Brexit

Denster wrote:Completely different.

I agree.

Corbyn will never be Prime Minister so it’s ridiculous to ask him something like that.

May is Prime Minister and so it’s perfectly acceptable to ask her if she agrees with a policy that she is carrying out.

Moggy wrote:

Denster wrote:

DML wrote:

Denster wrote:It’s not a question she should or have to answer. It’s irrelevant.

Do you honestly believe that Denster? Come on! Shes the leader!

Of a country that’s already decided. What does it matter what she’d vote now. It’s a moot point. One designed only to add further injury to her.
If she says yes she’d still remain - she dies herself damage if she says leave - the same but from different quarters.
It’s a no win answer unless she refuses the question.

I applaud her for not answering. The fact that so many in here don’t means nothing

You’d applaud her if she literally shat in your mouth.

And it’s these sort of comments that literally stop people from posting in here.

That’s what you get in a so called discussion thread. When you don’t agree with what is said and aren’t afraid to say it.
Crass comment and beneath you, Moggy.

Denster wrote:

Moggy wrote:

Denster wrote:

DML wrote:

Denster wrote:It’s not a question she should or have to answer. It’s irrelevant.

Do you honestly believe that Denster? Come on! Shes the leader!

Of a country that’s already decided. What does it matter what she’d vote now. It’s a moot point. One designed only to add further injury to her.
If she says yes she’d still remain - she dies herself damage if she says leave - the same but from different quarters.
It’s a no win answer unless she refuses the question.

I applaud her for not answering. The fact that so many in here don’t means nothing

You’d applaud her if she literally shat in your mouth.

And it’s these sort of comments that literally stop people from posting in here.

That’s what you get in a so called discussion thread. When you don’t agree with what is said and aren’t afraid to say it.
Crass comment and beneath you, Moggy.

People stopped posting because they have zero logical arguments.

It’s not a discussion thread, they haven’t existed for a while now.

You are afraid to say some things, remember that you refuse to answer most political questions on the party you support?

Crass? Probably.

Beneath me? Nope.

And “literally gooseberry fool in your mouth” is far nicer a comment than you usually post, so there’s no need for the faux outrage.

Same old argument dug up again and again. At least you admit it’s crass but let’s agree that you’re right. It isn’t beneath you. Not anymore.
Let’s see how much worse you can get before we actually leave the EU. All in the name of debate of course.

Denster wrote:Same old argument dug up again and again. At least you admit it’s crass but let’s agree that you’re right. It isn’t beneath you. Not anymore.
Let’s see how much worse you can get before we actually leave the EU. All in the name of debate of course.

Same old completely avoiding the difficult questions in favour of faux outrage at a crass comment. A crass comment that could easily have come from your own mouth.

You don’t want to debate Denny, so why pretend you do?

This is pretty pathetic stuff Denster.

Bless?

I’ve made my position clear and shouldnht have to defend it as often as I have.
you and your ilk in here won’t accept the Brexit result and give me grief because I have. Constantly.
Hey ho. I’m a big boy. I can take it. It’s not like it’s going to change any time soon.

Tineash wrote:This is pretty pathetic stuff Denster.

Because I agree with May or didn’t like Moggy’s comment?

Denster wrote:I’ve made my position clear and shouldnht have to defend it as often as I have.
you and your ilk in here won’t accept the Brexit result and give me grief because I have. Constantly.
Hey ho. I’m a big boy. I can take it. It’s not like it’s going to change any time soon.

Accusing me (again!!) of not accepting the result, when all I ever say is that it is going to happen?

.

Denster wrote:

Tineash wrote:This is pretty pathetic stuff Denster.

Because I agree with May or didn’t like Moggy’s comment?

Ridiculous faux pearl-clutching because someone said 'shat' - we all know you're filthy, Denster.
And ridiculous outrage at the PM being asked a question about the most important event in politics. It's salience is obvious & overwhelming. It is right and proper that an interviewer highlight this one contradiction in the whole strawberry floating mess of unresolvable contradictions that is Brexit.

jawafour wrote:

Moggy wrote:You’d applaud her if she literally shat in your mouth... People stopped posting because they have zero logical arguments...

Moggy, it appears that you may need to take a break.

It seems odd that Tineash and DML appear to support that kind of posting.

I think you are wrong Jawa.

Denster is the king of crass and insulting comments. It’s one of the things that I (genuinely!) love about him. If he can’t take the same language when it’s posted back at him, then he better change his entire posting style because this will be thrown back at him in the future as an example of hypocrisy.

The zero logical arguments comments is basically true. What are the logical arguments?

Tineash wrote:

Denster wrote:

Tineash wrote:This is pretty pathetic stuff Denster.

Because I agree with May or didn’t like Moggy’s comment?

Ridiculous faux pearl-clutching because someone said 'shat' - we all know you're filthy, Denster.
And ridiculous outrage at the PM being asked a question about the most important event in politics. It's salience is obvious & overwhelming.

So both then.

I answered the May question. Moggy’s point was crass and also not factual - I’ve criticised May plenty and certainly a lot in recent weeks.
I find it offensive that I’m perceived to be so blinkered that I’ll accept anything and I pointed out that that wasn’t suitable for a discussion thread.
As Moggy pointed out - this isn’t a discussion thread so I was wrong to take issue with his choice of words.
That’s why I let your use of pathetic slide as well. You’re welcome.

.

I'm not on either side, I'm just incredibly confused Denster the crassest person ever is now offended. It's just really odd.

jawafour wrote:

Moggy wrote:I think you are wrong Jawa...

Moggy, I feel that as soon as you start using derogatory language* and seemingly suggesting - perhaps not intentionally, but it could easily be perceived that way - that other folk are dolts, then you’ve lost ground.

Very few people are going to change their mind about Brexit; at least not in the short term. Folk can present arguments and discussion points here but, realistically, it is unlikely to change opinion... for either side of the fence.

The thread feels like an outlet for frustration. There is nothing wrong with that but it does make me wonder if different rules of engagement apply in this thread compared to others on the forum. Personally I feel that a lot of antagonism could be avoided by just pausing for ten minutes before replying. But, then again, I’m a boring old bastard.

* I recognise that “bad” language is subject to opinion and that we all use a lot of this type of language across the forum... but your “gooseberry fool in your mouth” quote didn’t appear to be taking much of a humorous angle.

Is “bastard” not bad language?

Denster swears as much as anybody else, in fact more than most. I refuse to believe he is seriously offended by the word “shat”.

Was it humorous? Well I’d imagine so, I don’t actually believe that Theresa May would gooseberry fool in Denny’s mouth or that he’d applaud her for it.

Denster (and I do genuinely mean this) is loved on this forum and a big part of that is his amazing use of crass, insulting and offensive language. He cannot complain when crass language is then used against him.

I wouldn’t have made that comment to you, you are not a poster that really uses such language. I don’t mean to insult you but it’s the difference in the language you use in the pub with your mates and the language you use with your grandparents.

I didn’t call anyone dolts either. I said they had no logical arguments. And I’m still waiting to hear one....

jawafour wrote:

Moggy wrote:I think you are wrong Jawa...

Moggy, I feel that as soon as you start using derogatory language* and seemingly suggesting - perhaps not intentionally, but it could easily be perceived that way - that other folk are dolts, then you’ve lost ground.

Very few people are going to change their mind about Brexit; at least not in the short term. Folk can present arguments and discussion points here but, realistically, it is unlikely to change opinion... for either side of the fence.

The thread feels like an outlet for frustration. There is nothing wrong with that but it does make me wonder if different rules of engagement apply in this thread compared to others on the forum. Personally I feel that a lot of antagonism could be avoided by just pausing for ten minutes before replying. But, then again, I’m a boring old bastard.

* I recognise that “bad” language is subject to opinion and that we all use a lot of this type of language across the forum... but your “gooseberry fool in your mouth” quote didn’t appear to be taking much of a humorous angle.

The only reason this thread feels like a place for frustration is because there are mainly remainers on here....but also the government is so goddamned awful as well. As those Channel 4 debates show, it is far from a remainer view that the government are woeful, and May is awful and ineffective. I don't understand why the likes of yourself come in to suggest this is an attack on Leavers. It is not, it is an attack on a woefully ineffective government. I don't personally see logical reasons to leave, but my main ire right now is with the idiots running this country.

I also have said I don't think May is an evil person, but I find her choices odd and her leadership dreadful. That said, I'd rather her than someone like Boris who isn't living on Planet Earth.

.

jawafour wrote:

Moggy wrote:...I said they had no logical arguments. And I’m still waiting to hear one....

Dude, I wonder if this is the thing that would deter people from wanting to enter a discussion here. Your wording appears to indicate that you are closed to different opinions and, frustratingly, on the basis that - logically - any argument wouldn’t pass muster. Why would folk raise a point in that situation?

The wording literally says I am waiting for a logical argument. That’s not being closed to different opinions, that’s asking to hear one.

Leavers are really really paranoid about all this and so defensive about their beliefs. I’m not stopping anybody posting (no matter how many times you claim it), but I will not sit back and not post either.

But, hey, I’m a glutton for punishment so here are two arguments, albeit ones that I expect have been talked over a thousand times already and that we probably won’t agree on:

For somebody that’s brought up the tone of postings, is that sentence above really a great opening to a discussion? Glutton for punishment, we won’t agree, talked over a thousand times?

1) I prefer the idea of the UK being in a position to devise and administer laws independent of outside influence.

As you guessed later on, I don’t agree with this as we can already make our own laws. We also have an equal say in any European laws. Arguing like this is like saying Bristol should be independent. Maybe there’s a good case to be made for that, but it needs more evidence than just “I prefer this little bit of land to make different laws”.

2) I like the notion of the UK being able to approach countries worldwide and agree trading processes independent of outside influence.

The trouble is that such a huge amount of our trade comes from EU member states. We will be cutting ourselves off from the biggest trading bloc on the entire planet.

And for what? America will never give us a free trade deal. Canada already has one with the EU. China? Russia? Tuvalu?

Now, I know that you will provide examples and links as to how the UK could already devise and implement aspects of laws... but it won’t be to the same degree of an independent nation. Equally, I recognise that being a part of the EU enables ease of trade with the other countries in that zone; but I think the UK has the capability to negotiate independently and worldwide.

I am not for one moment suggesting there won’t be bumps in the road with these two points, nor that other aspects of leaving the EU wouldn’t make the overall picture more challenging. But, for me, those two points are reasonable approaches that are attractive.

I can see that those two points look attractive when presented in the way that you have. But the reality is not looking that way. Even ardent Leavers are now stating/admitting that we are going to be poorer because of Brexit.

To me it is not logical to make yourself poorer just so you can theoretically make a trade deal with another country (that might never happen) or so that you can make your own law on how bendy bananas are (that’s humorous, I know the bendy banana thing is rubbish).