Brexit , the negatives

Erimus74 said:
HolgateCorner, you & a few others are excellent posters, you will put your point across without any hint of name calling someone who has the opposite view
I don't mind post after after post about Brexit appearing on here, this forum has threads on every topic imaginable & long may it continue, thats what's good about flyme
What gets me is the constant snipping that goes with it, that's the reason I get involved, the immature way certain posters have to go because what comes back to them they don't agree with

There was a thread about the government been responsible for the recent riots in Bristol due to the bil regarding public protests that we SHOULD have the right for free speech & the right to protest etc & I 100% agree with that, yet on another day, because someone voted how they seen fit & others didn't agree, they are classed as idiots, thick, stupid, racists, bigots etc

Just have debates & talk like adults, this will be my final post on any political thread because you can go on forever, as has been rightly pointed out, just ignore anything regarding Brexit & I will, but carry on, that's what this forum is for

Have a nice day all
Click to expand...

This just isn't borne out. It is the same false equivalence as I mentioend earlier in the thread and presumes that both sides come at it from a legitimate and honest place, which self-evidently isn't the case. I don't see any real insults. I do see one 'side' of the discussion providing evidence and fact based arguments and an absolute vacuum of anything but gaslighting, rhetoric and empty responses on the other. That's not a legitimate place from which to have a debate and is false equivalence.
 
Adi_Dem said:
This just isn't borne out. It is the same false equivalence as I mentioend earlier in the thread and presumes that both sides come at it from a legitimate and honest place, which self-evidently isn't the case. I don't see any real insults. I do see one 'side' of the discussion providing evidence and fact based arguments and an absolute vacuum of anything but gaslighting, rhetoric and empty responses on the other. That's not a legitimate place from which to have a debate and is false equivalence.
Click to expand...
Loads of of insults on this thread Aldi, you are deluded...
 
Adi_Dem said:
The answer to question 2 is inevitably conjecture. I am far from convinced we would have approached it differently as an EU member and I am pretty certain that we would have had a significant influence on directing the policy. But I don't think question 2 is the right question to ask at all. The right question is whether we did anything that we couldn't do as an EU member. The answer, factually and objectively, is no. It is therefore logically flawed to argue that something we were perfectly entitled to do inside the EU was a benefit of being outside of the EU.
Click to expand...
The issue isn't really what we could do but what we would have done and all member countries were being pressured to toe the party line. It is unlikely (IMHO) that we would have done what we did had we not been leaving the EU so I don't see it as being logically flawed. As you say though it's conjecture.
 
Millbrook said:
The issue isn't really what we could do but what we would have done and all member countries were being pressured to toe the party line. It is unlikely (IMHO) that we would have done what we did had we not been leaving the EU so I don't see it as being logically flawed. As you say though it's conjecture.
Click to expand...

I just think that logically flawed. Putting forward an argument that doing something we could have done as a member of the EU is a Brexit benefit because we *might* not have done it makes no sense. In many ways it sums up the argument though that this is a straw that is being clutched. The fact that it is being offered as a benefit speaks volumes I think.
 
Adi, why do you revert to being patronising and condescending? Something you claim not to be? You are a strange one.

The bottom line is both campaigns regarding Europe were threadbare and offered little for the electorate to consider. So blame needs to be heaped on those responsible for offering so little to make a considered opinion. The fact is immigration and the money allegedly we could offer the health service were two of the highest motivators for voting no. Shallowness personified.
 
Nosmo-King said:
Adi, why do you revert to being patronising and condescending? Something you claim not to be? You are a strange one.
Click to expand...

I knew it was only a matter of time before you piped up. Another who plays the man rather than the ball and gets it all wrong.

Nosmo-King said:
The bottom line is both campaigns regarding Europe were threadbare and offered little for the electorate to consider. So blame needs to be heaped on those responsible for offering so little to make a considered opinion. The fact is immigration and the money allegedly we could offer the health service were two of the highest motivators for voting no. Shallowness personified.
Click to expand...

This is objectively and factually wrong. There was a heap of information provided as to the consequences of leaving the EU. It even had a name: ‘Project Fear’. Anyone with an ounce of intelligence had access to lots and lots of information that was readily available. There was even the much complained about leaflet setting out in clear terms (and in hindsight very accurately) what a vote to leave would mean. Once again it is false equivalence to tar both sides of the debate with the same brush and it doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.
 
I worked with a returning officer at a polling station - so frankly had a good view of what were the key points in the eyes of the voters in that part of the world. And it was full of ABC1’s.

so you can claim what the hell you like - I am relating to experience on the ground.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top