Bloody good bloke, knows how to break a man's neck, have a bloody good pint with him
Shouldn't you be banging on about the racist homophobe, Jared O'Mara rather than trying to have a pseudo-clever dig every time a military background is nmentioned. It's so easy catching a Leuth on here. Did you see the coverage Leuth?
I don't mind it when someone has a military background. It amuses me when someone mentions it gratuitously as a means of demonstrating their admiration for something entirely unconnected to it.
The O'Mara stuff was unfortunate but I'm sure he's learnt from his errors. Guido Fawkes will never not be a creepy little fuckwit otoh
I cannot see there being a second referendum under any circumstances.
Will be a very bold government to push through something that they know will damage the economy for years.
Politicians are not known for doing bold.
........but they are known for doing things that damage the economy - Like Gordon Brown selling off UK gold cheap, and giving the OK to the Lloyds/HBOS deal at a drinks party.
Bloody good bloke, knows how to break a man's neck, have a bloody good pint with him
Shouldn't you be banging on about the racist homophobe, Jared O'Mara rather than trying to have a pseudo-clever dig every time a military background is nmentioned. It's so easy catching a Leuth on here. Did you see the coverage Leuth?
I don't mind it when someone has a military background. It amuses me when someone mentions it gratuitously as a means of demonstrating their admiration for something entirely unconnected to it.
The O'Mara stuff was unfortunate but I'm sure he's learnt from his errors. Guido Fawkes will never not be a creepy little fuckwit otoh
You are so right.
With your extensive world experience, I've no doubt you know exactly what qualities are required for such service. Qualities a snide stereotypical dismissal from a smart arse on a football site would never be able to relate to, so further discussion is pointless.
Shame as I hoped there might be an intelligent response within you.
But thanks for an insight into your hilarious reaction to the 'SAS' trigger.
Actually, I'm sure Davis has learnt a thing or two from his SAS training.
Things like: ensuring you have prepared for every circumstance before advancing. Or, understanding that a cool head will usually prevail over a hot one.
With all of that in mind, one might begin to realise just how awful his position is
Not really an EU or Brexit issue, but the figures out today showing the GDP figures also showed that construction is down again (last 2 quarters which is technically a recession) - an area where we need to be growing even more than anywhere else. Where are these fecking houses we keep being promised.
Not really an EU or Brexit issue, but the figures out today showing the GDP figures also showed that construction is down again (last 2 quarters which is technically a recession) - an area where we need to be growing even more than anywhere else. Where are these fecking houses we keep being promised.
He also referred to the Czech Republic as Czechoslovakia. Very competent!
FFS. Actually that doesn't do it justice.
And the worst thing is, he is the brightest of the 3 Brexiteers...
It doesn't surprise me at all. The power base in the Tories (ie the deepest darkest and most evil of them), want a return to the British empire. They would love the return of the east India tea company. Referring to the Czech Republic as Czechoslovakia is fairly mild (for them).
Look at the faces of death in May, Hammond, Redwood, Mogg etc. They've got their heads and mindsets in a time from centuries ago. They are so out of touch it's unbelieveable. We've had the made in Chelsea, wannabe trendy lot in Cameron. They upset the old crusties, and the crusties want to return their house back to a musty smell of pot pouri and lavender.....
When I think of the Tories I think of my dead gran (bless her). Not because she voted Tory (she may have). But more so because she didn't believe in sell by dates, fed me green corn beef, bitter lemon that was so bitter I couldn't open the bottle and she didn't mind people of ethnicity, but only if they stayed in their own country
This business about sovereignty and democracy and taking it back.
On the face of it we have a minority Government propped up by a massive one billion pound bribe to the DUP. The government want to import EU laws that individual ministers can then modify without reference to our elected representatives. This minority Government can then conclude a deal (or have no deal) and only after the business is done, according to David Davis there could, not definitely will, be a vote on it by our elected representatives, despite the Government expecting or intending otherwise.
This is the UK version of 'democracy' which people want to prevail. The people won, so it does prevail. Pretty crappy system.
He also referred to the Czech Republic as Czechoslovakia. Very competent!
FFS. Actually that doesn't do it justice.
And the worst thing is, he is the brightest of the 3 Brexiteers...
It doesn't surprise me at all. The power base in the Tories (ie the deepest darkest and most evil of them), want a return to the British empire. They would love the return of the east India tea company. Referring to the Czech Republic as Czechoslovakia is fairly mild (for them).
Look at the faces of death in May, Hammond, Redwood, Mogg etc. They've got their heads and mindsets in a time from centuries ago. They are so out of touch it's unbelieveable. We've had the made in Chelsea, wannabe trendy lot in Cameron. They upset the old crusties, and the crusties want to return their house back to a musty smell of pot pouri and lavender.....
When I think of the Tories I think of my dead gran (bless her). Not because she voted Tory (she may have). But more so because she didn't believe in sell by dates, fed me green corn beef, bitter lemon that was so bitter I couldn't open the bottle and she didn't mind people of ethnicity, but only if they stayed in their own country
No no no no. They are carrying out the will of the people. The "out of touch" are the "metropolitan elite", a completely different group. @Southbank will be along soon to tell you how you can identify them.
I know you live abroad, but the idea that most mass media-tv, radio and press, were pro Brexit in the run-up to the referendum is plain absurd.
I won't labour the point but my consumption of British media is entirely unaffected by my location. And I consume a lot of it.
The idea that the Sun, the Star the Mail, the Express, the Telegraph, the Spectator, various shock jocks on LBC and Talk Radio were not pro Brexit is equally absurd. And that is before we begin to consider the poisonous Russian funded dross that infects people's Facebook feeds, which by its nature isn't even seen by a lot of people.
I've given a lot of thought to the roots of populism. Of course we all should. Why don't you start a thread on it? And spending time on the Continent means that I've come to realise something you may not have done. The socio-demographic make up of the populist vote is very similar across many different countries. But interestingly, the successful trigger points populist agenda in each country are quite different and, of course led by national issues. If you think that all the populists across Europe are all banging on about the EU to the extent that our populists are, you are very much mistaken. Perhaps you should try reading the English version of Spiegel if you want to understand the AfD vote, rather than relying on the Telegraph. For example.
I don't seek to insult people, as individuals. I can't easily tell on here much about someone's background or the extent or source of their "disenchantment" unless they write about it. I might however be so annoyed by the views some people express that I respond by calling them drivel. Whether that is some of your Brexit related views of the world, or whether it is some idiot claiming that we should be signing better strikers than Josh Magennis. I don't see why on CL we should respond more cautiously to someone's views on politics than to their views about football. If anything it should be the other way round, surely?
I have no problem with you going in hard on political issues, far from it. My point is that simply condemning populism is a waste of time and can be counterproductive, especially if it comes from within the ranks of those who identify with the elites' view of the world.
We have to start from the basic facts that our doninant political parties and ruling ideas feel alien to huge numbers of people. There is a cultural divide across the western world between on the one hand those who believe in globalisation, immigration, government by technocrats and modern liberalism and on the other those who feel threatened by these things. There is a mistaken belief that this is a generational thing and that it will pass. The French election showed huge support for Le Pen amongst young working class kids, for example.
If we were not so obsessed with Brexit we would see a rise in parties across Europe which express populist themes ( not all anti-EU by the way), most recently in Germany and Austria. There is a lot more to come.
This hits the nail on the head. The Trump and Brexit phenomena were based upon the exploitation of one member one vote. Or rather leveraging the discontent of those left behind by the twin forces of globalization and asset price inflation as interest rates fell, i.e., higher house prices and rents - the disenfranchised if you will. Naked populism and false claims to deliver promises are the common theme and in both cases things are starting to unravel.
The Leave campaign were very careful not to quantify the exact reduction in immigration required. Perhaps this was because they didn't wish to be labelled racist? But this report provides a more sophisticated answer as it describes polling of UK attitudes around the Brexit vote. Not read the whole thing but skimming the diagrams, there is a clear distintion between the 28% of voters who wanted to see a massive reduction in immigration and others who prefer more modest decreases.
Some label the Brexit vote as a vote for change as if leaving the EU were a progressive act. It isn't and it's now possible to state that the 58:42 vote in the regions was a protest vote about stagnation in wages along with lack of solutions around housing, education, the NHS and job opportunities. Immigration was linked to poor service provision and lack of decent housing. Repeatedly.
The report linked substantiates this view for it shows why people are proud to be British: our history, the NHS and our system of democracy play at the top of the list.
So Leave ran a populist campaign based upon "taking back control" and sovereignty as well as linking leaving the EU to giving more money to the NHS. It's not rocket science - populist marketing won the vote in the US and UK - but it's impossible to deliver! If the EU was never the cause of housing issues nor crowded classrooms and NHS resourcing issues then leaving doesn't solve anything.
Therefore it's up to established parties or a new movement to deliver alternatives for the electorate. UK politics has been transformed by the referendum with Labour harnessing the disaffection vocalized in 2016 and turning that into an opinion poll lead. Labour has travelled from 26% to 42% in the polls not by challenging leave voters nor calling them stupid but by listening to their concerns and publishing a manifesto that addressed these concerns with policy solutions. That's to say addressing the root causes.
It's the middle class Liberal response which is nauseating. First leave voters were stupid, then racist then wrong. And next it was Brexit must be stopped and we must have a second referendum so as to correct the "mistake".
Demonizing leave voters because leave won is devisive and anti-democratic. Ultimately that goes nowhere, especially when the objective should be to win over 20% of the leave vote, I.e. 10% of the electorate. As posted before, there is a different question on the table around the Customs Union and Single Market.
Should polls move towards 60:40 against Brexit or against leaving the SM/CU/EEA then that will empower Parliament to make the right decisions. For that's how our democracy works. Rees Mogg and other can continue their campaigns against those they feel are blocking them but life goes on.
More stats, more fumbles and more preparations for the UK team. This to deliver enough on the three questions to move forwards. Always with an eye on the popular opinion.
I understand your conclusions. I understand why you criticise "middle class Liberals" who call for a second referendum. However you then go on to suggest that Parliament could in some way change the direction of Brexit on its own, if opinion polls start to move decisively away from the previously accepted "will of the people".
My problem is that either of these two routes will cause the Hard Brexiteers to go completely apeshit. Both the politicans and many of those who agree with them (judging by the opinions we read on here).
I do not have any kind of answer to that problem. I cannot currently see any alternative to a pretty hard Brexit that will not cause a shit storm from the Moggsters and Murdochers that will make the previous few years look like a calm and mature debate.
Personally I have accepted that the UK is out, and out hard. Selfishly I tell myself that this is OK for me as I don't have to rely on the UK any more. And the chaos of Brexit will help point out to citizens in other countries what a stupid idea it is. Indeed the Czech Foreign Minister said as much back in March. To quote the newspaper report:
Zaorálek said it is outrageous for someone to want a referendum on exiting the EU. Czechs are not stupid and see what has happened in the UK since the Brexit vote, he said: Real income is falling, investment has stopped, inflation is rising, and the pound has fallen 15%. This is why Corbyn succeeded with a program that Fidel Castro would not be ashamed of, he said.
But to think in that selfish way is to break faith with the many excellent people (including on this thread) who realise what a disastrous decision it is, and have no escape route from it.
The trouble is I don't think your portrayal of how it can be reversed is realistic (in the sense of, will the nation go along with that method?)
Well...according to analysis of the vote, those whom I would consider make up the elite voted overwhelmingly for Remain, so in short hand the elite view is Remain.
Onviously not everybody who voted Remain is part of the elite, but they share the elite view.
The older the voters, the more likely they were to have voted to leave the EU. Nearly three quarters (73%) of 18 to 24 year-olds voted to remain, falling to under two thirds (62%) among 25-34s. A majority of those aged over 45 voted to leave, rising to 60% of those aged 65 or over. Most people with children aged ten or under voted to remain; most of those with children aged 11 or older voted to leave.
A majority of those working full-time or part-time voted to remain in the EU; most of those not working voted to leave. More than half of those retired on a private pension voted to leave, as did two thirds of those retired on a state pension. Among private renters and people with mortgages, a small majority (55% and 54%) voted to remain; those who owned their homes outright voted to leave by 55% to 45%. Around two thirds of council and housing association tenants voted to leave.
A majority (57%) of those with a university degree voted to remain, as did 64% of those with a higher degree and more than four in five (81%) of those still in full time education. Among those whose formal education ended at secondary school or earlier, a large majority voted to leave.
White voters voted to leave the EU by 53% to 47%. Two thirds (67%) of those describing themselves as Asian voted to remain, as did three quarters (73%) of black voters. Nearly six in ten (58%) of those describing themselves as Christian voted to leave; seven in ten Muslims voted to remain.
The AB social group (broadly speaking, professionals and managers) were the only social group among whom a majority voted to remain (57%). C1s divided fairly evenly; nearly two thirds of C2DEs (64%) voted to leave the EU.
A majority of those who backed the Conservative in 2015 voted to leave the EU (58%), as did more than 19 out of 20 UKIP supporters. Nearly two thirds of Labour and SNP voters (63% and 64%), seven in ten Liberal Democrats and three quarters of Greens, voted to remain.
---
So out of the following groups that generally voted Remain, who would you consider Elites?
- those under 44 years of age - those in employment - private renters and mortgage holders - those currently in full time education or those who had an education level above GCSE - Asian and black voters - Muslims - Professionals and managers - non-Tory/UKIP voters
I would assume that your answer would be academics & professionals. So those who have gone on to pursue qualifications in their areas relating to their intelligence and skills are a dangerous elite and we should vote against them?
I still don't understand why what the "elite" think is considered inherently bad? There is a clear divide between employed, qualified people born after 1972 who are in positions leveraged on how well the economy is doing, and unemployed, unqualified people born before 1972 who are relatively insulated from economic conditions by comparison.
Well...according to analysis of the vote, those whom I would consider make up the elite voted overwhelmingly for Remain, so in short hand the elite view is Remain.
Onviously not everybody who voted Remain is part of the elite, but they share the elite view.
The older the voters, the more likely they were to have voted to leave the EU. Nearly three quarters (73%) of 18 to 24 year-olds voted to remain, falling to under two thirds (62%) among 25-34s. A majority of those aged over 45 voted to leave, rising to 60% of those aged 65 or over. Most people with children aged ten or under voted to remain; most of those with children aged 11 or older voted to leave.
A majority of those working full-time or part-time voted to remain in the EU; most of those not working voted to leave. More than half of those retired on a private pension voted to leave, as did two thirds of those retired on a state pension. Among private renters and people with mortgages, a small majority (55% and 54%) voted to remain; those who owned their homes outright voted to leave by 55% to 45%. Around two thirds of council and housing association tenants voted to leave.
A majority (57%) of those with a university degree voted to remain, as did 64% of those with a higher degree and more than four in five (81%) of those still in full time education. Among those whose formal education ended at secondary school or earlier, a large majority voted to leave.
White voters voted to leave the EU by 53% to 47%. Two thirds (67%) of those describing themselves as Asian voted to remain, as did three quarters (73%) of black voters. Nearly six in ten (58%) of those describing themselves as Christian voted to leave; seven in ten Muslims voted to remain.
The AB social group (broadly speaking, professionals and managers) were the only social group among whom a majority voted to remain (57%). C1s divided fairly evenly; nearly two thirds of C2DEs (64%) voted to leave the EU.
A majority of those who backed the Conservative in 2015 voted to leave the EU (58%), as did more than 19 out of 20 UKIP supporters. Nearly two thirds of Labour and SNP voters (63% and 64%), seven in ten Liberal Democrats and three quarters of Greens, voted to remain.
---
So out of the following groups that generally voted Remain, who would you consider Elites?
- those under 44 years of age - those in employment - private renters and mortgage holders - those currently in full time education or those who had an education level above GCSE - Asian and black voters - Muslims - Professionals and managers - non-Tory/UKIP voters
I would assume that your answer would be academics & professionals. So those who have gone on to pursue qualifications in their areas relating to their intelligence and skills are a dangerous elite and we should vote against them?
I still don't understand why what the "elite" think is considered inherently bad? There is a clear divide between employed, qualified people born after 1972 who are in positions leveraged on how well the economy is doing, and unemployed, unqualified people born before 1972 who are relatively insulated from economic conditions by comparison.
Well...according to analysis of the vote, those whom I would consider make up the elite voted overwhelmingly for Remain, so in short hand the elite view is Remain.
Onviously not everybody who voted Remain is part of the elite, but they share the elite view.
The older the voters, the more likely they were to have voted to leave the EU. Nearly three quarters (73%) of 18 to 24 year-olds voted to remain, falling to under two thirds (62%) among 25-34s. A majority of those aged over 45 voted to leave, rising to 60% of those aged 65 or over. Most people with children aged ten or under voted to remain; most of those with children aged 11 or older voted to leave.
A majority of those working full-time or part-time voted to remain in the EU; most of those not working voted to leave. More than half of those retired on a private pension voted to leave, as did two thirds of those retired on a state pension. Among private renters and people with mortgages, a small majority (55% and 54%) voted to remain; those who owned their homes outright voted to leave by 55% to 45%. Around two thirds of council and housing association tenants voted to leave.
A majority (57%) of those with a university degree voted to remain, as did 64% of those with a higher degree and more than four in five (81%) of those still in full time education. Among those whose formal education ended at secondary school or earlier, a large majority voted to leave.
White voters voted to leave the EU by 53% to 47%. Two thirds (67%) of those describing themselves as Asian voted to remain, as did three quarters (73%) of black voters. Nearly six in ten (58%) of those describing themselves as Christian voted to leave; seven in ten Muslims voted to remain.
The AB social group (broadly speaking, professionals and managers) were the only social group among whom a majority voted to remain (57%). C1s divided fairly evenly; nearly two thirds of C2DEs (64%) voted to leave the EU.
A majority of those who backed the Conservative in 2015 voted to leave the EU (58%), as did more than 19 out of 20 UKIP supporters. Nearly two thirds of Labour and SNP voters (63% and 64%), seven in ten Liberal Democrats and three quarters of Greens, voted to remain.
---
So out of the following groups that generally voted Remain, who would you consider Elites?
- those under 44 years of age - those in employment - private renters and mortgage holders - those currently in full time education or those who had an education level above GCSE - Asian and black voters - Muslims - Professionals and managers - non-Tory/UKIP voters
I would assume that your answer would be academics & professionals. So those who have gone on to pursue qualifications in their areas relating to their intelligence and skills are a dangerous elite and we should vote against them?
I still don't understand why what the "elite" think is considered inherently bad? There is a clear divide between employed, qualified people born after 1972 who are in positions leveraged on how well the economy is doing, and unemployed, unqualified people born before 1972 who are relatively insulated from economic conditions by comparison.
Lots of interesting stats there. I've highlighted the key one for me. Just what are these 5% of 'kippers on, supporting Ukip, but not Brexit. Weird.
94% of Leave voters were not minded to take notice of the risks to trade and the economy. (Only 6% thought the economy and trade would be better.) 43% of Remain voters voted because of the risks to jobs, trade and the economy.
No Leave voters it would appear said they voted because they thought £360m a week would go to the NHS. (Remain voters didn't believe it either, but assume Leave voters, being less well educated, thought it was true.)
Conclusion - Remain voters trust what the establishment feeds them, except if it's from Boris Johnson.
94% of Leave voters were not minded to take notice of the risks to trade and the economy. (Only 6% thought the economy and trade would be better.) 43% of Remain voters voted because of the risks to jobs, trade and the economy.
No Leave voters it would appear said they voted because they thought £360m a week would go to the NHS. (Remain voters didn't believe it either, but assume Leave voters, being less well educated, thought it was true.)
Conclusion - Remain voters trust what the establishment feeds them, except if it's from Boris Johnson.
The graph states that the NHS was 75% relevant to people's votes, with more Leave voters considering it relevant than Remainers. So your first point is inaccurate, clearly some voters thought the NHS and any possible windfalls from Brexit going into it was a good reason to leave.
Your conclusion; care to expand on that? Who are the establishment?
94% of Leave voters were not minded to take notice of the risks to trade and the economy. (Only 6% thought the economy and trade would be better.) 43% of Remain voters voted because of the risks to jobs, trade and the economy.
No Leave voters it would appear said they voted because they thought £360m a week would go to the NHS. (Remain voters didn't believe it either, but assume Leave voters, being less well educated, thought it was true.)
Conclusion - Remain voters trust what the establishment feeds them, except if it's from Boris Johnson.
I would say the conclusion is Remain voters are able to tell the difference between real news and fake news and between facts and made up nonsense. And Brexit voters are even more stupid and ill educated than anyone realised.
Comments
The O'Mara stuff was unfortunate but I'm sure he's learnt from his errors. Guido Fawkes will never not be a creepy little fuckwit otoh
With your extensive world experience, I've no doubt you know exactly what qualities are required for such service.
Qualities a snide stereotypical dismissal from a smart arse on a football site would never be able to relate to, so further discussion is pointless.
Shame as I hoped there might be an intelligent response within you.
But thanks for an insight into your hilarious reaction to the 'SAS' trigger.
Things like: ensuring you have prepared for every circumstance before advancing. Or, understanding that a cool head will usually prevail over a hot one.
With all of that in mind, one might begin to realise just how awful his position is
didn't this happen when they voted Tony Blair in power?
Oh no blame the greedy bankers!
With the greatest respect, I don't think you can do this without in the process realising it is a bogus argument, but do try to prove me wrong.
And the worst thing is, he is the brightest of the 3 Brexiteers...
Look at the faces of death in May, Hammond, Redwood, Mogg etc. They've got their heads and mindsets in a time from centuries ago. They are so out of touch it's unbelieveable. We've had the made in Chelsea, wannabe trendy lot in Cameron. They upset the old crusties, and the crusties want to return their house back to a musty smell of pot pouri and lavender.....
When I think of the Tories I think of my dead gran (bless her). Not because she voted Tory (she may have). But more so because she didn't believe in sell by dates, fed me green corn beef, bitter lemon that was so bitter I couldn't open the bottle and she didn't mind people of ethnicity, but only if they stayed in their own country
On the face of it we have a minority Government propped up by a massive one billion pound bribe to the DUP. The government want to import EU laws that individual ministers can then modify without reference to our elected representatives. This minority Government can then conclude a deal (or have no deal) and only after the business is done, according to David Davis there could, not definitely will, be a vote on it by our elected representatives, despite the Government expecting or intending otherwise.
This is the UK version of 'democracy' which people want to prevail.
The people won, so it does prevail.
Pretty crappy system.
I'm more of a District Line man myself.
The Leave campaign were very careful not to quantify the exact reduction in immigration required. Perhaps this was because they didn't wish to be labelled racist? But this report provides a more sophisticated answer as it describes polling of UK attitudes around the Brexit vote. Not read the whole thing but skimming the diagrams, there is a clear distintion between the 28% of voters who wanted to see a massive reduction in immigration and others who prefer more modest decreases.
Some label the Brexit vote as a vote for change as if leaving the EU were a progressive act. It isn't and it's now possible to state that the 58:42 vote in the regions was a protest vote about stagnation in wages along with lack of solutions around housing, education, the NHS and job opportunities. Immigration was linked to poor service provision and lack of decent housing. Repeatedly.
The report linked substantiates this view for it shows why people are proud to be British: our history, the NHS and our system of democracy play at the top of the list.
So Leave ran a populist campaign based upon "taking back control" and sovereignty as well as linking leaving the EU to giving more money to the NHS. It's not rocket science - populist marketing won the vote in the US and UK - but it's impossible to deliver! If the EU was never the cause of housing issues nor crowded classrooms and NHS resourcing issues then leaving doesn't solve anything.
Therefore it's up to established parties or a new movement to deliver alternatives for the electorate. UK politics has been transformed by the referendum with Labour harnessing the disaffection vocalized in 2016 and turning that into an opinion poll lead. Labour has travelled from 26% to 42% in the polls not by challenging leave voters nor calling them stupid but by listening to their concerns and publishing a manifesto that addressed these concerns with policy solutions. That's to say addressing the root causes.
It's the middle class Liberal response which is nauseating. First leave voters were stupid, then racist then wrong. And next it was Brexit must be stopped and we must have a second referendum so as to correct the "mistake".
Demonizing leave voters because leave won is devisive and anti-democratic. Ultimately that goes nowhere, especially when the objective should be to win over 20% of the leave vote, I.e. 10% of the electorate. As posted before, there is a different question on the table around the Customs Union and Single Market.
Should polls move towards 60:40 against Brexit or against leaving the SM/CU/EEA then that will empower Parliament to make the right decisions. For that's how our democracy works. Rees Mogg and other can continue their campaigns against those they feel are blocking them but life goes on.
More stats, more fumbles and more preparations for the UK team. This to deliver enough on the three questions to move forwards. Always with an eye on the popular opinion.
I understand your conclusions. I understand why you criticise "middle class Liberals" who call for a second referendum. However you then go on to suggest that Parliament could in some way change the direction of Brexit on its own, if opinion polls start to move decisively away from the previously accepted "will of the people".
My problem is that either of these two routes will cause the Hard Brexiteers to go completely apeshit. Both the politicans and many of those who agree with them (judging by the opinions we read on here).
I do not have any kind of answer to that problem. I cannot currently see any alternative to a pretty hard Brexit that will not cause a shit storm from the Moggsters and Murdochers that will make the previous few years look like a calm and mature debate.
Personally I have accepted that the UK is out, and out hard. Selfishly I tell myself that this is OK for me as I don't have to rely on the UK any more. And the chaos of Brexit will help point out to citizens in other countries what a stupid idea it is. Indeed the Czech Foreign Minister said as much back in March. To quote the newspaper report:
Zaorálek said it is outrageous for someone to want a referendum on exiting the EU. Czechs are not stupid and see what has happened in the UK since the Brexit vote, he said: Real income is falling, investment has stopped, inflation is rising, and the pound has fallen 15%. This is why Corbyn succeeded with a program that Fidel Castro would not be ashamed of, he said.
But to think in that selfish way is to break faith with the many excellent people (including on this thread) who realise what a disastrous decision it is, and have no escape route from it.
The trouble is I don't think your portrayal of how it can be reversed is realistic (in the sense of, will the nation go along with that method?)
The older the voters, the more likely they were to have voted to leave the EU. Nearly three quarters (73%) of 18 to 24 year-olds voted to remain, falling to under two thirds (62%) among 25-34s. A majority of those aged over 45 voted to leave, rising to 60% of those aged 65 or over. Most people with children aged ten or under voted to remain; most of those with children aged 11 or older voted to leave.
A majority of those working full-time or part-time voted to remain in the EU; most of those not working voted to leave. More than half of those retired on a private pension voted to leave, as did two thirds of those retired on a state pension.
Among private renters and people with mortgages, a small majority (55% and 54%) voted to remain; those who owned their homes outright voted to leave by 55% to 45%. Around two thirds of council and housing association tenants voted to leave.
A majority (57%) of those with a university degree voted to remain, as did 64% of those with a higher degree and more than four in five (81%) of those still in full time education. Among those whose formal education ended at secondary school or earlier, a large majority voted to leave.
White voters voted to leave the EU by 53% to 47%. Two thirds (67%) of those describing themselves as Asian voted to remain, as did three quarters (73%) of black voters. Nearly six in ten (58%) of those describing themselves as Christian voted to leave; seven in ten Muslims voted to remain.
The AB social group (broadly speaking, professionals and managers) were the only social group among whom a majority voted to remain (57%). C1s divided fairly evenly; nearly two thirds of C2DEs (64%) voted to leave the EU.
A majority of those who backed the Conservative in 2015 voted to leave the EU (58%), as did more than 19 out of 20 UKIP supporters. Nearly two thirds of Labour and SNP voters (63% and 64%), seven in ten Liberal Democrats and three quarters of Greens, voted to remain.
---
So out of the following groups that generally voted Remain, who would you consider Elites?
- those under 44 years of age
- those in employment
- private renters and mortgage holders
- those currently in full time education or those who had an education level above GCSE
- Asian and black voters
- Muslims
- Professionals and managers
- non-Tory/UKIP voters
I would assume that your answer would be academics & professionals. So those who have gone on to pursue qualifications in their areas relating to their intelligence and skills are a dangerous elite and we should vote against them?
I still don't understand why what the "elite" think is considered inherently bad? There is a clear divide between employed, qualified people born after 1972 who are in positions leveraged on how well the economy is doing, and unemployed, unqualified people born before 1972 who are relatively insulated from economic conditions by comparison.
94% of Leave voters were not minded to take notice of the risks to trade and the economy. (Only 6% thought the economy and trade would be better.)
43% of Remain voters voted because of the risks to jobs, trade and the economy.
No Leave voters it would appear said they voted because they thought £360m a week would go to the NHS. (Remain voters didn't believe it either, but assume Leave voters, being less well educated, thought it was true.)
Conclusion - Remain voters trust what the establishment feeds them, except if it's from Boris Johnson.
Your conclusion; care to expand on that? Who are the establishment?