A Political Thread pt. 2

[dirty harry]

I don't think Farage has any intention of doing anything he says, he doesn't want power he want to keep his grift going. His entire thing is about shouting from the sidelines.

I agree with this to be fair, he does have skill at opposition, and manages to rally a sentiment, I dont think hes ever been involved in implementing things hes campaigning for on a large scale (I may be wrong), but if he wins then he has no choice, and I dont see him U turning.

Like I said, Labour are killing themselves, Tories already have, Farage is the only one who can take Farage down currently, I expect the British governnent to go after him legally for anything he does or says thats questionable, or things he did in hos past, or even hasn't dont, in order to stop him running, although id hope us Brits have more integrity than the Americans, Germans or French

 

[dirty harry]

The big issue with farage is not that he's held responsible (he essentially did nothing but shout from the sidelines), but that's he's not held accountable for lying or being wrong. He made plenty of claims about Brexit which were weapons grade bullshit. These included things like we would get a Norway style deal no problem, we held all the cards, Europe needed us more than we needed them (same as the official Brexit campaign).

He's then not here to account for throwing his toys out of the pram wherever his feet are held to the fire over his claims and whatever he has said. It's the same as for Trump and to a degree Johnson, there is this attitude of letting those on the right and far right get away with much much more than those on the left.

I mean, he would argue had the Brexit team not been trying to undermine Brexit, people in government undermining it, and the EU negotiating in bad faith (from Brits POV) after seeing all this, maybe Britain could have got a very good deal... we'll never know, and thats all the ambiguity Farage needs really.

Lets not pretend the entire Brexit campaign wasnt full of ****, from both sides. Not that im playing down the Brexit side, but few people talk about the threats to the public, 20% house price crashing, immediate emergency budget raising taxes, recession and war...

 

[dirty harry]

German mayor critically injured in stabbing attack, police say

Chancellor Friedrich Merz says "we fear for the life" of Iris Stalzer, a newly-elected mayor in the western town of Herdecke.

www.bbc.com

Interestingly, 16 politician / candidates have passed away in September running up to elections, 7 AFD candidates in a tiny time period of the same area...

If your a German politician you should be watching where you go, what you eat, Russian whispers in the distance, something seems to be going on.

 

[Becca]

German mayor critically injured in stabbing attack, police say

Chancellor Friedrich Merz says "we fear for the life" of Iris Stalzer, a newly-elected mayor in the western town of Herdecke.

www.bbc.com

Interestingly, 16 politician / candidates have passed away in September running up to elections, 7 AFD candidates in a tiny time period of the same area...

If your a German politician you should be watching where you go, what you eat, Russian whispers in the distance, something seems to be going on.

I saw that the other week.

What the Devil is going on ?!

 

[dirty harry]

I saw that the other week.

What the Devil is going on ?!

I think there have been 8 or 9 politicin deaths in the uk in 2025, and outside of a 37 year old they've all been 80 plus (id have to check). These 16 were of 40, 50, 60 year olds, all in a 3 month period...

I think i read recently some prominent figures saying that thos statistically is impossible to be coincidental

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

I mean, he would argue had the Brexit team not been trying to undermine Brexit, people in government undermining it, and the EU negotiating in bad faith (from Brits POV) after seeing all this, maybe Britain could have got a very good deal... we'll never know, and thats all the ambiguity Farage needs really.

Lets not pretend the entire Brexit campaign wasnt full of ****, from both sides. Not that im playing down the Brexit side, but few people talk about the threats to the public, 20% house price crashing, immediate emergency budget raising taxes, recession and war...

Except Brexiters can't point to how Brexit was undermined. Most of the undermining was done by Johnson in the name of undermining the previous deal. The whole rushed deadline was another thing to appease Brexiters at the expense of reality. You can look at most things that undermined Brexit and it was done to appease hardcore Brexiters. If anything the argument for be made that the people who undermined Brexit the most were those who most loudly called for it.

Everyone with any sense argued that seeking Brexit agreements would be difficult and the EU wouldn't simply bend over and give us everything we wanted. Farage and Johnson sold the bullshit to the pubic that we could make ultimatums and the EU would be cowed into compliance.

The ambiguity is what farage can be challenged on, he made various specific claims about Brexit, both in terms of what he believed would happen and what he thought could happen. For example, Northern Ireland, the free market and the regulatory system, he has contradicted himself on all of these and could be held to account for it but isn't.

Remain were involved in scaremongering too but the reality has shown that the claims remain made were much closer to reality.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

Mate you can post all the links in the world, but they will never back up your assertion on independance because Scotland and NI voted to leave the UK, when they absolutely never.

Im not sure if your aware your pulling the decade old trick, or whether you've just heard it enough, but Scotland, NI, and Wales come to think of it, did not vote to remain in the EU, that was never the question, it has no relevance on independence sentiment etc...

Just be honest.

How can you so brazenly lie and demand others they be honest? It's well known that a major argument against Scottish independence was that they would they be outside the EU. Couple that with Scots having a majority choosing to remain in the EU and it's perfectly valid point to make.

Stop being a ***. Ask yourself why you end up in an argument with basically every single person on here. If you think it's because only you see nuance and everyone else is brainwashed, I've got bad news for you.

 

[AlRums]

Former Tory MP turned Reform.

 

[dirty harry]

Except Brexiters can't point to how Brexit was undermined. Most of the undermining was done by Johnson in the name of undermining the previous deal. The whole rushed deadline was another thing to appease Brexiters at the expense of reality. You can look at most things that undermined Brexit and it was done to appease hardcore Brexiters. If anything the argument for be made that the people who undermined Brexit the most were those who most loudly called for it.

Everyone with any sense argued that seeking Brexit agreements would be difficult and the EU wouldn't simply bend over and give us everything we wanted. Farage and Johnson sold the bullshit to the pubic that we could make ultimatums and the EU would be cowed into compliance.

The ambiguity is what farage can be challenged on, he made various specific claims about Brexit, both in terms of what he believed would happen and what he thought could happen. For example, Northern Ireland, the free market and the regulatory system, he has contradicted himself on all of these and could be held to account for it but isn't.

Remain were involved in scaremongering too but the reality has shown that the claims remain made were much closer to reality.

Of course they can...

There are a number of things that undermined negotiations, even from the very off, selecting those who didnt vote leave, and wanted close ties with the EU, even backing a soft brexit or 2nd referendum in the team tasked with negotiating a deal was undermining negotiations from the off.

If Im opening a steakhouse, im not selecting a vegan activist to design my menu!

Before anything began, people who didn't want to leave, were charged with negotiating the best deal possible, who were motivated by not doing so with the possible intent that stalling and offering a bad deal would get what they want, made worse when the actual politicians who were motivated to get it done resigned because of the poor deal that was being agreed to. I mean thats the definition of undermining.

We can get into the debates and rebellious nature of both leave and remain politicians throughout, but there is no arguing that the position of the UK would have been stronger with a motivated, and comited to leave team at the helm.

Im not a brexiteer, or i should say i wasnt until the results came in, but even I can recognise the failings of those involved, and the undermining of the process. Brexit didnt embarrass the UK in 2016, actions taken between 2016 and 2020 very much did.

 

[dirty harry]

How can you so brazenly lie and demand others they be honest? It's well known that a major argument against Scottish independence was that they would they be outside the EU. Couple that with Scots having a majority choosing to remain in the EU and it's perfectly valid point to make.

Stop being a ***. Ask yourself why you end up in an argument with basically every single person on here. If you think it's because only you see nuance and everyone else is brainwashed, I've got bad news for you.

How have I lied, for calling out a falsity pushed for years. Scotland did not vote to remain in the EU, the same way NI and Wales didnt, the same way England didnt vote to leave the EU... They voted on behalf of the UKs intention to leave or remain, to pretend that these stats meant these countries intention was to leave or remain is false.

Im not sure why your lying about Scottish independence vote either, I was there in 2014, living in Edinburgh (ish) and voted for independance (on behalf of someone).

I never heard any real argument that Scotland would have to leave the EU, until ******** Barrosso made his comments, and even then the argument was that Scotland would have to reapply to join, and adopt the euro, and he made the scare statement about Spain.

Most of the chatter (which was difficult as most Scots seemed to be afraid of discussing it from what I saw) was around control, economic freedom and national identity. I personally didnt want to vote and didnt feel I should vote on the future of a country i didnt intend to live in long term.

And BTW, this entire argument started because I disagreed and called out the falsehood AND then agreed with the 2nd part of his statement, so the question isnt why I keep disagreeing, its why there is so much hysteria over a disagreement, its tough to listen to grown men whine, and name calling strangers on the internet, but I suppose if that tactic is to keep others from disagreeing, which it absolutely has kept other posters away from engaging, then job done.

Do you feel like you contribute to an environment that allows all attitudes and political leanings feel comfortable enough to contribute? I think youd agree with me in that you dont, and you play your part in dog piling, hysteria, and keeping this place a relative echo chamber that over reacts to counter points.

 

[AlRums]

Except Brexiters can't point to how Brexit was undermined. Most of the undermining was done by Johnson in the name of undermining the previous deal. The whole rushed deadline was another thing to appease Brexiters at the expense of reality. You can look at most things that undermined Brexit and it was done to appease hardcore Brexiters. If anything the argument for be made that the people who undermined Brexit the most were those who most loudly called for it.

Everyone with any sense argued that seeking Brexit agreements would be difficult and the EU wouldn't simply bend over and give us everything we wanted. Farage and Johnson sold the bullshit to the pubic that we could make ultimatums and the EU would be cowed into compliance.

The ambiguity is what farage can be challenged on, he made various specific claims about Brexit, both in terms of what he believed would happen and what he thought could happen. For example, Northern Ireland, the free market and the regulatory system, he has contradicted himself on all of these and could be held to account for it but isn't.

Remain were involved in scaremongering too but the reality has shown that the claims remain made were much closer to reality.

Fartage and BJ sold the idea that we would continue out trade relationship with the EU with no barriers and everyone would be happy in the EU to trade with the UK as before.

Essentially they expected everything carry on except we wouldn't be subject to EU laws or regulation and we paid nothing.

Another good example was to expect no hard border at Northern Ireland/Ireland.

The EU were quick and right to correct this misconceptions minutes after victory was claimed.

It was a con job from start to finish

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

How have I lied, for calling out a falsity pushed for years. Scotland did not vote to remain in the EU, the same way NI and Wales didnt, the same way England didnt vote to leave the EU... They voted on behalf of the UKs intention to leave or remain, to pretend that these stats meant these countries intention was to leave or remain is false.

Im not sure why your lying about Scottish independence vote either, I was there in 2014, living in Edinburgh (ish) and voted for independance (on behalf of someone).

I never heard any real argument that Scotland would have to leave the EU, until ******** Barrosso made his comments, and even then the argument was that Scotland would have to reapply to join, and adopt the euro, and he made the scare statement about Spain.

Most of the chatter (which was difficult as most Scots seemed to be afraid of discussing it from what I saw) was around control, economic freedom and national identity. I personally didnt want to vote and didnt feel I should vote on the future of a country i didnt intend to live in long term.

And BTW, this entire argument started because I disagreed and called out the falsehood AND then agreed with the 2nd part of his statement, so the question isnt why I keep disagreeing, its why there is so much hysteria over a disagreement, its tough to listen to grown men whine, and name calling strangers on the internet, but I suppose if that tactic is to keep others from disagreeing, which it absolutely has kept other posters away from engaging, then job done.

Do you feel like you contribute to an environment that allows all attitudes and political leanings feel comfortable enough to contribute? I think youd agree with me in that you dont, and you play your part in dog piling, hysteria, and keeping this place a relative echo chamber that over reacts to counter points.

No you didn't point that out at all, you're being a ***. It's not a falsehood. If your best argument is playing stupid semantic games then you have no argument.

You never heard any argument about Scotland using leaving the EU until you heard an argument about Scotland having to leave the EU. For **** sake again trying to dance around admitting you're wrong. So your DID hear an argument about Scotland leaving the EU. You should also have noticed that the leaving the EU argument was the big one being pushed in the final days and correlated with a swing towards remain when that became the major argument being pushed.

You haven't called out any falsehood, you've played stupid semantic games once again for the sake of creating an argument once again. FFS stop being a ***.

Simple yes or no, did the people in Scotland who voted in the Brexit referendum mostly vote for it against Brexit. No stupid dancing around, which way did the people of that region mostly vote.

Stop playing the victim Harry. It's tedious. You're not the victim, you're the instigator.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

Of course they can...

There are a number of things that undermined negotiations, even from the very off, selecting those who didnt vote leave, and wanted close ties with the EU, even backing a soft brexit or 2nd referendum in the team tasked with negotiating a deal was undermining negotiations from the off.

If Im opening a steakhouse, im not selecting a vegan activist to design my menu!

Before anything began, people who didn't want to leave, were charged with negotiating the best deal possible, who were motivated by not doing so with the possible intent that stalling and offering a bad deal would get what they want, made worse when the actual politicians who were motivated to get it done resigned because of the poor deal that was being agreed to. I mean thats the definition of undermining.

We can get into the debates and rebellious nature of both leave and remain politicians throughout, but there is no arguing that the position of the UK would have been stronger with a motivated, and comited to leave team at the helm.

Im not a brexiteer, or i should say i wasnt until the results came in, but even I can recognise the failings of those involved, and the undermining of the process. Brexit didnt embarrass the UK in 2016, actions taken between 2016 and 2020 very much did.

Notice the absence of any actual evidence of undermining in your first bit though, merely the assertion it happened.

You say a bad deal was offered, where is the evidence of that? Where is the evidence the deal Johnson offered was better? The steakhouse example is nonsense too. If you want to negotiate a new contract with a client, do you select someone who is on good terms with them or someone who has spent the last decade saying publicly what a **** client they are and how you be better off away from them?

You're working on the assumption that the remain negotiators actively sabotaged the deal yet provide no evidence of it. Evidence first, assertions after. Can you ping to specifically how remain supporters sabotaged the process? The biggest sabotage was by leave supporters. We had a deal that Johnson then stormed in and tore up before trying to use the Trump method of negotiation without the economic might to back it up. The deal we have now was because of leave sabotage.

 

[ncurd]

Guys remember Harry has claimed this before. Was asked to name one thing tthat could of been obtained as a benefit (not even obtained). Then said vaccines as something we did get and proceeded to completely **** the bed trying to pretend he knew what he was talking about when it was pointed the vaccines were obtained under EU law which we were still subject to at the time.

Guy hasn't got a ******* clue outside right wing talking points.

 

[dirty harry]

No you didn't point that out at all, you're being a ***. It's not a falsehood. If your best argument is playing stupid semantic games then you have no argument.

You never heard any argument about Scotland using leaving the EU until you heard an argument about Scotland having to leave the EU. For **** sake again trying to dance around admitting you're wrong. So your DID hear an argument about Scotland leaving the EU. You should also have noticed that the leaving the EU argument was the big one being pushed in the final days and correlated with a swing towards remain when that became the major argument being pushed.

You haven't called out any falsehood, you've played stupid semantic games once again for the sake of creating an argument once again. FFS stop being a ***.

Simple yes or no, did the people in Scotland who voted in the Brexit referendum mostly vote for it against Brexit. No stupid dancing around, which way did the people of that region mostly vote.

Stop playing the victim Harry. It's tedious. You're not the victim, you're the instigator.

Stop whining mate, its sad at this point, the insults make you look small and petty.

You get so emotional when disagreed with, I hope you dont act like this in the real world, I suspect you dont, so dont act like it here.

"It's well known that a major argument against Scottish independence was that they would they be outside the EU."

Look at what you wrote, this isnt true, the major arguments I set out above, late In to the campaign the argument there was a surge in Yes polling, showing they were ahead which led to that stupid 'Vow' from party leaders, and seemingly tipped it over the edge, alongside business and economic concerns, EU was a minor issue amongst everything I saw while there, so again you are wrong, you can hold your hands up its fine to be wrong.

What isnt fine, is the idea Scotland voted to remain in the EU, because it never, and 2014 wasnt a referendum that hinged on being in the EU. Slightly more Scots voted for the UK to remain in the EU, and slightly more Scots voted for Scotland to remain in the UK, to frame it the way people do is to be dishonest.

Once again, a disagreement has turned into this hysterical multi poster, one sided slagging match for no reason other than someone having the gall to disagree on this thread, you really hate those who disagree, but you shouldn't hate them to the degree you throw insults at strangers on a forum, and get so worked up.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

Stop whining mate, its sad at this point, the insults make you look small and petty.

You get so emotional when disagreed with, I hope you dont act like this in the real world, I suspect you dont, so dont act like it here.

"It's well known that a major argument against Scottish independence was that they would they be outside the EU."

Look at what you wrote, this isnt true, the major arguments I set out above, late In to the campaign the argument there was a surge in Yes polling, showing they were ahead which led to that stupid 'Vow' from party leaders, and seemingly tipped it over the edge, alongside business and economic concerns, EU was a minor issue amongst everything I saw while there, so again you are wrong, you can hold your hands up its fine to be wrong.

What isnt fine, is the idea Scotland voted to remain in the EU, because it never, and 2014 wasnt a referendum that hinged on being in the EU. Slightly more Scots voted for the UK to remain in the EU, and slightly more Scots voted for Scotland to remain in the UK, to frame it the way people do is to be dishonest.

Once again, a disagreement has turned into this hysterical multi poster, one sided slagging match for no reason other than someone having the gall to disagree on this thread, you really hate those who disagree, but you shouldn't hate them to the degree you throw insults at strangers on a forum, and get so worked up.

"Stop whining" from Mr "aw help help in being oppressed". Bloody hell.

No once again being a hypocritical, contrarian *** had turned into you being called out for it and you desperately trying to play the victim.

We don't get emotional at being disagreed with, it's you being a lying hypocrite that rubs people up the wrong way. The fact you've been told this but still ignore it is very telling. You are the problem Harry, not everyone else.

But well done finally admitting that the Scots voted more to remain in the EU than leave. And it wasn't by a small margin either. EU referendum results by region: Scotland | Electoral Commission https://share.google/8z1XwQoMfMLcMna75

What was that you said about lying? You think 50% more voting to remain than leave in Scotland is small? This is why people tell you to **** off. You lie, constantly.

 

[dirty harry]

Notice the absence of any actual evidence of undermining in your first bit though, merely the assertion it happened.

You say a bad deal was offered, where is the evidence of that? Where is the evidence the deal Johnson offered was better? The steakhouse example is nonsense too. If you want to negotiate a new contract with a client, do you select someone who is on good terms with them or someone who has spent the last decade saying publicly what a **** client they are and how you be better off away from them?

You're working on the assumption that the remain negotiators actively sabotaged the deal yet provide no evidence of it. Evidence first, assertions after. Can you ping to specifically how remain supporters sabotaged the process? The biggest sabotage was by leave supporters. We had a deal that Johnson then stormed in and tore up before trying to use the Trump method of negotiation without the economic might to back it up. The deal we have now was because of leave sabotage.

You seemed to have fallen into a realm of brexit voters bad regardless of whats happened.

When negotiators like Hammond, Gauke and Robbins all favour the idea of softer versions of a brexit, and delays being essential for british MPs to consider other options, and leave voting politicians are quitting because of the concerns of the negotiations, then whether you blame Brexit bad or not, that is 100% Farages argument on undermining things, and the public largely agreed with this in the Brexit focused referendum for Johnson.

You can complain about it, but you cant not accept it.

If you want to use your analogy, there would be little point heading into those negotiations, with part of your board whispering I still love you to the opposing business, and trying to delay the process hoping for a reversal.

Im not arguing in favour of Brexit here, it was a **** show of our own making.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Stop whining mate, its sad at this point

Irony overload

 

[dirty harry]

"Stop whining" from Mr "aw help help in being oppressed". Bloody hell.

No once again being a hypocritical, contrarian *** had turned into you being called out for it and you desperately trying to play the victim.

We don't get emotional at being disagreed with, it's you being a lying hypocrite that rubs people up the wrong way. The fact you've been told this but still ignore it is very telling. You are the problem Harry, not everyone else.

But well done finally admitting that the Scots voted more to remain in the EU than leave. And it wasn't by a small margin either. EU referendum results by region: Scotland | Electoral Commission https://share.google/8z1XwQoMfMLcMna75

What was that you said about lying? You think 50% more voting to remain than leave in Scotland is small? This is why people tell you to **** off. You lie, constantly.

Of course it was small, 600k more people voted remain to leave the EU, 400k more voted to remain in the UK than leave it, in favt more people voted to remain in the UK than in the EU 2 years later.

These numbers are pretty comparable no?

Again its like your googling things as you go, the numbers have been published for a decade!

So in 2014 2 million people voted for scotland to remain in the UK, then 2 years later 1.6million voted for the UK to remain in the EU. Noone voted for Scotland to remain in the EU, it was minor in the referendum, and wasnt an option 2 years later.

Just be good faith, your being angry and trying so hard to win your not understanding, im hoping not through tear filled eyes smashing your keyboard.

PS you whining about me playing victim is making you look even worse, just discuss or debate, if your not capable continue to insult and whine

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

You seemed to have fallen into a realm of brexit voters bad regardless of whats happened.

When negotiators like Hammond, Gauke and Robbins all favour the idea of softer versions of a brexit, and delays being essential for british MPs to consider other options, and leave voting politicians are quitting because of the concerns of the negotiations, then whether you blame Brexit bad or not, that is 100% Farages argument on undermining things, and the public largely agreed with this in the Brexit focused referendum for Johnson.

You can complain about it, but you cant not accept it.

If you want to use your analogy, there would be little point heading into those negotiations, with part of your board whispering I still love you to the opposing business, and trying to delay the process hoping for a reversal.

Im not arguing in favour of Brexit here, it was a **** show of our own making.

A soft Brexit was literally what most Brexiters, including farage, campaigned on... How often did we hear about a Norway model?