EU referendum, brexit and the aftermath

Even voting NO if what comes back from negotiations, on the balance of probabilities, will harm their constituencies more than staying in the EU

How is that going to be judged? A lot of experts said that Brexit would be harmful but the majority of constituencies still voted for it.

Fair point.

So for that Labour needs to speak to their constituents:
If they are all for human rights, May is thinking about pulling the UK out of the European Human Rights conventions which means any court cases have to be fought for way longer, for a lot more money.
If they think it means more protection for workers, they risk losing that with the stance of May

There seems to have been a lot of "the EU is evil technocrats" but I am hoping that can be boiled down to practical reasons and rights, which we all risk losing.

If it's just identity politics and concerns about EU policies that the UK can improve staying in it, but people just want to vote on principle, then it's a lost battle as it's too vague.

So then we risk losing worker protections, dump the economy, empower even bigger assholes in the UK but it's OK the left has spoken.

I know, I know, bike thread >>>> etc, but that is just awesome. Chapeau.

Also did Labour push a "leave EEC too" brexit or not?

That's another question they can ask.

I don't think that's going to convince many people to be honest. Most of that was anticipated before the vote and it still went for Brexit.

Then most likely the outcome won't change.

Lots of reasons I guess, the main two I would guess are

....because they've lost their traditional base in England to UKIP and probably the Tories soon too and don't want to risk loosing more. Whilst knowing that they lack the competencey to spin the reason for blocking the vote over workers rights issues.

...because they (rightly or wrongly) think that as the 2nd party if they get into bed with the SNP, Lib Dems and Greens they will forever be viewed as a weak nothing party.

Oh and that point up there about a vote out being representative of their constituents.

I think the current Labour leadership takes for granted the support of the middle-class left and is focusing on shoring up its working class base. So the Lib Dems are angling for the middle-class left vote.

like babies fighting over a dirty nappy.

good.

This 'letter to the queen' is the level of understanding amongst the UKIPS... (I snipped off his full home address and the Buckingham palace address)!

It's followed by an awful lot of congratulations and offers to send the same letter.

1 Attachment

See- they're thick cunts, I defy anyone to deny this.

I'm surprised he can write letters that long to be honest.

His whole letter could easily be summed up to "brexit mean brexit".

Is 'madam' the right way to address the queen?

Is 'madam' the right way to address the queen?

As long you pronounced as "ma ham", and only after you begin with "your majesty".

Which in this case, he failed, horribly.

He is trying.

2 Attachments

What really kick it for me is him claiming he's worried about her age!

What the holy fuck can the Queen do about it anyway?

Jesus wept.

What are you on about ? It makes perfect sense to complain about something you think is undemocratic to an undemocratic institution.

Apparently Fiona's lapped up the recent conspiracy that Charles has become a Muslim

People aren't 'thick', they just get lied to and have their trust abused. The small number of falsehoods in this letter are all down to 'newspapers' printing/publishing (online) total nonsense.

People aren't 'thick'

As sweeping generalisations go, that's a corker. Some people are very thick. Many people are quite thick. That's why it's possible to lie to them, and for them to believe it anyway.

PLOT TWIST:

People aren't 'thick'

People are most certainly thick. This is why intelligent journalists and politicians know they can tell them any amount of mad balls, repeat it a few times and they'll believe it.

Fuck it, why not just write it on the side of a bus?

Yes, they're having their trust abused but, in the days of the internet and social media, it's easier than ever to find different points of view - their trust only extends as far as what they want to believe anyway.

Further to that, one of the reasons Conservatives, Republicans et al. are so keen on restricting education, closing libraries, removing arts funding etc is that they rely on people being stupid enough to fall for their lies and vote against their own interests.

Look at the core UKIP support as an example. They need to keep people uneducated for their parties to survive. They need to lack critical thinking and evaluating skills, they need to lack a basic understanding of politics or economics, they need to lack an ability to recognise patterns from history or to question inconsistencies.

They need to to make sure people distrust independent experts.

I agree with you to a point but there are clearly critical thinking skills missing and a lack of effort involved. After talking to the man further he clearly based his POV on things read in the Mail and Express but was unwilling to read the court judgement or find an original source for anything.
He eventually conceded that Gina Miller 'has guts', despite being 'a whore if ever I've met one' and definitely having sinister motives for 'spending all that money'. I didn't tell him what he should actually do ie. write to his MP.