Bulletguy Posted June 14, 2021 Share Posted June 14, 2021 Cries a fisherman who believed in Boris. Well you were all warned but none of you listened to us........you wanted your batty Brexit. *-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John52 Posted June 14, 2021 Share Posted June 14, 2021 Their mistake was to believe BoJo's promises But at least they are honest enough to admit they were conned Not trawl the Daily Mail for 'evidence' of Brexit success *-) and then skulk away and hide like pelmetman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barryd999 Posted June 15, 2021 Share Posted June 15, 2021 LOL! True dat! Been watching a documentary series about fisherman and none of them seem to have a good word to say about Johnson and Brexit now but as said, at least they admit they were conned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John52 Posted June 15, 2021 Share Posted June 15, 2021 Barryd999 - 2021-06-15 8:00 AM at least they admit they were conned. Yes, and I respect them for that Because its more than some people can do. :-S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malc d Posted June 15, 2021 Share Posted June 15, 2021 Barryd999 - 2021-06-15 8:00 AM LOL! True dat! Been watching a documentary series about fisherman and none of them seem to have a good word to say about Johnson and Brexit now but as said, at least they admit they were conned. I should think that the majority of people have now accepted the fact that we have left the EU - and that Boris Johnson is fireproof, whatever he does. :-D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barryd999 Posted June 15, 2021 Share Posted June 15, 2021 malc d - 2021-06-15 9:50 AM Barryd999 - 2021-06-15 8:00 AM LOL! True dat! Been watching a documentary series about fisherman and none of them seem to have a good word to say about Johnson and Brexit now but as said, at least they admit they were conned. I should think that the majority of people have now accepted the fact that we have left the EU - and that Boris Johnson is fireproof, whatever he does. :-D At the end of the day he and a few of his media mogul masters are the only winners. Fisherman under the bus, NI under the bus, most businesses and certainly those that trade or are effected by trade with Europe under the bus. I also watched a program the other night where they were talking to people from Boston in lincs who had the highest percentage leave vote in the country because of Immigration and they also feel like they have been thrown under the bus as nothing has changed. So then if you consider the appalling handling of not only Brexit but the pandemic you have to ask yourself why is he still so popular and "Fireproof"? I keep thinking its got to be people saving face because they are so heavily invested but its just mad for it to be that isnt it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malc d Posted June 15, 2021 Share Posted June 15, 2021 Barryd999 - 2021-06-15 10:25 AM So then if you consider the appalling handling of not only Brexit but the pandemic you have to ask yourself why is he still so popular and "Fireproof"? I keep thinking its got to be people saving face because they are so heavily invested but its just mad for it to be that isnt it? He was just born lucky. Right time - right place. In the Brexit campaign he was up against David Cameron ( so no contest there ). In fact David Cameron was so out of touch that he thought he would win easily. In the election campaign he was up against a shambles, led by a waffler. He tried to start the fight against Covid as another election campaign ( " world beating track and trace " etc ) - but others stepped in and saved the day - ( possibly that was while he was in hospital ?) Kate Bingham and HER team got us the vaccines quickly, and the NHS rolled it out brilliantly. Rishi Sunak came up with plans to save industry and jobs. I'm sure that Boris Johnson is quite happy to given the credit for all that. ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted June 15, 2021 Share Posted June 15, 2021 Barryd999 - 2021-06-15 10:25 AM...................... I keep thinking its got to be people saving face because they are so heavily invested but its just mad for it to be that isnt it? It is, but it is very hard to reach an alternative conclusion that is less mad. :-S Something has gone seriously, seriously, wrong with our version of democracy. When people discount the opinions and guidance of those who have knowledge, simply because they have knowledge, in favour of the opinions of others who, with little to no knowledge, merely reflect their own opinions - whatever they may be - we are all headed to Hell in a handcart. Truly, the lunatics are close to having control of the asylum. But why is that? What changed? Why are the ignorant suddenly more influential than the knowledgeable? Is it just political cynicism? A recognition that in any society there are more of the ignorant than the knowledgeable, so more votes to be gained from them, so that feeding their uninformed opinions by telling them what they want to be told, rather than telling them what they need to know, gains the greatest favour, and so the most votes? It helps the practitioners keep their jobs, after all, because they remain popular with the "average" voter. But if so, what lies ahead? 8-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barryd999 Posted June 15, 2021 Share Posted June 15, 2021 Brian Kirby - 2021-06-15 1:05 PM Barryd999 - 2021-06-15 10:25 AM...................... I keep thinking its got to be people saving face because they are so heavily invested but its just mad for it to be that isnt it? It is, but it is very hard to reach an alternative conclusion that is less mad. :-S Something has gone seriously, seriously, wrong with our version of democracy. When people discount the opinions and guidance of those who have knowledge, simply because they have knowledge, in favour of the opinions of others who, with little to no knowledge, merely reflect their own opinions - whatever they may be - we are all headed to Hell in a handcart. Truly, the lunatics are close to having control of the asylum. But why is that? What changed? Why are the ignorant suddenly more influential than the knowledgeable? Is it just political cynicism? A recognition that in any society there are more of the ignorant than the knowledgeable, so more votes to be gained from them, so that feeding their uninformed opinions by telling them what they want to be told, rather than telling them what they need to know, gains the greatest favour, and so the most votes? It helps the practitioners keep their jobs, after all, because they remain popular with the "average" voter. But if so, what lies ahead? 8-) June 23 2016, Brexit referendum. It all stems from that I reckon. Got to be. Its when the line in the sand was drawn and its been that way ever since no matter how ever increasingly bonkers it got and continues to do so. I am no longer so bothered about Brexit but much more bothered about what its enabled and the great division its caused and continues to cause. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malc d Posted June 15, 2021 Share Posted June 15, 2021 Barryd999 - 2021-06-15 2:05 PM June 23 2016, Brexit referendum. It all stems from that I reckon. Got to be. . I disagree. That doesn't explain the absence of a credible opposition party at the last election. Seems to me that everything started to go down the tubes when the Labour party chose the wrong Miliband as leader. :-| Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted June 15, 2021 Author Share Posted June 15, 2021 Brian Kirby - 2021-06-15 1:05 PM Barryd999 - 2021-06-15 10:25 AM...................... I keep thinking its got to be people saving face because they are so heavily invested but its just mad for it to be that isnt it? It is, but it is very hard to reach an alternative conclusion that is less mad. :-S Something has gone seriously, seriously, wrong with our version of democracy. When people discount the opinions and guidance of those who have knowledge, simply because they have knowledge, in favour of the opinions of others who, with little to no knowledge, merely reflect their own opinions - whatever they may be - we are all headed to Hell in a handcart. Truly, the lunatics are close to having control of the asylum. I think that's already happened and in process Brian. Some Brexiteers, those brave enough to admit, have said the reason they voted Leave was as a "protest vote". They didn't think Leave would win, but just voting Leave was their way of "getting back" at government. Seriously that is the sort of utter insanity i've read from Brexiteers on other forums,, the few brave enough to admit. Because it's now all gone pear shaped and they no longer have the EU to blame for their madness, they're blaming anyone but themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted June 15, 2021 Author Share Posted June 15, 2021 malc d - 2021-06-15 2:15 PM Barryd999 - 2021-06-15 2:05 PM June 23 2016, Brexit referendum. It all stems from that I reckon. Got to be. . I disagree. That doesn't explain the absence of a credible opposition party at the last election. Seems to me that everything started to go down the tubes when the Labour party chose the wrong Miliband as leader. :-| Why do you think that Malc? In my opinion Ed was a better political debater than his brother, he seemed to me a more natural choice for leader where David didn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CurtainRaiser Posted June 15, 2021 Share Posted June 15, 2021 malc d - 2021-06-15 2:15 PM Barryd999 - 2021-06-15 2:05 PM June 23 2016, Brexit referendum. It all stems from that I reckon. Got to be. . I disagree. That doesn't explain the absence of a credible opposition party at the last election. Seems to me that everything started to go down the tubes when the Labour party chose the wrong Miliband as leader. :-| The issue wasn't the "wrong" Milliband or even the wrong Corbyn, or even the wrong Foot. It was that anytime the Labour Party has a true socialist in charge the attacks from the media to undermine them start. Compare and contrast the treatment about the way Milliband ate, Foot or Corbyns appearance with the "sack of custard" as a former lover of Johnson has described him. It is almost as if the owners of the media want to protect their positions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted June 15, 2021 Share Posted June 15, 2021 Dunno! :-) It seems to me it must have begun Before the Referendum. The result was in part contributed to by that uninformed response to the informed arguments against leaving, the dismissal and (I assume) deliberate distortion of the economic projections of the consequences. Remember that chorus immediately following the result? All that crowing that we'd voted Brexit, and the "sky hadn't fallen in"? Partly Osbourne's fault (historian, not economist!) for over-spinning the forecasts that were quite clearly based on an assumption that if we voted leave, we would leave, and the projected outcomes would follow our departure. To bolster his argument this was reduced to "if we vote leave the consequences would follow", and, of course, although some did quickly follow the vote, most did not, and are now slowly creeping in, but hopelessly enmeshed with the Covid saga. But also Paul's point re the protest vote is valid. So far as I am aware, no-one tried to find out what provoked that reaction. Those who wanted Brexit for their own reasons had little incentive to do so. They had, after all, "won" as a result, and the "losers" were just, well, losers - so who cared what they thought? Where did that protest feeling come from? What would investigating its origins reveal, and who might wish it had remained buried? It's a serious point. The centres of dissatisfaction seem to be those areas that have been de-industrialised, especially where heavy industries have gone and little to nothing has replaced them, leaving long legacies of higher than average unemployment and relative disadvantage. All that seems to me to have started post WW2, and has continued more or less unbroken ever since. The parts of Europe that were really smashed during the war, on the other hand, seem to have managed their rebuilding alongside a much better managed de-industrialisation than UK's. France, Italy, and Germany set out to protect and maintain much of their industry, while the UK simply rejected its in favour of the easier path of "financial services" and exporting its manufacturing jobs around the world. Why was that? Thatcher (but far from her alone) took the view that we were "not good at making things" (or similar) and that we could import all those mass employment dependent goods far cheaper from abroad, no doubt with half an eye on the fact that with mass employment came Trades Unions, so two birds with one stone! We had long pursued versions of hire and fire across most of industry: when the order books were full staff were hired, when the orders fell, staff were fired. There was a plentiful pool of labour right up to the 60's, so managements didn't need to invest in more efficient methods - even though the resulting lack of loyalty from employees resulted in unreliable products that were gradually replaced by imports - to the point at which they couldn't raise the investment capital needed to turn the tide, and gradually faded away. Remember BRILEYMOCO? People still speak of the "British" car industry. British? Who owns it? There are a few successful niche players, but the majority of the rest is owned by the French, the Germans, and the Japanese, and they will be unlikely to maintain UK factories beyond the present models - because all vehicles manufactured in UK will, post Brexit, have to be exported against tariff barriers around the world. So, the industrial decline continues, and instead of meeting the challenge of re-skilling our own people for new industries, we instead import "the brightest and the best" from around the world, leaving our own de-skilled and under-educated workforce disillusioned and dissatisfied in poorly paid dead end jobs. Should we then begin to look at new industries, and encourage their development? One might think so, but that would involve "picking winners", wouldn't it? So that's out!! And so we go on. Bring in cheap well educated labour from overseas, import cheap goods and food from overseas, and produce nothing, but rely on banking to pay the bills. That approach can only last for so long before the illusion is exposed for what it is. The people who are left disadvantaged by being neither the beneficiaries of employment in the banking sector, nor employment in any other sector to which their natural abilities suit them (which seems to be the case for a very substantial proportion of the population), aren't going anywhere. They are here, where else can they take their low valued skills? Unless their employment prospects are improved, and a concomitant increase in well paid jobs encouraged - both of which imply an increase in home grown productive industry - we seem destined for a future of repeated, damaging, protest votes while the ship of state slowly subsides into the sea. But then, perhaps I'm just depressed! :-S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted June 15, 2021 Share Posted June 15, 2021 CurtainRaiser - 2021-06-15 4:01 PM......................... It was that anytime the Labour Party has a true socialist in charge the attacks from the media to undermine them start. ..................... Which begs a definition of a "true socialist", and raises a question as to why "the media" should be able to exert such influence if faced with a truly successful Labour leader. It also raises a question about the measurement of success. Which successful countries around the world would you cite as being led by someone you consider a true socialist. Surely there must be a better reason for those who seem to qualify being rejected than "the media"? Things they do, say, or represent, that puts the ordinary Joe off electing them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malc d Posted June 15, 2021 Share Posted June 15, 2021 Bulletguy - 2021-06-15 2:38 PM malc d - 2021-06-15 2:15 PM Barryd999 - 2021-06-15 2:05 PM June 23 2016, Brexit referendum. It all stems from that I reckon. Got to be. . I disagree. That doesn't explain the absence of a credible opposition party at the last election. Seems to me that everything started to go down the tubes when the Labour party chose the wrong Miliband as leader. :-| Why do you think that Malc? In my opinion Ed was a better political debater than his brother, he seemed to me a more natural choice for leader where David didn't. I don't really take any close interest in politics until a general election is due - and then have a browse through the manifestos. In the year of the Labour Party leadership election I was away in France when it took place. David Miliband had always seemed to me to be ' statesman ' material - he spoke well, and clearly ( i.e. no waffling ) and I took it for granted that when I got home he would be the new leader. Very surprised that Ed had won - because I'd never ( well, hardly ever ) heard of him. To his credit, David Miliband then left politics to avoid any media problems, constantly comparing the two brothers. :-| Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malc d Posted June 15, 2021 Share Posted June 15, 2021 CurtainRaiser - 2021-06-15 4:01 PM "......... anytime the Labour Party has a true socialist in charge the attacks from the media to undermine them start. " I assume that you mean by " true socialist " - an obvious left winger. If the media finds Labour leaders who are ' obvious left wingers ' so easy to undermine you would think that the Labour Party would stop electing them as leader. They may have a better chance with Keir Starmer - if he can has assemble a team of suitable talent. ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CurtainRaiser Posted June 15, 2021 Share Posted June 15, 2021 Brian Kirby - 2021-06-15 5:51 PM CurtainRaiser - 2021-06-15 4:01 PM......................... It was that anytime the Labour Party has a true socialist in charge the attacks from the media to undermine them start. ..................... Which begs a definition of a "true socialist", and raises a question as to why "the media" should be able to exert such influence if faced with a truly successful Labour leader. It also raises a question about the measurement of success. Which successful countries around the world would you cite as being led by someone you consider a true socialist. Surely there must be a better reason for those who seem to qualify being rejected than "the media"? Things they do, say, or represent, that puts the ordinary Joe off electing them? By socialist I mean someone who doesn't believe that there should be billionaires paying no tax whilst there are food banks and people living on the street. Someone who believes in a progressive rate of taxation and I say that as someone who would have been paying more. Someone who is prepared to ask why CEO pay in this country has moved from a twenty times the company median to over two hundred times over the last forty years. Someone who believes that such massive inequalities are unhealthy for any society. In terms of countries I would point to the nordic block, not perfect but functioning democracies where a proper safety net exists. I'm also a big fan of Costa Rica - any country that spends more on education than armaments gets my vote. As to the media, ordinary Joe believes what he sees in the papers, the media owners have their own agenda, why do you think Murdoch is prepared to lose £200,000,000 a year on the Scum? Why does the Daily Wail want to undermine the judiciary? Now it is not the EU's fault we will have to have some culture wars, what with you, Barry and Bulletguy all being so woke! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CurtainRaiser Posted June 15, 2021 Share Posted June 15, 2021 malc d - 2021-06-15 7:51 PM CurtainRaiser - 2021-06-15 4:01 PM "......... anytime the Labour Party has a true socialist in charge the attacks from the media to undermine them start. " I assume that you mean by " true socialist " - an obvious left winger. If the media finds Labour leaders who are ' obvious left wingers ' so easy to undermine you would think that the Labour Party would stop electing them as leader. They may have a better chance with Keir Starmer - if he can has assemble a team of suitable talent. ;-) Was Kier Hardie left wing? Earnest Bevin? I voted for Starmer in the leadership contest on the basis that he was promising to unite the party AND continue with the manifesto commitments. Since he has been in office he has divided the party further, lost 250,000 members (including me!) and is about to lose the backing of the unions, 20 points down in the polls. But we got flags, hurrah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted June 15, 2021 Share Posted June 15, 2021 CurtainRaiser - 2021-06-15 8:44 PM malc d - 2021-06-15 7:51 PM CurtainRaiser - 2021-06-15 4:01 PM "......... anytime the Labour Party has a true socialist in charge the attacks from the media to undermine them start. " I assume that you mean by " true socialist " - an obvious left winger. If the media finds Labour leaders who are ' obvious left wingers ' so easy to undermine you would think that the Labour Party would stop electing them as leader. They may have a better chance with Keir Starmer - if he can has assemble a team of suitable talent. ;-) Was Kier Hardie left wing? Earnest Bevin? I voted for Starmer in the leadership contest on the basis that he was promising to unite the party AND continue with the manifesto commitments. Since he has been in office he has divided the party further, lost 250,000 members (including me!) and is about to lose the backing of the unions, 20 points down in the polls. But we got flags, hurrah. "I voted for Starmer in the leadership contest" (lol) (lol) (lol) ........... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted June 15, 2021 Author Share Posted June 15, 2021 Brian Kirby - 2021-06-15 5:31 PM Dunno! :-) It seems to me it must have begun Before the Referendum. The result was in part contributed to by that uninformed response to the informed arguments against leaving, the dismissal and (I assume) deliberate distortion of the economic projections of the consequences. Remember that chorus immediately following the result? All that crowing that we'd voted Brexit, and the "sky hadn't fallen in"? Partly Osbourne's fault (historian, not economist!) for over-spinning the forecasts that were quite clearly based on an assumption that if we voted leave, we would leave, and the projected outcomes would follow our departure. To bolster his argument this was reduced to "if we vote leave the consequences would follow", and, of course, although some did quickly follow the vote, most did not, and are now slowly creeping in, but hopelessly enmeshed with the Covid saga. But also Paul's point re the protest vote is valid. So far as I am aware, no-one tried to find out what provoked that reaction. Those who wanted Brexit for their own reasons had little incentive to do so. They had, after all, "won" as a result, and the "losers" were just, well, losers - so who cared what they thought? Where did that protest feeling come from? What would investigating its origins reveal, and who might wish it had remained buried? It's a serious point. The centres of dissatisfaction seem to be those areas that have been de-industrialised, especially where heavy industries have gone and little to nothing has replaced them, leaving long legacies of higher than average unemployment and relative disadvantage. I should have mentioned, those who were brave enough to admit, [re "protest vote"] when asked their reasons why, some said they didn't know whilst others said government was getting too powerful and out of touch. :-S It probably explains why someone like Trump was able to feed the gullible silly soundbites simple enough for them to memorise and parrot in a mantra. None of his acolytes were the brightest bulbs in the box so it had to be something simple....."Make America Great Again", stick it on a baseball cap, and not only does the money roll in, so do the numpties. Johnson did similar with his "Brexit means Brexit" yadda yadda, "Oven Ready" yadda yadda, and all the other daft garbage his puppet master taught him, but as he's since left he's got to dream up his own such as "world beating" and "national flagship". People still speak of the "British" car industry. British? Who owns it? There are a few successful niche players, but the majority of the rest is owned by the French, the Germans, and the Japanese, and they will be unlikely to maintain UK factories beyond the present models - because all vehicles manufactured in UK will, post Brexit, have to be exported against tariff barriers around the world. Depress no more for UK has secured it's "first major Brexit success"........at least that's what the media is touting the deal with Australia as. We're going to get sweets, swimwear, wine and chemically enhanced cheap beef, and we're exporting cars which is bound to cheer up the workers in the plants that are closing, to a nation with South Asia on it's doorstep. *-) https://tinyurl.com/3549avny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted June 15, 2021 Share Posted June 15, 2021 pelmetman - 2021-06-15 9:00 PM CurtainRaiser - 2021-06-15 8:44 PM malc d - 2021-06-15 7:51 PM CurtainRaiser - 2021-06-15 4:01 PM "......... anytime the Labour Party has a true socialist in charge the attacks from the media to undermine them start. " I assume that you mean by " true socialist " - an obvious left winger. If the media finds Labour leaders who are ' obvious left wingers ' so easy to undermine you would think that the Labour Party would stop electing them as leader. They may have a better chance with Keir Starmer - if he can has assemble a team of suitable talent. ;-) Was Kier Hardie left wing? Earnest Bevin? I voted for Starmer in the leadership contest on the basis that he was promising to unite the party AND continue with the manifesto commitments. Since he has been in office he has divided the party further, lost 250,000 members (including me!) and is about to lose the backing of the unions, 20 points down in the polls. But we got flags, hurrah. "I voted for Starmer in the leadership contest" (lol) (lol) (lol) ........... (lol) (lol) (lol) (lol) ............. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CurtainRaiser Posted June 15, 2021 Share Posted June 15, 2021 pelmetman - 2021-06-15 9:13 PM (lol) (lol) (lol) (lol) ............. ‘Whenever somebody is becoming fanatical and dogmatic, we have to assume - I would assume - that something is going wrong.’ (Psychoanalyst and writer, Adam Phillips) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted June 15, 2021 Share Posted June 15, 2021 CurtainRaiser - 2021-06-15 9:21 PM pelmetman - 2021-06-15 9:13 PM (lol) (lol) (lol) (lol) ............. ‘Whenever somebody is becoming fanatical and dogmatic, we have to assume - I would assume - that something is going wrong.’ (Psychoanalyst and writer, Adam Phillips) https://voicebritannia.co.uk/starmer-where-did-it-go-wrong/ (lol) (lol) (lol) (lol) (lol) ............ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted June 15, 2021 Author Share Posted June 15, 2021 malc d - 2021-06-15 7:39 PM Bulletguy - 2021-06-15 2:38 PM malc d - 2021-06-15 2:15 PM Barryd999 - 2021-06-15 2:05 PM June 23 2016, Brexit referendum. It all stems from that I reckon. Got to be. . I disagree. That doesn't explain the absence of a credible opposition party at the last election. Seems to me that everything started to go down the tubes when the Labour party chose the wrong Miliband as leader. :-| Why do you think that Malc? In my opinion Ed was a better political debater than his brother, he seemed to me a more natural choice for leader where David didn't. I don't really take any close interest in politics until a general election is due - and then have a browse through the manifestos. In the year of the Labour Party leadership election I was away in France when it took place. David Miliband had always seemed to me to be ' statesman ' material - he spoke well, and clearly ( i.e. no waffling ) and I took it for granted that when I got home he would be the new leader. Very surprised that Ed had won - because I'd never ( well, hardly ever ) heard of him. To his credit, David Miliband then left politics to avoid any media problems, constantly comparing the two brothers. :-| David was a committed Blairite where Ed was more to the left. I never took much notice of the sibling rivalry thing the media tried to stir up. Corbyn was far too old to take leadership and also lacked the stomach for attack letting May and Johnson get away with no end of things. Then again, unlike Johnson, Corbyn was actually a Brexiteer. Johnson simply used it to get into Downing street. Well worth reading his unpublished Remain draft; https://tinyurl.com/cz5f72ru Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.