be delivered legally and not infringe any existing obligations (GFA)

No plan before A50 triggered

No WA agreed, or even outlined in principle, before A50 triggered

Not a very good reference when it comes to seeking trade deals with others further afield if you can't work out how to leave existing neighbours.

@MeganBacon thats exactly what I'm talking about in this thread. YOU have blamed Remainers for failing to convince Leavers. You've proven my point that remainers get blamed. You are doing the blaming.

No Leavers don't listen ever. Have you wandered over to the Leave pages of FB or are you sat in your ivory tower thinking it's just remainers that are frothing at the mouth?

How dare you blame remainers for the way Leavers voted. Like i posted upthread, people prefer comforting lies over inconvenient truths.

As for your impact and influence comment, you talk a good game but the only thing you've convinced me of is that you're full of completely biased twaddle.

Nice one.

Not relevant

In your opinion

Seems to be the opinion of 17.4 Million others too.

What was on the ballot paper people used to make their choice counts

And therein lies the problem

“Leave” is nebulous and undefined and means different things to different people*

How else could the ballot paper have been prepared? It had to be an equal balance between leave and remain.

Possible that the 17.4 Million who voted leave each had a different interpretation of the meaning of leave in the context of EU membership. Not very practical to list them all on a ballot paper.

How else could the ballot paper have been prepared? It had to be an equal balance between leave and remain.

Could have had multiple choice questions and/or been phased, as in first phase: do you want to Leave or Remain? Majority answer: Leave

Ok next vote: pick your preferred terms of leaving: do you want to remain in the customs union? Do you want to have access to the single market? Etc all the way to No Deal - WTO

{T May said over 100 times that UK would leave EU on 29 March 2019 also said that No Deal better than a Bad Deal. So far neither has happened.}

And at every statement she made she said that the UK wants a deep and meaningful relationship with the EU.
This was countered by the actions and statements by cabinets ministers and others with a continual stream of ill informed disrespect to the leaders of countries that will be very important to the survival of the UK as like it or not the UK will HAVE to negotiate with the EU. Calling them 'Russians' or 'Nazis' is not a great start to the process.

Closertotheheart
I admire your efforts but many of the electorate are not that interested in understanding politics and their idea of 'choices' is not much above deselecting people in the Big Brother house. This was certainly the case a few months before the referendum, where reputedly only about 6% had any interest in the EU. Those who actually understand the EU would probably be considerably less as most only get a glimpse of the depth of integration if they are working 'across borders' in medicine, manufacturing etc.

TM legitimised this being all about immigration with her red lines.

Because of her refusal to back down on FOM we are unable to have a deal that’s anything like as good as we have now and it has emboldened those with dreadful racist views because their behaviour has become much more the norm.