Brexit-bored Brits back to bashing the bishop after ballot box blues British people are now bored of Brexit and have returned to using the Internet for what it was made for – pornography. Although the country has been thrown into chaos, with the Prime Minister announcing his resignation and refusal to clean up the mess left behind after Thursday’s EU referendum result, normality has been …
If you search for "Dumb blonde fucks 15 million people at once" on pornhub, you get a (thankfully clothed) video of BoJo.
Apparently.
I'm averse to doing any further research on BoJo's potential sex tapes, and he's got plenty of sex scandals going around, being a tory and all that.
"The only people who really know what is being voted for are the ones who get voted in."
The BREXIT campaign appears to be an exception. Many Leave campaigners touted aims that conflicted with their fellow campaigners - as well as against reality. It is unlikely that their most fervent supporters will be happy with the eventual compromises - and there will still be hard left/right groups touting populist paths to Hell.
Modern politics have become the playground of single issue lobbyists with a dog whistle. Unfortunately they have often been co-opted to draft new laws. Finding that the practical nuances and trade-offs are difficult - they use the short-cut of "the end justifies the means".
A chastened Boris's aim of becoming PM is now a poisoned chalice of his own brewing - but he cannot resist rolling the dice again rather than abandoning his ambitions. Ditto Corbyn.
The only people who really know what is being voted for are the ones who get voted in.
Kind'a. Probably applied to the IN campaign.
The LEAVE campaign had clearly contradicting claims, fraudulent numbers, impossible to achieve promises. That is normal for a campaign based on populism alone. It has kept characters like Berlusconi and Jirinovski afloat for many years. In the past it has brought us such leading lights of democracy like Peron, Mussolini and Hitler. It is well known to work, provided that you DISBAND democracy after you win so you do not have to face the consequences of the fact that your campaign was based on a fraud. Hmm... interesting thought...
It's absolutely certain that what they say you are going to vote for is not going to be the same thing as what you get after you have voted.
I think that anyone who isn’t 17 years old and terminally stupid gets that.
IN the end the question was 'do you want an uncertain future inside, or an uncertain future outside the EU with less, or more control over the politicians who will, after they have exhausted every other alternative, finally hit upon if not the right thing, something that doesn't result in the total destruction of our nation'?
After due consideration, looking at the complete and utter mess the EU has made of trade deals with anyone but itself, the Euro disaster, the Debt and banking disaster, the migrant disaster, people decided that actually perhaps we were better off alone. The lifeboat may be smaller, but it isn’t sinking.
It was a finely balanced decision, taken with far less data than necessary to make an informed decision either way. Welcome to the real world. The point is that Euroscepticism had reached a point at which the conflict was more damaging than the resolution would be, either way.
So a binary decision had to be taken. The status quo was unstable. Arguing over whether it was the 'right' or 'wrong' decision is in the end pointless. No one knows. Democracy, British style was developed not to give direction of the country to its peole, but to ensure that whichever set of oligarchs had the reins, did not have absolute power. Because getting out from under people who have absolute power is bloody revolution, beheaded kings, destruction of property, and and decades of bitterness that last longer then the memory of what the quarrel was all about.
It was agreed that in the end, its less a matter of who wins, than minimising the destruction of a bloody conflict, and to this end we had, a parliamentary democracy. Until we (almost) handed that power to Brussels.
AS it is, it will be a little bloody, and will result in some destruction of wealth.
But it is a reassertion of the fundamental principle of British democracy, that you can't ignore the feelings of the little people forever, even if they are totally wrong about everything, they still need to be listened to. Or they will kick you in the nuts. After all, they have very little to lose. Except the feeling that the place they were born, and the community they were born in, belongs to them.
"I think that anyone who isn’t 17 years old and terminally stupid gets that."
It appears that many people voted, or even campaigned, for Leave on the "safe" assumption that it would merely register their protest about the Government - without actually causing us to leave the EU.
The march against the Iraq war showed that public opinion, like the EU referendum. is not binding on Parliament. Our democracy is based on an elected Parliament taking the decisions. The populace can, in theory, express their displeasure at the next General Election. However it is not usual for a Government to revoke a previous party's acts in any substantial way.
The "English" way has traditionally been compromise - with the gradual ceding of power by the ruling elite when it looked like bloody revolution may be imminent.
Proper Proportional Representation like STV may be the next step to heal the current rifts. The major parties can then fragment into their warring factions - and assemble coalition governments that reflect a broad consensus. There are still dangers of minor extreme parties influencing the balance of power - but only if a PM is determined to be in power at any cost.
There may be MILLIONS, but the BBC only managed to find one brain dead woman who would admit it; and even then she thought she was only doing what her SON wanted her to do.
Actually, "Brain dead" is too polite.
Come on everyone, tune in to BREATHE FM... Breathe IN....... Breathe OUT..... Breathe IN..... Breathe out...
(Millions suffocated the last time they went off air).
"90% of the people who voted had no clue what they are voting for and what are the consequences so they looked them up the day AFTER they voted."
That's not true. The correct number is 100%*, and even since looking up the information the day after, the figure is still 100%.
The politicians and leaders don't know, the EU leaders don't know. Nobody knows, article 50 hasn't been declared and no formal negotiations have happened.
*100% with the possible exception of some Delorean/flux capacitor owners.
It,s absolutely certain that what they say you are going to vote for is not going to be the same thing as what you get after you have voted.
I thought that voting leave meant that we'd get shafted by a big dumb blond .... oh I see what you mean.
My impression as a yank with no real investment in the outcome is that a lot of those campaigning for Leave did so under the assumption it would fail. They wanted to burnish their credentials as someone who wants change from the status quo, but many probably didn't actually want to Leave. Since Leave actually won, a lot of them are running and hiding from their previous statements, because they don't want to be associated with the mess that follows.
Regardless of the long term success or failure of leaving the EU, there will obviously be some suffering in the short run which the Leave campaigners have now realized they will be on the hook for. So once it becomes apparent how the UK leaves the EU, they'll make sure to position themselves in a way that says "no, that was wrong, if you had done it how I said everything would be roses". The problem is they can't yet say how they want it to be done because they have to know how it will be done so they can be sure they say something different!
I am very intrigued by the possibility that the UK won't leave at all. You still have to provide Section 50 notice to the EU, and who exactly is going to do that? Will you put in a new PM who will do it on his own, or will it require assent from Parliament? If the latter, well that's a problem since 2/3 of them don't want to leave - perhaps more now that some of the Leavers who only staked it out as a political position but didn't want to actually leave have been served a dose of reality. What you will need is a PM for a day who can serve Section 50 notice and then resign the next day, and conveniently take the blame for the fallout from his successor. But no one wants to be the fall guy for that. You lot really have inherited yourselves a mess... It is rather like the US involvement in Iraq where we planned right up to taking out Saddam but not for what would happen after.
"My impression as a yank with no real investment in the outcome is that a lot of those campaigning for Leave did so under the assumption it would fail."
As a Brit with a lot invested in the outcome, my impression is that you have hit all the main nails squarely on the head. You have produced and excellent summation of the current situation and obviously have a much better grasp of UK politics and Parliamentary procedure than a great number of UK voters. Now, it only you can sort out Trump and Clinton we'll all eventually be happy :-)
"Damn, that is a good deal for one day's work! Is there any requirement that the PM be a UK citizen? If not, I'd like to throw my name in the hat for consideration."
You need to move here, become entitled to vote and that's pretty much it. It might be surprising for someone not actually a citizen to become an MP and then PM. With the oath ceremony, it might not be possible to swear the oath with validity if not a citizen. Other than winning a seat as an MP and then winning a party leadership election, (I've already posted elsewhere how and why a non-MP, non party leader could become PM)
Unlike the USA, there a no rules on where you are born precluding someone becoming Prime Minister. The Duke of Wellington was PM and he was born in Ireland when it was a foreign country. Bonar Law was born in Canada (although I think it was still a colony then) Boris Johnson was born in New York although I doubt he'll ever be PM, even when he likely does bounce back after the EU exit.
Although TBH, the best way to increase the cances of becoming PM is to have rich, influential parents, go to Harrow or Eton schools followed by Oxford (or Cambridge at a push) university. Anything less than that reduces the chances to less than 35% of winning the job.
"90% of the people who voted had no clue what they are voting for and what are the consequences so they looked them up the day AFTER they voted."
Which makes absolutely no sense so is most likely complete bullshit. It's much more likely people who voted in because they have little concept of the EU and just what to keep things as is; which is fine, looking up what they've just been voted out of. There's also lots of kids that would want to lookup what they've been voted out of for their tumbler posts.
But why let common sense get in the way of whinging.
"netizens are far more interested in grumble flicks than finding out who might be the next leader of the country."
Well to be fair, vote for a prime minister and it just seems the usual wobble between left and right, with one trying to revoke or blame the previous parties actions and look after their mates, until the backlash when everyone gets tittsed off with them and it swings back. Where then the new party get in and spend all their time trying to bring back what was revoked, nix the party who were before thems actions and blame them for everything else and look after their mates, until of course everyone gets pissed off with that and then what happens is everyone votes in the other side, who immediately start tryin to bring back what was nixed by the prior party.....
Frankly feel like the EU referendum was the first significant vote this country (not including the Scots) referrendum was allowed to have that may have made a difference to our future. Who is prime minister thats just chosing between lizards.
It's Thursday isn't it? This is the day that Brexit Boris Johnson and Theresa Stasi May announce they will run for the leadership! Brexit will rise again in the searches!
Older voters, mainly in England are Conservative voters, so Brexit voters are Conservative voters. So Boris will do a "tough negotiations on Brexit" stance, while Stasi May will do a "heal divided Britain" stance, trying to avoid mention of it.
By "divided Britain" she really means "divided Conservatives" with her on the losing side:
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-35616946
Nobody says "well Britain is divided between Labour and Conservatives, so we need to heal that division by having a few Labour ministers in our government". No, you only do that when you're on the losing side and can't say anything positive about your previous stance.
She'll have the Stasi behind her, I guess Boris will do some speeches aimed at getting the Stasi on his side too. I'm going to drink a beer for every time he says the word "security" and a beer for everytime Stasi May says the word "heal".
... maybe a scotch is she says the clique "set aside our differences"
Come now... Stop tarring us old codgers and fogeys with the same brush.
not all older Conservative voters voted for BREXIT. Some of the ... shall we say wiser amongst us voted to remain.
Personally, I hope that there will come a day of reckoning when we are up shit creek and the EU has us reeling/bent over a chair etc in the trade negociations that the pro BREXIT MP's will face de-selection before the next election. I wonder how many of the likes of Gove and even possibly Boris (please fellow Tories don't elect him as leader. anyone but Boris please.) get deselected by their party for leading us into oblivion. Interesting times ahead.
@"shall we say wiser amongst us voted to remain"
Good for you, run for election and explain your ideas to the dumb codgers not as smart as you.
@"I wonder how many of the likes of Gove and even possibly Boris (please fellow Tories don't elect him as leader. anyone but Boris please.) get deselected by their party for leading us into oblivion"
I think, given the nature of the vote, the Cons had better get in line with their voters before their voters deselect them.
It's not whether the Conservatives MPs vote for Boris, its whether the country would. But we just did and he won by a majority.
Yes, the older voters swung the balance. Those old folks living off pensions don't care about the economy because they are mostly insulated from it. They don't care about their children and grandchildren either.
And just to make it extra generous of them, many won't live to the end of the article 50 negotiations either.
This post has been deleted by its author
I do wonder what sort of person sits down at their computer, opens up google, and searches for "porn".
Nothing specific, just plain old porn. They apparently don't care what they see as long as there's nekkid people somehow involved.
Mines the one with the "highly specialised literature" in the pocket >>>>>>>>>>
" They apparently don't care what they see as long as there's nekkid people somehow involved."
Doesn't necessarily involve naked people these days - and probably never has.
The better term is possibly "fetish". The word "porn" these days is more likely to be attached to cars, houses, cakes, clothes. You name it - and someone somewhere wants to drool and get excited over pictures or descriptions of it.
The human animal has a strong instinct of curiosity. When allied with a resulting dopamine pleasure rush - the two reinforce each other.
'I do wonder what sort of person sits down at their computer, opens up google, and searches for "porn".'
Something that has always amused me is when I was analysing my website logs back in the late 1990s, it turned out someone had found their way to my website after putting "where can I download soft porn" into a search engine.
Yes, someone was searching on the internet for soft porn.
All of those words with the exception of 'porn' would have been on most of the pages of my site - so it's easy to see how it happened, though I'm not sure how many pages of results the visitor went through to find my site!
Of course that means tearing down the stinking corrupt edifice that was built for the aggrandisement of failed politicians and being content with our own local stinking corrupt edifice for some time, but after this they may actually listen to us.
I do not believe that it is possible to abstract away corruption that stinks. You just have to clean it up.
As for the actual notice, I'd wait until after the next general election, there are a lot of governments that will come under pressure from their own people for the same referendum that we have just had. Resolving the 'Brexit' quickly will do us no favours whatsoever especially with these elections to come from the major countries with EU discontent rising rapidly across populations.
Germany and France, 2017
Austria, Italy and Sweden, 2018
And the EU parliament itself in 2019.
When a major EU politician refers to the referendum result as a contagion ( Cheers Angela ) with other 'leaders' agreeing I fail to see how anyone can allow that level of disrespect to have any say over them.
We may or may not be better off out of the EU, but we will be better without the disgraceful attitude of EU politicians.
A few important details:
"Of course that means tearing down the stinking corrupt edifice that was built for the aggrandisement of failed politicians and being content with our own local stinking corrupt edifice for some time"
For decades, most measures proposed for making the EU corrupt edifice less corrupt were frontally opposed by the people in charge of your local corrupt edifice*. So, instead of acting locally first and electing a government intent on putting pressure on the EU to fix the issues, 'you'** chose to rage quit without anything remotely resembling a sane, informed debate on the consequences of the Brexit or its alternatives.
Germany and France, 2017...
That was far more probable before the Brexit referendum. Right now EU citizens -including UK citizens- can see more clearly the consequences of such a populist measure on their everyday lives. I don't think anybody is queuing up to organize a similar referendum, except those types whose contact with reality is mostly orthogonal, like Le Pen and their ilk.
When a major EU politician refers to the referendum result as a contagion...
...he/she is wrong. See the paragraph above.
But yes, the Brexit will set an example for the rest of Europe. A powerful negative example. Thanks for that!.
As for the actual notice, I'd wait until after the next general election...
The European commission has already stated that they themselves will invoke Article 50 if the British govt. drags its feet for too long, so as to minimize uncertainty and economic harm caused to the EU by the delays. So you can wait till hell freezes over, but in the end it won't matter, as others will take that decision for you.
Disclaimer: I think there is still hope for 'us'***, but lot of people will have to back-pedal and do a lot of hard work to undo the damage. It goes without saying that both British and Europeans are needed for this difficult task. And if they succeed, it may help bring about all those changes to the EU workings that most Europeans want.
Note*: Who have been blocking any proposed changes to the workings of the EU that would make it more democratic. E.g. tax havens in Europe (of which the UK owns several), a different method for electing the EC and many many more examples.
Note**: Here, when I say 'you', I mean the UK government, the UK political class, the UK media and the UK public.
Note***:'us' with a similar meaning to the above note, but replacing UK with the EU, of which the UK is still an important part.
"He might come over as a buffoon, but he knows a poisoned chalice when he sees one."
He's a sharp operator. The buffoon persona is exactly that. A persona, one of many. Once all the dust has settled and someone else takes the blame for the exit negotiations, he'll be back, front and centre, offering to "save" us again.
A Grauniad article recently summed up three choices for Boris over the leadership election. All three were deemed to come to the same conclusion - his ambitions would come to nothing - he would be finished.
Possibly he has decided to decline his BREXIT home-brewed poisoned chalice - in the hope it may enable him to live to fight another day.
Indeed, it's stupidity and the pols playing to the electorate.
In Brexit, there was the statement about 350M a week to the NHS.. the retirees jumped on it and ignored the rest. Immigration... a group jumped all over that. Etc....
Here in the States, Trump is playing the same game. Bring up a hot topic like illegals or terror and suddenly voters saying "yes, he's the Man" even though they may upchuck at the rest of the platform. Same for Hillary.
Pander to the lowest voter and you're a hit. Target one group with a simple solution to their issue and they will ignore the complex ones. We want simple answers.... or so the politicos tell us.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
