Current Affairs EU In or Out

In or Out

  • In

    Votes: 688 67.9%
  • Out

    Votes: 325 32.1%

  • Total voters
    1,013
Status
Not open for further replies.
Both sides used propaganda if that the case every prime minister would be removed and not gain power !

Its not remotely the same. A binary choice referendum was swayed by lies. A GE has manifestos and Parliament, and the people, can hold them to account.

You seemingly are happy that your side won, based, by your own confession, on lies. Bewildering.
 
If that is referring to me, you are f*cking joking!!! I wouldn't feed any of the bastards! I'm a lifelong Labour voter, and always will be.

So what else have you got completely 100% wrong about me...?

If Labour stood at the next election on a ticket of another referendum, and actively campaigned as a Pro EU party, would you still vote for them? Not a dig, just an observation.
 
Ever tried listening to him anyone who disagrees with him he ridicules them pathetically I hit the off button!
The guy on before him give a person a chance that's why he won awards today!

I listen to him daily. He doesn't pander to xenophobia or ignorance but gives plenty of breathing space to opinions he disagrees with as long as they're well thought through. Should he pander to ignorance like in that video, or let them hang themselves as he did?

Regarding awards, O'Brien won broadcaster of the year at the British Press Guild Awards earlier this year.
 
If you look at the government leaflet there aren't any lies in it. It's another thing Joe trots out as truth that actually isn't.


Now, now, Bruce, don't tell lies!

Page 8 (including the front cover as page 1), heading WHAT HAPPENS IF WE LEAVE?
Voting to leave the EU would create years of uncertainty and potential economic disruption.

Tangential to the above, they repeat part of that quote on the following page over a photo that they breached copyright with, as they had made no request to the copyright holder to use it in the first place! Shambolic amateurism of the worst kind.

Now, unless Cameron/the Government had a crystal ball that no one else had access to, that statement is a lie. It is a lie, because it uses the conditional word 'would'. Not 'might'. Not 'could perhaps'. It is a definite statement with the word 'would. Sorry if I sound pedantic, but you know the reason why I examine such things in detail. It is also ambiguous in the use of 'years'. What is the measure of that word? 5, 10, 15, 20 years?

Also, 'The UK has secured a special status in the EU'. Yeah right. Only weeks before, after saying he would obtain major concessions, Cameron came back withalmost nothing, and was roundly derided for it in the media. The special status we have is that the other players tend to ignore us, but are happy to take our dosh.

Also, 'If the UK voted to leave the EU, the resulting economic shock would risk higher prices of some household goods'. This is talking down to people in a BIG way. As if there has never, ever, been inflation on prices before this referendum kicked off, and as if there would never be price rises even if the vote had been to remain yeah, right!). That sentence stinks of a condescending tone, and a totally patronising approach to the public.

FFS, Bruce, wake up and smell the coffee (even if it is European...). The Government lied to the public in a sly, sneaky, way with that leaflet.

Next: cue certain entities on here piling in to me again.
 
I listen to him daily. He doesn't pander to xenophobia or ignorance but gives plenty of breathing space to opinions he disagrees with as long as they're well thought through. Should he pander to ignorance like in that video, or let them hang themselves as he did?

Regarding awards, O'Brien won broadcaster of the year at the British Press Guild Awards earlier this year.
The other guy swept the board!
 
If Labour stood at the next election on a ticket of another referendum, and actively campaigned as a Pro EU party, would you still vote for them? Not a dig, just an observation.


C'mon, roydo. Ask me a real question, not a rhetorical one. I'll leave the rhetorical questions, and their answers, to the remainers.

Don't try to set a trap for me, eh?
 
If that is referring to me, you are f*cking joking!!! I wouldn't feed any of the bastards! I'm a lifelong Labour voter, and always will be.

So what else have you got completely 100% wrong about me...?

Jesus relax would you. It was a guess based on content of your posts.

Damn, you over react to everything.

It wasn't even a dig or anything.

You make everything toxic for yourself and then accuse people of going after you. Pathetic really.

A simple innocent post becomes a platform for a viral response from you.

I'm surprised you didn't say i was attacking you like you normally do...
 
Both sides told porkies also if that had been a GE first past the post system Out would have won by a biggest Landslide since the Blair days so you're theories are invalid !

That's probably true and i am not debating whether that's the case. I was just giving an observation based on information, facts and posts in this thread. Not looking to debate the lies quite frankly.
 
On a point of principle, no. The vote to leave was taken and now should be enacted. Once we have left, and given it a fair chance to work, if another vote says go back in then fair enough. Attempting to change the referendum vote before it is enacted would undermine the whole purpose of a majority vote......

But it was never stated (let alone voted on) what would constitute "a fair chance to make it work". The principle of leaving is one thing but if the process is a farce surely you have to question the original principle?

But what if it's about how we leave, which wasn't on the ballot in the first instance?

If Leave is so confident that we're better off out, why are they afraid of a democratic vote on the how now that they've won the argument of why?

This!

Excuse me many times on this thread some posters have been branded racist for voting OUT!

I think the majority of Leave voters were misguided and acted willfully on emotion and an instinct rather than any clear level of analysis. I think the latter is inarguably as - even now - there is no analysis to support leaving!

Both sides told porkies also if that had been a GE first past the post system Out would have won by a biggest Landslide since the Blair days so you're theories are invalid !

Joe that's plain rubbish!! First the Leave side told a stack more "untruths". Indeed pretty much everything they said has turned out to be false. Second I wish it was a decision taken as part of a proper election as then the Leave side would have had to stick to a proper manifesto and we could now hold them properly to account!!
 
Now, now, Bruce, don't tell lies!

Page 8 (including the front cover as page 1), heading WHAT HAPPENS IF WE LEAVE?
Voting to leave the EU would create years of uncertainty and potential economic disruption.

Tangential to the above, they repeat part of that quote on the following page over a photo that they breached copyright with, as they had made no request to the copyright holder to use it in the first place! Shambolic amateurism of the worst kind.

Now, unless Cameron/the Government had a crystal ball that no one else had access to, that statement is a lie. It is a lie, because it uses the conditional word 'would'. Not 'might'. Not 'could perhaps'. It is a definite statement with the word 'would. Sorry if I sound pedantic, but you know the reason why I examine such things in detail. It is also ambiguous in the use of 'years'. What is the measure of that word? 5, 10, 15, 20 years?

That statement is true. The 18 months since the vote has been one of tremendous uncertainty and economic disruption, and we're still no nearer to knowing what kind of relationship we are likely to have when/if we leave. On trade alone, there isn't a single experienced trade negotiator that thinks this will be quick, with most putting the figure at between 5-10 years. That alone equals uncertainty and potential economic disruption.

Indeed, if anything, it was the leave campaign who portrayed that as #projectfear and that this would all be a walk in the park because they need us more than we need them etc. that have been shown to be false.

Also, 'The UK has secured a special status in the EU'. Yeah right. Only weeks before, after saying he would obtain major concessions, Cameron came back withalmost nothing, and was roundly derided for it in the media. The special status we have is that the other players tend to ignore us, but are happy to take our dosh.

I fear this could be heading into James O'Brien territory, but what exactly were the concessions he came back with?

Also, 'If the UK voted to leave the EU, the resulting economic shock would risk higher prices of some household goods'. This is talking down to people in a BIG way. As if there has never, ever, been inflation on prices before this referendum kicked off, and as if there would never be price rises even if the vote had been to remain yeah, right!). That sentence stinks of a condescending tone, and a totally patronising approach to the public.

We're not discussing whether it was condescending or not, we're debating Joe's accusation that 'both sides told lies'. The pound has gone down in value significantly, therefore prices have gone up considerably. That isn't a lie.

If anything, it was the whole #projectfear nonsense that has been shown up as absurd, so if anyone should be smelling the coffee right now, it's your good self.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top