Actually, they did. Try facing up to it. Try respecting it.
Constituency Labour Party.
Seeing as you can’t point to where Brexiters get the information to doubt that Remain’s statistics were good, I don’t think they did.
Causes without basis in fact do not get my respect. Much like Trump.
There are many people who don’t doubt that brexit may cause a downturn in the economy, they honestly and truthfully believe it is worth short-medium term pain in order to regain full control of their country.
That’s a perfectly reasonable position to take and doesn’t require clinging to economic predicitions…which…need I remind anyone, come from the same people that failed to predict the 2007/8 crash…and the one before that…and the one before that…and the one before that…etc.
And if they think they’re getting more control than what we already have under the EU, on what basis do they believe this? I’ve asked this before and the responses assume all kinds of false things about how the EU works, the UK’s interaction with it, and how international relations actually work.
And anyway, that wasn’t the Leave claim in the campaign. Their mantra was that it’s all ‘scaremongering’, but now you’re revising history to claim they actually agreed with the Remain claims?
I find that British weather forecasts aren’t the most reliable, but when they say take an umbrella, I take an umbrella.
The idea that because experts can get it wrong allows laymen to claim any kind of hare-brained scheme will work is akin to creationists insisting they’re right because scientists sometimes get their theories disproven and they change their findings.
They were self-evidently false. I mean, WW3? Global financial collapse? Simply for voting for Brexit. It was seen as bullshit then and been shown to be bullshit since.
Since you put such faith in economic predictions, tell me, which of the pre-Brexit referendum economic forecasts by Remain have been correct? The Pound has gone down a bit, but the economy’s up, unemployment is down, etc etc.
May accusing Brussels of influencing the election.
Jesus fucking Christ. This is the brave new world of Brexit?
This is all part of setting out a position and working towards a deal is it?
Cite, then? Not a Mail or Express article, but the words that come from the mouth of a prominent Remainer.
What Cameron said in his speech on the UK’s strength and security was this:
At no point did Cameron ever mention WW3 or even war in Europe. The only person to mention WW3 was Boris Johnson when he said in response to Cameron’s speech: “No, I don’t believe that leaving the EU would cause World War Three to break out on the European continent.”
UK does well under economic regime it wants to leave. News at 11.
In the immediate aftermath of the Brexit vote the stock markets did indeed collapse as was warned. However Cameron resigned and the government abandoned the plan to trigger article 50 immediately.
I cannot find anyone saying anywhere that a global meltdown would result. Even the most pessimistic remain campaigner would be hard pushed to argue a global meltdown would occur. The closest I could find to this was the OECD saying that Britain voting to leave the EU would have a negative impact on the global economy.
Project Fear in action.
I can’t help but admire the acknowledgment that Brexit is an inherently risky proposition which poses grave threats to jobs, prosperity and economic fairness.
The Tories biggest concern over this election is that people can see it’s a done deal and won’t turn out, which could reduce their majority. So they’re pumping up the fear by a) pretending that a c. 18% poll lead might somehow evaporate; b) contrasting May as the strong alternative to weak Corbyn; c) casting Brussels as teh external enemy poised to savage poor innocent Britain unless a saviour can be found. All this to get people to the voting booths in those key marginals.
It’s fairly obvious populist rhetoric: our country could be great, but is threatened by enemies within and without. Only I, the strong leader, can win victory for you the people and restore us to greatness. Help me help you by giving me more power.
The idea that Brussels is trying to sabotage the election, or undermine May personally, rather than just getting on with the normal process of Brexit - which, let’s remember, has a two year timetable ticking away, election or no election - is in one sense laughable and in another very effective Tory propaganda.
Oh, Quartz, I found this too: http://www.strongerin.co.uk/monetary_policy_committee_warns_possibility_of_eu_exit_is_already_damaging_britain_s_economy#gGZHLtP9R1OPbGBC.97
Describing something as “possibly” a risk to global financial markets is not the same as saying “global meltdown to stock markets would inevitably result”. “Possibly” doesn’t mean “inevitably”, and “risk” does not equate to “meltdown”.
But sure, believe all the Leaver strawmen.
I guess it’ll be as much control as an independent sovereign nation can have, Australia? Canada? New Zealand? that sort of thing.
Unlike you I don’t claim to speak for brexiters or Remainers and don’t lump them all under a single pejorative banner, however, yes, it was a common enough belief and expressed often enough for it to seem like something other than an anomaly. Of course, with it being a moderate, nuanced and balanced opinion it was hardly likely ever to set the media on fire. The more explosive and extreme views (on each side) were always (and still are) more telegenic and media-friendly.
The weather forecasts are not accurate more than a few days in advance. Economic projections are the equivalent of predicting an afternoon shower on July 13th 2018.
I note your desperate need to cast Brexiters in the loony creationist camp and us in the rational scientist camp, tempting…but nowhere near an accurate analogy. No-one knows how the E.U. will turn out and no-one knows how Brexit will turn out. Anyone who sells you a certainty either way is lying. Indeed, the E.U. is probably the antithesis of science as it is ideologically driven and I’m not convinced those in charge are willing to change their approach when things go wrong.
More Project Fear:
Imagine the press misrepresenting one side’s negotiating position. Oh my!
The negotiation guidelines don’t materially differ from the draft guidelines we saw last month. The only thing that’s changed is that the EU are talking up the size of the bill for ongoing commitments. This is what negotiators do when they think the person on the other side of the table is weak.
What threats? Which officials? If this is a reference to the EU position that Britain won’t have as good a deal outside the EU as it has inside, this has been the position since before June last year. It is not a threat, it’s an explanation of what the phrase"no longer a member of the EU" means.
They’re all out to get me. I mean us. I mean me.
Aside from the not-so-subtle threats about security co-operation being contingent on them playing ball.
See how nice we are? Unlike those bastards…
Our enemies lurk in the shadows. Who can save us in hour of need?
Ah, it’s you. Funny that, in the middle of an election and everything.
Remember this thing which we’ve always said will be fine? Well actually it’s incredibly risky and dangerous.
Question: if Brussels pointing out that Brexit means Brexit is meant to demonstrate bad faith, what is it when May accuses unnamed EU officials and politicians of working to stop Britain from prospering?
Actually, I didn’t believe either side.
Well, you believed Leave’s strawmen about WW3 and about global economic meltdown?
Do you concede that these were not Remain claims at all?
See, I used to think like that. But as every discussion I have with Brexiters seems to devolve into what we’ve seen here (i.e. baseless claims not defended, subject changes, then naive optimism, then told to shut up and accept the will of the people at some point), I have become unable to let that conclusion survive any longer.
Fact is, the only sensible way to approach these things is to change something only when it’s broken, and only fix the part that’s broken, and do that when you know your endeavour will fix that problem.
Leave has not demonstrated that. Even if they won with 99% of the vote, if no Brexiter can answer how Brexit will fix the EU’s problems, or the UK’s problems (which they haven’t), then this should not be happening.
Otherwise, we’re just going through a decade of utter misery for nothing.
Additional: I realise I keep lumping Quartz here with Brexiters even though he claims to be a Remainer, but presently he is exhibiting all the attitudes of a Brexiter, and I keep forgetting he’s apparently not.
No, those were Remain’s.
klaxon disproven above.
Fwiw, I didn’t vote Brexit either.
This crazy new paradigm where blue/red binary choices now longer work …
Now it’s a Leave/Remain split rather than party political. Scottish politics split somewhat similarly after the indyref. I can’t say I’m pleased that various forms of nationalism are dominating our political landscapes at the moment - it rarely ends well.