Cookie Notice

WE LOVE THE NATIONS OF EUROPE
However, this blog is a US service and this site uses cookies from Google to deliver its services and analyze traffic. Your IP address and user-agent are shared with Google along with performance and security metrics to ensure quality of service, generate usage statistics, and to detect and address abuse.

Monday, 21 January 2019

Ignore the roar of the public at your risk

The narcissistic Remoaners in Parliament who are deluded enough to believe that their own selfish views, their personal inflated opinions, trump the bellow of the people of Britain, 17.4 million voices crying LEAVE, are sowing the seeds of their own downfall. 

Yvette Cooper, who with her husband Ed Balls 'flipped' main residence three times solely out of greed, to maximise the expenses they troughed from our taxes, now wants to augment her Parliamentary stipend with a Leader's wedge. Her vacuous pledge to house a migrant in one of her several homes has come to naught; instead she is flipping the bird to the people of Britain with petty Parliamentary jiggery. Likewise Dominic Grieve, a man who loves himself so greatly that he cannot conceive that his opinion, contrary to that of 17.4m voters, should not prevail. So like some plague rat he labours in the dark to concoct Parliamentary shenanigans that will frustrate our leaving the EU.

They must be unaware that the public view is shifting. Leavers and Remainers. And that instead of appearing as Robin Hoods to the electorate, they are looking like Orcs. Everywhere it is becoming apparent that the people of Britain are becoming sick of the saboteurs, frustrated with the delay and uncertainty. All Grieve and Soubry and Cooper and their ilk are achieving is to strengthen public support for Theresa May.

Boris in his Monday telegraph column is firm in his view that "These feeble plots won't stop Brexit". More tellingly he observes
Did you see Question Time on Thursday, and hear the roar of audience approval for the suggestion that no deal might now be the best option? There is a sense in which the public are braver – and wiser – than their MPs.



Update
======
As Guido spotted, The Grauniad has hidden a bang-up-to-date ICM poll that makes 'No Deal' the most popular option with the public - supported by 28% of voters, against 24% who want a second referendum.

Of course remoaners will doubtless claim that as the polling was done last week, many of those polled will have died or changed their minds since, and that the pollsters only actually polled a couple of thousand random but representative Brits. Polls should ask every person in the UK their opinion, they will say, including babies and infants - with glugs, gurgles and random noise to be counted as support for a second referendum.

47 comments:

rapscallion said...

That huge roar of approval from the audience for Isabelle Oakshott's suggestion that we should walk away, that there should be No Deal heartened me hugely. It told me all I needed to know about the resolve of Britain's extraordinary people.

Would that our mendacious, craven MPs have an ounce of their courage and fortitude.

Dave_G said...


I too felt great cheer when I heard the audience response which settled my mind on the oft-manipulated 'public opinion' portrayed by our corrupt media.

It doesn't, however, alter my opinion on the politicians on-going treachery and my efforts to try to discern their modus operandi. That some politicians recognise the public concern and acknowledge that the 17.4m still have impetus is heartening.

Anonymous said...

What "roar"?

There isn't even any graffiti.

There are a few hundred paid thread-crawlers posting the same repetitive gibberish on the web, and a similar number who turn up to photo calls with Yaxley-Lennon etc. That's about it.

No, a roar is what was heard in Derry the other day, and it will get much, much louder I'm afraid.

Jack the dog said...

Via Tim Worstall I see that there are a number of petitions starting up to deselect Grieve and Soubry, and to ensure that Art 50 cannot be delayed or cancelled.

Sign them and share.

Anonymous said...

What it told you, rapscallion, is that it's easy to get fifty or so cretins gathered together in the same room, in a country of sixty-six million.

People cheer at darts or boxing matches FGS.

Billy Marlene said...

Just as reassuring was on This Week, following QT with Johnson (Alan) and Portillo quietly and civilly demolishing the duty remoaner (Heidi Allen).

Unlike Blair, Major, Heseltine et al, they have no axe to grind or ego to feed. They merely challenged the remoaner pitch of the day, in this case a second referendum, with simple logic. The look in Allen’s eyes showed defeat.

Johnson believes that Leave would win with an increased majority. Such is the public distaste for the EU negotiating strategy, the behaviour of our elected representatives and the daily diet of impending doom.

For me, the quote of last week:

Tim Martin at the Leave Means Leave rally ‘Try going into a pub in Sunderland and asking if it was right that they didn’t understand what they were voting for’.

Anonymous said...

So there are lots of ignorant, violent people in pubs, looking for an excuse to assault someone, Billy? No sh*t Sherlock eh?

And if you define "victory" as succeeding in eliciting a cheer, from a mob of cretins, then yes, the reasonable will often be "defeated".

As I have said before, the axiom of the dullard is "it's not what's said that matters, but who's sayin' it"

The wise search for the truth, the fools want stories to suit their prejudices. The Leave campaigns give them plenty, and at a suitably infantile level.

Mark said...

Anon. Yes, we know you didn't like the referendum results. Even the pro leave morons on this blog have worked that out by now.

Mark The Skint Sailor said...

That episode of QT was from Derby, who voted to leave 57.2% to 42.8%. I suspect that future episodes between now and March will come from Remain-majority areas, lest we get another pro-Brexit rabble taking over the audience.

But Dianne Abbott was right on one thing (and only one thing): if you rerun the referendum, you'll most likely get the same result.

I suspect more remainers would vote, but there would be a proportion of remainers with a sense of democracy that would vote leave to give the government a bloody nose over ignoring the result the first time round and being asked to vote a second time.

I also suspect that more leavers would be galvanised to vote as well.

I doubt it would go well for the government or the EU. The British don't like this sort of unfair and undemocratic shenanigans.

Anonymous said...

For the twentieth-or-so time Mark, I think that the UK should Leave the EU, as marginally advised by the 2016 referendum.

Raedwald frequently trumpets the in-his-view noble history of English law.

The common law aspects of our civil law are based on the concept of what is REASONABLE.

Is it *reasonable*, for the most extreme in their views among seventeen million - probably fewer than half of those who voted, since the result was marginal - to impose their wishes on sixty-six million people?

It cannot be, can it?

So it is entirely proper that MPs should do their jobs as the representatives - not the delegates as Burke rightly said - of ALL their constituents.

You won. Get over it.

right-writes said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
right-writes said...

Anonymous @09:46

"... the fools want stories to suit their prejudices."

That's very big of you...

It's not often that a troll like you points out your own failings.

Wessexboy said...

Anon - common law is non-statute law. Brexit will be achieved through Statute. Statutes will not always be viewed by all as reasonable.

KC said...

In the case of another referendum, never under estimate the possibility of a Jo Cox moment which in 2016 happened just as Leave were pulling ahead in the polls.

I put nothing past our establishment..

Oldrightie said...

The Londonderry car bomb's timing is similar to the presence of Colonel Alison McCourt strolling past the Skripals' house on the day they were poisoned. This deep state is not a myth. The EUSSR every bit part of it's unpleasant existence.
As for Brexit, MPs are well over 500 plus remain, self interest, EU lackeys. May likewise along with her Cabinet.The only problem that exists is their desperation to STOP us leaving this corrupt body of unelected shite. We should have left in 2016 or early 2017. By now we would be recovering from any issues aimed against the UK by the EU to sabotage our Nation for daring to leave.

Anonymous said...

I live in east aberdeenhire , and what has the eu done for us nothing!
only decimated the fishing industry

Mark said...

Anon. For the 20th time. Who are these "extremists" and how are they imposing their will? What precisely "cannot be". This is your narrative.

Raedwald said...

I've got Varadkar pinned for the car bomb, myself - and wouldn't be at all surprised to find the miltary explosive bears a recent chemical signature, certainly manufactured after 'the lads' put theirs beyond use.

But even if our intelligence services pin it on Varadkar, we'll never hear about it. *That's* the deep state bit.

Raedwald said...

Good to see the trolls rattled today. Well done, all!

Anonymous said...

WB. That's a straw man.

I was addressing Raedwald's oft-repeated but actually fallacious point, that the ancient common law *traditions* of England would determine what "free Englishmen" would accept as Acts of Parliament.

Yes, they are often unreasonable, and it is partly why governments get voted out. If there were no possibility of it happening, then there would be no point in my posting, would there?

Fine, Mark, if you think that markedly fewer than seventeen million people out of sixty-six million, probably significantly fewer than the Remain vote, imposing a long-term, materially-damaging future on all those people is reasonable, then that is for you. Other people are entitled to their opinion as to whether you are mad or not on that basis.

Many people voted leave because they were reassured by the lies of Hannan, Paterson etc., that the UK would continue in the Single Market, and that there would be no catastrophic rupture.

The latter, lying low-life now say that they want exactly that.

Raedwald said...

I was addressing Raedwald's oft-repeated but actually fallacious point, that the ancient common law *traditions* of England would determine what "free Englishmen" would accept as Acts of Parliament.

In your imagination, Troll. Go on, one quotation from one referenced post.

Fine, Mark, if you think that markedly fewer than seventeen million people out of sixty-six million, probably significantly fewer than the Remain vote, imposing a long-term, materially-damaging future on all those people is reasonable, then that is for you. Other people are entitled to their opinion as to whether you are mad or not on that basis.

You're a mendacious little toerag, aren't you? After that particular lie has been killed at least half a dozen times you still repeat it. Next time, comment delation without notice.

Many people voted leave because they were reassured by the lies of Hannan, Paterson etc., that the UK would continue in the Single Market, and that there would be no catastrophic rupture.

What's becoming ever clearer is that it's not Leave lies that deceived the public bur Remoaner lies, which you repeat and repeat and repeat - leaving no-one in any doubt what you are and what you do.

Mark said...

Anon. (sigh). Fine. If you know how leave voters thought, if you can divide them as suits your narrative. If you want to brand an unspecified number as unthinking morons. If you then want to think that these morons are somehow in control. Etc, etc.

Think of me what you will. Think I'm mad by all means (although I have a collection of shrunken heads that would beg to differ).

BTW we Neanderthal leavers don't use strawmen, we use wicker men.

If Carlsberg did sore losers!

John Dub said...

Jesus this Anon troll is a small minded wanker.

Begone!!

Dave_G said...


Anon has classified a majority of voters as 'deplorables' - and look what that got Hillary for doing so.

Yes, keep it up Anon - you will be a victim of your own stupidity, like she was.

Budgie said...

The Anon troll is making the same mistake as the establishment. He thinks he knows what we think and why, and with no self-awareness is keen to tell us. He is unaware that a lack of defence for his corrupt EU empire, instead of just attacking us, rather undermines his position.

Then he whittles our numbers down: pensioners - they don't count because they'll soon be dead; the followers of Yaxley-Lennon don't count anyway; many of us are thick - so shouldn't have had a vote; angry people obviously don't count; the rest were duped so they don't count either. And despite both campaigns telling us that Leave meant leaving the EU treaties, that doesn't count - just because Anon says so.

There, he has satisfied himself that the vote to Leave the EU treaties was really, actually, definitely, lower than Remain's, and didn't mean actually, really leaving the EU. He has too easily convinced himself how clever he is.

Anonymous said...

As per usual form, Anon (the troll) somehow arrives at a narrative that, in the run-up
to the referendum Leavers were influenced by Hannan, Paterson etc. but strangely not by
pro-EU politicians, bankers, corporates, presidents, university professors, international currency
speculators etc.

How did such feeble-minded creatures so easily fall prey to one message and not the other.

Please don't ban him/her, Raedwald - he/she provides much light-hearted relief.

Anonymous said...

Did Hannan say "no one is thinking of leaving the Single Market" or not?

Did Paterson say, that moving to the EEA would be a logical first step, in the long process of disengagement from the EU or not?

All that I am claiming is that they did, and that this likely influenced some cautious people to vote Leave, who otherwise would not have done.

Nothing else.

No one here has produced any evidence whatsoever, that of the 17.4 million Leave voters, at least 96% of them want No Deal, which is what it would need to make them a majority of those who voted, assuming that nothing else has changed since the vote.

That's hardly outrageous, is it?

Raedwald said...

Anon, I accept your novel and innovative maths system. But it doesn't do you any favours.

You see, it means 28% of the Remain vote of 16m are actually in favour of No Deal - and if we add their vote to the 17.4m Leave voters, we have an overwhelming national majority for leaving on the 29th March.

It also means that 28% of those registered to vote but didn't do so are also in favour of Leaving without a deal - that's 28% of 11m voters, which makes Leave's total unassailable.

Anonymous said...

Just a suggestion in the spirit of compromise;
Offer the 2nd referendum 5 to 10 years after we have fully left.
Reasons being, Voting would be based on reality not the speculation we have now. Could revert to a simple binary question. Demographics would be further changed together with the Political and economic landscape (should the EU even still exist by then). Enough time to let the dust settle and the rules of engagement be squared.
I had to wait 40 years to have my say, surely complaining millenials wait 5 years!
I am not anonymous of troll variety.

Mark said...

I don't know about anybody else here but I decided I wanted to leave 20 odd years ago.Just never thought I'd get the chance of a referendum (thanks miscalculating, remainer establishment)

For me the 2016 campaign made no difference. The remain "campaign" since, I strongly suspect, has reinforced leave sentiment.

Billy Marlene said...

Absolutely, Mark.

This wasn’t a vote for the best pop record of 2016. The public did not need to be convinced or talked around by either campaign. Beliefs have been long held.

The only thing these campaigns did were to reassure me, my family and a good few friends, that we had made the right decision.

Anonymous said...

I think that a reasonable person would say, that a paltry 28% of the electorate - never mind of the total people - is hardly "most popular", but rather, "least unpopular".

The country is in a fractured, confused, utter mess.

Which is ideal, if you want to divide-and-rule, the stock-in-trade of the Right.

Span Ows said...

As per Mark and Marlene, I too (and most people that I know who voted Leave) knew before the turn of the Century (by Maastricht really).

Budgie said...

News just in: excitable Remain troll thinks Leave means stay. In other news: Anon troll believes Referendum "unreliable" but polls spot on; bears shitting in the woods means woods now shit-free; and Ian Paisley was a catholic all along, unlike the Pope.

Anonymous said...

Span.

Let me define a Straw Man for you.

It is when someone addresses not the matter which another raises, but instead asserts, usually groundlessly, that they were implying something else - generally rather silly - and takes issue with that instead, because it is more easily refuted.

It is one of the least impressive debating devices that there is, and the classic refuge of the cynical dullard.

I have never claimed that Leave voters did not know why they were voting Leave nor what they wanted from that.

Maybe you and the rest of your troupe could address what I actually said instead?

Wessexboy said...

Yes, like Span Ows, Mark, Billy, I knew I wanted out. In fact this was my 'people's vote' as I made a mistake in the first one.
As for 'stock-in-trade of the Right - what about the fact that most non-metropolitan Labour voters want out too? Or should they not qualify for a vote?
A fractured, confused mess, yes. Just like both major political parties. Let's have a little more direct and also local democracy.

Anonymous said...

WB, you'll never get your mob rule, not after this utter porridge, and we've had People's Courts before.

They didn't work very well, all that nailing people to crosses, and then later the Ducking Stool.

I don't think that any conceivable Parliament will bring them back, so sorry.

But, mainly, see my last comment.

Mark said...

"Let me define a Straw Man for you".

Let's have a little more direct and also local democracy = "mob rule" - "we've had People's Courts before" - "nailing people to crosses, and then later the Ducking Stool".

Hell's teeth man, how much longer are you going to keep this up!

Anonymous said...

I'm not charging for this Mark.

Show some gratitude.

Sebastian Weetabix said...

But are you being paid?

Sobers said...

Like others I realised the EU was a crock of sh*te in the late 80s when the whole ERM and currency alignment thing was starting up, and the Maastricht Treaty in '92 put the tin lid on it for me. I knew the moment the vote was announced which way my X was going, as I suspect did most others who voted Leave. We've had no mainstream party to give our votes to for 30 odd years since Labour went pro-EEC (as it then was) in the mid 80s, so thats why the Establishment is so surprised - they had ignored a massive proportion of the electorates opinion on the EU for so long they'd forgotten those people existed.

Span Ows said...

Anon 20:07, genuinely funny. Nice one.
Anon 18:03, you address your comment to me incorrectly I think: I was just giving an anecdote of my experience in reply to Mark and Billy.

On a lighter note, not much change to May's WA today so not many more votes would go her way if it were voted on.

Sgt 73rd Regt said...

Wow, Anon troll really is a knob end isn't he!! I have been trying to follow Brexit from afar (Australia) and have found Raedwald's posts and most of the comments very informative.

I still can't fully grasp what is going on other than the fact that the majority of your politicians (along with your "elites") are doing everything in their power to defeat the will of the people as as voiced in the 2016 referendum. I thought that our politicians were a bunch of two faced liars only interested in their perks and staying elected but they are paragons of virtue and honesty compared to what I am seeing day by day in the UK.

I can only offer my heartfelt hope that the UK can successfully leave the EU and once again make it's own way in the world, free of the shackles of Brussels, (Some good news for you, Australia is currently negotiating a free trade agreement with the UK in anticipation of you leaving the EU).

Anonymous said...

So the Guardian "hides" news by publishing it then, Raed?

You kindly demonstrate that with your link. Thanks.

Polly Toynbee repeats the findings today.

Andrew Douglas said...

Is treason still a crime in this country? If so, why aren’t Rudd, Rudd, Grieve, Soubry, Clarke, Ummana, Blair, Major, Heseltine etc being locked up?

Anonymous said...

Andrew, it is arguably.

The reason, that none of the above have faced any charges is, because they have not betrayed the UK to an enemy. They merely want a positive relationship, with twenty-seven countries, with which this one presently has a solemn, sincere Treaty of friendship.

On the other hand, those working for unaccountable right-wing US interests might well meet that definition.

Those financed by Robert Mercer etc., that is.

They will be found out in due course.

Anonymous said...

PS. Here's one:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/22/owen-paterson-trips-personal-thinktank-hard-brexit