What is going to be better on the ‘other side’?

[Bearbehind]

I’ve long since accepted that Brexit is happening.

But what is going to be better once we’ve left?

What is the everyday Joe going to notice that improves their life?

This opens the door to deliberately thwarting something for so long that you can then disingenuously argue it can't be done and should be abandoned.

And this is not what Boris Johnson did, by voting against a better deal negotiated by Theresa May? Which if he and his cronies had voted for it, would have meant that we had left by the original deadline of 29th March. A man, a known liar, who deliberately undermined the then PM for his own personal ambition.

I think you said you voted Remain Megan, but you do seem to have joined the Leavers in their 'twist it whichever way' camp.

And of course, how does the ordinary Joe or Jill benefit?
Well this election might see off the shit stirrer Farage, which would be one blessing. What has he done for anyone?

I think this thread proves that people just don’t want to hear answers that don’t fit with their preconceptions and what you term my ‘twisting’ could be interpreted as not being so entrenched that I can’t see a different point of view, one that in fact is not what I originally wanted. I also note that remainers always resort to insults (twisting is not an insult in my mind although you may have intended it as such, but misti’s ‘brain dead’ paragraph certainly is) as a way to maintain the echo chamber. In view of that I see ‘twisting’ as a good thing.

I would like to see Leavers give me some convincing arguments. I don't know why the results of an advisory Referendum are sacrosanct when we have general elections at least every five years, so I am not going to go along with "that's democracy" as far as a referendum is concerned. Johnson and Rees-Mogg weren't too fussed about democracy when they illegally prorogued Parliament.

I think we’ve already covered this ad nauseum.

I put ‘ad nauseum’ in ironically there as a mini tribute to Bj and jrm 😄

I disagree. I have yet to see a convincing argument from a Leaver. I have seen a lot of pie in the sky, easiest deals in history stuff.

If there was a cast iron guarantee that the NHS would get £350 million a week, I might begin to say OK. But since this was nothing to do with the EU, there is no reason why May's Government could not immediately have implemented that pledge.

The NHS is fucked anyway.
It needs scrapping.
Too many people here now plus we’re all living 25 years longer than we did 50 years ago.
Totally unsustainable.

I certainly agree that the NHS needs reform - it's foundation was based on a time when people only lived a few years after retirement. But it needs a proper debate about how and what we are prepared to pay for; not being sold off by stealth to US companies.

What health care systems do other EU countries have?
Are they French & Germans less healthy than us? do they all drop dead at 50?
We’re probably one of the least healthy countries in Europe - certainly one of the most overweight.

The NHS is fucked anyway.
It needs scrapping.

Scrapping the NHS certainly will change the life of the ordinary Joes on this thread!

A rare admission of what Brexit is really about.

@Velveteenfruitbowl The problem with the EU is that you end up woth a lot of harmonising policies which must take into account its poorer members.

This one of the few coherent arguments for voting to leave the EU. It's not my view, but it's a valid one to hold. I personally don't have a problem in supporting or building up the poorer countries so everyone in the EU lives, works, transacts on an equal footing globally. We benefit from that as a country and I'm happy to compromise on policy that will achieve that, even if I can't name a single policy where we've done that.

But this is an ideologically-driven reason for voting to remain or leave. I can absolutely live with that, much like I live with a Conservative government who is ideologically opposed to me. What I struggle with is the misinformation and incorrect beliefs that motivated people to vote to leave. Germany taking over the UK, an EU army, Abu Hamza, unaudited accounts, Turkey, more money for the UK. The list goes on.

I don't know why the results of an advisory Referendum are sacrosanct when we have general elections at least every five years, so I am not going to go along with "that's democracy" as far as a referendum is concerned.

^This.

Democracy works because of the sheer numbers of the electorate. So it doesn't usually matter if people aren't knowledgeable or have weighed it all up etc. as that usually balances out across parties. But for democracy to be an accurate reflection of the electorate's views, it has to be fair, which is why we have electoral law. In the EU referendum, some of these laws were broken and the Leave campaign overspent so they could target specific voters with known misinformation that played on their fears to deliberately influence the result. And it only needed to be successful with 1.2m to do that.

Therefore in this case, democracy was subverted. Not by MPs who've not supported for a No Deal, nor the MPs who didn't support a WA. But in the referendum itself. So I really don't have any time for people who moan about democracy whilst having absolute no regard for the failings of the referendum to uphold this.

< yawn >
Democracy only works when it’s going your way. We know we know.

I think you’ll find the comparison to a ge was covered at 10.57 yesterday.
There is possibly a valid point to be made about the fairness of the referendum but then tackle that problem head on or it will forever be alluded to darkly but never proven and never used effectively in anyone’s favour. That would be progress that could have been made over the past three years but no-one with any influence has managed to capitalise on it. Wonder why?

It's this child's version of "democracy" straight from the Ladybird Book of Government that Megan and her cohorts are espousing that makes me want to scream. The complete failure, or refusal, to understand how democracy actually works in this country, and the continued demand that they should be given what they voted for, even though it wasn't defined at the time, and even though it's actually not what the vast majority thought they were voting for.

It really is like a toddler's temper tantrum, and is about as convincing as one.

The way democracy works is that you have a vote and then you have another one. Sometimes all the things that were promised by the winners of vote 1 are not fulfilled by the time vote 2 takes place.

As far as I'm concerned, the referendum "mandate" died when Theresa May decided to have an election in 2017 and made it about Brexit. She lost. Get over it.

Now I only have to tick off ‘I don’t suffer fools gladly, me’ and I will have won echo chamber bingo. Yay.

The way democracy works is that you have a vote and then you have another one

😂😂😂😂😂

< yawn >
Democracy only works when it’s going your way. We know we know.

To be fair those shouting loudest about this are those who are still asking where their prize is and blaming all and sundry for not having got it yet. You were quite happy democracy was working when empty promises were being made, data was being sold and leave won the referendum, ie when it was going your way.

As far as I'm concerned, the referendum "mandate" died when Theresa May decided to have an election in 2017 and made it about Brexit. She lost. Get over it.

How long the mandate lasts is a good question - May lost and cobbled together her deal, so the mandate was in abeyance IMO. If Johnson wins, then the mandate will be for Johnson's Brexit. If the Tories lose again, and there is a hung Parliament then it goes on hold again. At some stage you would hope that the poor thing would be delivered the coup de grace.

There is possibly a valid point to be made about the fairness of the referendum but then tackle that problem head on or it will forever be alluded to darkly but never proven and never used effectively in anyone’s favour. That would be progress that could have been made over the past three years but no-one with any influence has managed to capitalise on it. Wonder why?

@MeganBacon I have no idea why your point up thread isn't made more of. Why is no one addressing this head on? Why didn't May say the referendum was flawed because both leave campaigns broke the law? Because leave wasn't clearly defined? Because as a new government they were no longer bound by Cameron's 'promise' to follow through on the result? The whole thing stinks tbh and it's certainly not a strong enough reason to burn bridges and go gung-ho into a situation where even the government's own analysis is the UK will be worse off.

It's people's refusal to consider these points and still be just shouting "where my prize that I won?" that grinds my gears. That they think this is just about being a sore loser and nothing to do with their failure to understand the sheer complexities of this and underhand shenanigans.

I'm clear that the impasse is due to MPs allowing personal ambition to override any care for the outcome

The number of MPs standing down would suggest that furthering their personal careers was perhaps not everyone's priority.

In response to the rhetorical question about health care elsewhere, the fact that obesity levels are higher in the UK than in France, for instance, is not due to the inadequacy of the NHS, but to poor diet, lack of exercise, drinking habits, etc. And austerity makes it worse, because cheap filling food is inevitably calorie-rich but nutritionally poor.
I can see nothing to suggest that this is likely to change after Brexit. On the contrary, limiting access to the UK's nearest sources of fresh fruit and vegetables will compound the problem. (Yes, I know, the idea is that reduced food choice will cure obesity and anyway people should be scavenging for brambles in the hedgerows and turnips are fabulous, and so on, but those are unrealistic arguments, to put it politely.)

The natural incentive to discredit the ref lies with remain. As they failed to address it over such a long time I’m afraid the abiding impression is that there actually is no case to be made. I don’t understand why Grieve or Miller would not have been all over it otherwise. Which takes me back to my original position that you can’t indefinitely postpone without good reason.

@MeganBacon Miller is taking the approach that rather than discredit the referendum, she's ensuring there are enough checks and balances to protect the UK from its effects. If I could be bothered I'd dig out the various people who are trying to get some kind of legal recourse over the illegalities of the referendum, not least the case file that was passed to the CPS by the Met Police. But on the basis that you can't reason people out of a position they didn't reason themselves into, I'm actually not going to.