The Irony Thread

TheBigBean

kingstongraham said:

coopster_the_1st said:

I wonder who Russia are supporting in the upcoming Lib Dem leadership election

Maybe the Russians hacked their polling before the last election and told them that "Stop Brexit without a second ref" was a good idea. More likely they were just inept though.

Perhaps the Lib Dem leadership are keen readers of this forum, and decided it was an excellent policy.

kingstongraham

TheBigBean said:

kingstongraham said:

coopster_the_1st said:

I wonder who Russia are supporting in the upcoming Lib Dem leadership election

Maybe the Russians hacked their polling before the last election and told them that "Stop Brexit without a second ref" was a good idea. More likely they were just inept though.

Perhaps the Lib Dem leadership are keen readers of this forum, and decided it was an excellent policy.

If I remember correctly, I think that would have been a fairly small minority view even here among remoaner central.

TheBigBean

kingstongraham said:

TheBigBean said:

kingstongraham said:

coopster_the_1st said:

I wonder who Russia are supporting in the upcoming Lib Dem leadership election

Maybe the Russians hacked their polling before the last election and told them that "Stop Brexit without a second ref" was a good idea. More likely they were just inept though.

Perhaps the Lib Dem leadership are keen readers of this forum, and decided it was an excellent policy.

If I remember correctly, I think that would have been a fairly small minority view even here among remoaner central.

Perhaps you're right. I think the majority favoured BRINO which is a materially different standpoint of course.

rick_chasey

TheBigBean said:

kingstongraham said:

TheBigBean said:

kingstongraham said:

coopster_the_1st said:

I wonder who Russia are supporting in the upcoming Lib Dem leadership election

Maybe the Russians hacked their polling before the last election and told them that "Stop Brexit without a second ref" was a good idea. More likely they were just inept though.

Perhaps the Lib Dem leadership are keen readers of this forum, and decided it was an excellent policy.

If I remember correctly, I think that would have been a fairly small minority view even here among remoaner central.

Perhaps you're right. I think the majority favoured BRINO which is a materially different standpoint of course.

I said it on here a long time ago, that the best option surely was to negotiate a BRINO that gave them the option someway down the line to gradually reduce the integration.

So you're involved in an ongoing negotiation, but working backwards from BRINO.

So it satisfies the criterium of the referendum, avoids any dramatic episodes like risk of no dealm, as a result of the ref, and yet allows the UK over time to actually work out what it wants to do outside of the EU>

kingstongraham

Noone really wanted a no-deal though. Which brings us back on topic.

coopster_the_1st

kingstongraham said:

Noone really wanted a no-deal though. Which brings us back on topic.

Wrong. No-deal is always better than a bad deal

surrey_commuter

rick_chasey said:

TheBigBean said:

kingstongraham said:

TheBigBean said:

kingstongraham said:

coopster_the_1st said:

I wonder who Russia are supporting in the upcoming Lib Dem leadership election

Maybe the Russians hacked their polling before the last election and told them that "Stop Brexit without a second ref" was a good idea. More likely they were just inept though.

Perhaps the Lib Dem leadership are keen readers of this forum, and decided it was an excellent policy.

If I remember correctly, I think that would have been a fairly small minority view even here among remoaner central.

Perhaps you're right. I think the majority favoured BRINO which is a materially different standpoint of course.

I said it on here a long time ago, that the best option surely was to negotiate a BRINO that gave them the option someway down the line to gradually reduce the integration.

So you're involved in an ongoing negotiation, but working backwards from BRINO.

So it satisfies the criterium of the referendum, avoids any dramatic episodes like risk of no dealm, as a result of the ref, and yet allows the UK over time to actually work out what it wants to do outside of the EU>

agree with all of the above but I would have joined the EEA as I think it will take us several years to work out the costs and benefits of how much to diverge.

I accept that as i see it as an act of economic vandalism then my ideal leave would always look as much like membership as possible

rick_chasey

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

TheBigBean said:

kingstongraham said:

TheBigBean said:

kingstongraham said:

coopster_the_1st said:

I wonder who Russia are supporting in the upcoming Lib Dem leadership election

Maybe the Russians hacked their polling before the last election and told them that "Stop Brexit without a second ref" was a good idea. More likely they were just inept though.

Perhaps the Lib Dem leadership are keen readers of this forum, and decided it was an excellent policy.

If I remember correctly, I think that would have been a fairly small minority view even here among remoaner central.

Perhaps you're right. I think the majority favoured BRINO which is a materially different standpoint of course.

I said it on here a long time ago, that the best option surely was to negotiate a BRINO that gave them the option someway down the line to gradually reduce the integration.

So you're involved in an ongoing negotiation, but working backwards from BRINO.

So it satisfies the criterium of the referendum, avoids any dramatic episodes like risk of no dealm, as a result of the ref, and yet allows the UK over time to actually work out what it wants to do outside of the EU>

agree with all of the above but I would have joined the EEA as I think it will take us several years to work out the costs and benefits of how much to diverge.

I accept that as i see it as an act of economic vandalism then my ideal leave would always look as much like membership as possible

Sure. I mean the final bit is a bit irrelevant. The point of my scenario is that we are still arguing over what the UK actually voted for.

This way, the referendum is satisfied, and then governments can run on various iterations of what Brexit can mean, and there can be a proper discussion.

The problem I have is that my main memory of the Ref debate was that pretty much everyone was debating on the premise that the UK would never leave the single market.

I know a few people throw cameron quotes at me, but I distinctly remember him on the special question time basically saying "we would be rule takers" because they would not leave the single market, and I know all the members of leave said they would be mad to leave it.

I don't think an abrubt 'no deal' was ever even discussed.

So forget whether opting for no deal or a border in Northern Ireland or the Irish sea is vandalism or not; I don't think the reality of what the post-Brexit situation actually looks like was ever discussed.

That is surely a scandal, regardless of whether you voted for it or not. I can imagine, and indeed I know, plenty of people who voted Brexit but who wanted and indeed assumed the UK would continue to be in the single market, for example. Now, are they getting what they voted for?

kingstongraham

rick_chasey said:

I don't think an abrubt 'no deal' was ever even discussed.

So forget whether opting for no deal or a border in Northern Ireland or the Irish sea is vandalism or not; I don't think the reality of what the post-Brexit situation actually looks like was ever discussed.

That's the irony - all the voices on the leave campaign said that we would not leave the single market. But I think that was for another thread.

Let's put it down to "good advice that you just didn't take".

surrey_commuter

rick_chasey said:

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

TheBigBean said:

kingstongraham said:

TheBigBean said:

kingstongraham said:

coopster_the_1st said:

I wonder who Russia are supporting in the upcoming Lib Dem leadership election

Maybe the Russians hacked their polling before the last election and told them that "Stop Brexit without a second ref" was a good idea. More likely they were just inept though.

Perhaps the Lib Dem leadership are keen readers of this forum, and decided it was an excellent policy.

If I remember correctly, I think that would have been a fairly small minority view even here among remoaner central.

Perhaps you're right. I think the majority favoured BRINO which is a materially different standpoint of course.

I said it on here a long time ago, that the best option surely was to negotiate a BRINO that gave them the option someway down the line to gradually reduce the integration.

So you're involved in an ongoing negotiation, but working backwards from BRINO.

So it satisfies the criterium of the referendum, avoids any dramatic episodes like risk of no dealm, as a result of the ref, and yet allows the UK over time to actually work out what it wants to do outside of the EU>

agree with all of the above but I would have joined the EEA as I think it will take us several years to work out the costs and benefits of how much to diverge.

I accept that as i see it as an act of economic vandalism then my ideal leave would always look as much like membership as possible

Sure. I mean the final bit is a bit irrelevant. The point of my scenario is that we are still arguing over what the UK actually voted for.

This way, the referendum is satisfied, and then governments can run on various iterations of what Brexit can mean, and there can be a proper discussion.

The problem I have is that my main memory of the Ref debate was that pretty much everyone was debating on the premise that the UK would never leave the single market.

I know a few people throw cameron quotes at me, but I distinctly remember him on the special question time basically saying "we would be rule takers" because they would not leave the single market, and I know all the members of leave said they would be mad to leave it.

I don't think an abrubt 'no deal' was ever even discussed.

So forget whether opting for no deal or a border in Northern Ireland or the Irish sea is vandalism or not; I don't think the reality of what the post-Brexit situation actually looks like was ever discussed.

That is surely a scandal, regardless of whether you voted for it or not. I can imagine, and indeed I know, plenty of people who voted Brexit but who wanted and indeed assumed the UK would continue to be in the single market, for example. Now, are they getting what they voted for?

I am truly amazed, I only know one sane person who voted for Brexit

pblakeney

rick_chasey said:

...Now, are they getting what they voted for?

The Brexit voters that I know voted for "out means out", less foreigners (natch), no more foreigners telling us what to do, and the side of a bus.

I count that as a score draw with no benefits and discounts the things that they didn't vote for.

rick_chasey

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

TheBigBean said:

kingstongraham said:

TheBigBean said:

kingstongraham said:

coopster_the_1st said:

I wonder who Russia are supporting in the upcoming Lib Dem leadership election

Maybe the Russians hacked their polling before the last election and told them that "Stop Brexit without a second ref" was a good idea. More likely they were just inept though.

Perhaps the Lib Dem leadership are keen readers of this forum, and decided it was an excellent policy.

If I remember correctly, I think that would have been a fairly small minority view even here among remoaner central.

Perhaps you're right. I think the majority favoured BRINO which is a materially different standpoint of course.

I said it on here a long time ago, that the best option surely was to negotiate a BRINO that gave them the option someway down the line to gradually reduce the integration.

So you're involved in an ongoing negotiation, but working backwards from BRINO.

So it satisfies the criterium of the referendum, avoids any dramatic episodes like risk of no dealm, as a result of the ref, and yet allows the UK over time to actually work out what it wants to do outside of the EU>

agree with all of the above but I would have joined the EEA as I think it will take us several years to work out the costs and benefits of how much to diverge.

I accept that as i see it as an act of economic vandalism then my ideal leave would always look as much like membership as possible

Sure. I mean the final bit is a bit irrelevant. The point of my scenario is that we are still arguing over what the UK actually voted for.

This way, the referendum is satisfied, and then governments can run on various iterations of what Brexit can mean, and there can be a proper discussion.

The problem I have is that my main memory of the Ref debate was that pretty much everyone was debating on the premise that the UK would never leave the single market.

I know a few people throw cameron quotes at me, but I distinctly remember him on the special question time basically saying "we would be rule takers" because they would not leave the single market, and I know all the members of leave said they would be mad to leave it.

I don't think an abrubt 'no deal' was ever even discussed.

So forget whether opting for no deal or a border in Northern Ireland or the Irish sea is vandalism or not; I don't think the reality of what the post-Brexit situation actually looks like was ever discussed.

That is surely a scandal, regardless of whether you voted for it or not. I can imagine, and indeed I know, plenty of people who voted Brexit but who wanted and indeed assumed the UK would continue to be in the single market, for example. Now, are they getting what they voted for?

I am truly amazed, I only know one sane person who voted for Brexit

Knocking on people's doors, asking them to vote remain will help ha.

Stevo_666

coopster_the_1st said:

I wonder who Russia are supporting in the upcoming Lib Dem leadership election

Pretty sure the Lib Dems are too obscure for even Russian hackers to discover anything about.

tailwindhome

Ironically there is actually a Brexit thread

coopster_the_1st

Stevo_666 said:

coopster_the_1st said:

I wonder who Russia are supporting in the upcoming Lib Dem leadership election

Pretty sure the Lib Dems are too obscure for even Russian hackers to discover anything about.

Bingo!

Or too obscure to not even bother to set the work experience kid on them

Hence why I posted it in the Irony thread

surrey_commuter

coopster_the_1st said:

Stevo_666 said:

coopster_the_1st said:

I wonder who Russia are supporting in the upcoming Lib Dem leadership election

Pretty sure the Lib Dems are too obscure for even Russian hackers to discover anything about.

Bingo!

Or too obscure to not even bother to set the work experience kid on them

Hence why I posted it in the Irony thread

Don’t over egg it, just let us appreciate the gag of you posting about sub-standard Russian trolls in the irony thread

Stevo_666

tailwindhome said:

Ironically there is actually a Brexit thread

The irony of that thread is that people keep arguing we shouldn't leave when we've already left

Stevo_666

rick_chasey said:

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

TheBigBean said:

kingstongraham said:

TheBigBean said:

kingstongraham said:

coopster_the_1st said:

I wonder who Russia are supporting in the upcoming Lib Dem leadership election

Maybe the Russians hacked their polling before the last election and told them that "Stop Brexit without a second ref" was a good idea. More likely they were just inept though.

Perhaps the Lib Dem leadership are keen readers of this forum, and decided it was an excellent policy.

If I remember correctly, I think that would have been a fairly small minority view even here among remoaner central.

Perhaps you're right. I think the majority favoured BRINO which is a materially different standpoint of course.

I said it on here a long time ago, that the best option surely was to negotiate a BRINO that gave them the option someway down the line to gradually reduce the integration.

So you're involved in an ongoing negotiation, but working backwards from BRINO.

So it satisfies the criterium of the referendum, avoids any dramatic episodes like risk of no dealm, as a result of the ref, and yet allows the UK over time to actually work out what it wants to do outside of the EU>

agree with all of the above but I would have joined the EEA as I think it will take us several years to work out the costs and benefits of how much to diverge.

I accept that as i see it as an act of economic vandalism then my ideal leave would always look as much like membership as possible

Sure. I mean the final bit is a bit irrelevant. The point of my scenario is that we are still arguing over what the UK actually voted for.

This way, the referendum is satisfied, and then governments can run on various iterations of what Brexit can mean, and there can be a proper discussion.

The problem I have is that my main memory of the Ref debate was that pretty much everyone was debating on the premise that the UK would never leave the single market.

I know a few people throw cameron quotes at me, but I distinctly remember him on the special question time basically saying "we would be rule takers" because they would not leave the single market, and I know all the members of leave said they would be mad to leave it.

I don't think an abrubt 'no deal' was ever even discussed.

So forget whether opting for no deal or a border in Northern Ireland or the Irish sea is vandalism or not; I don't think the reality of what the post-Brexit situation actually looks like was ever discussed.

That is surely a scandal, regardless of whether you voted for it or not. I can imagine, and indeed I know, plenty of people who voted Brexit but who wanted and indeed assumed the UK would continue to be in the single market, for example. Now, are they getting what they voted for?

I am truly amazed, I only know one sane person who voted for Brexit

Knocking on people's doors, asking them to vote remain will help ha.

I guess it might have depended on who was doing the knocking on doors. If they were real d1ckheads it might have persuaded people to vote leave

orraloon

I think it ironic that Brexit voting lardies will be prime fodder come the starvation future, as a bit of fat makes the meat that bit more succulent .

Stevo_666

orraloon said:

I think it ironic that Brexit voting lardies will be prime fodder come the starvation future, as a bit of fat makes the meat that bit more succulent .

If it wasn't utter bollox, that statement could be ironic coming from a Scot

kingstongraham

Channel 4 had a "highlights" show of the F1 race that was two and a half hours long. For a race that was well under two hours long.

shortfall

Formula one highlights. Is that ironic or an oxymoron?

rick_chasey

kingstongraham said:

Channel 4 had a "highlights" show of the F1 race that was two and a half hours long. For a race that was well under two hours long.

It’s pretty good for those who don’t have Sky F1

kingstongraham

rick_chasey said:

kingstongraham said:

Channel 4 had a "highlights" show of the F1 race that was two and a half hours long. For a race that was well under two hours long.

It’s pretty good for those who don’t have Sky F1

How did they squeeze in all the best bits tho?

shortfall

Banks insisting on people wearing masks before they can go in.

ballysmate

The work of police sketch artists has become much easier.

Stevo_666

Although identity parades might not be so easy.

tailwindhome

https://twitter.com/itvnews/status/1287394537393065987?s=20

rick_chasey

Bloody hell that dogs weighs as much as I do.

tailwindhome

rick_chasey said:

Bloody hell that dogs weighs as much as I do.

Are you any better a descender?