RayC

I think that the word ".. about.." is superfluous.

Or a border down the Irish Sea which we have now. Whatever one might think of the DUP's politics, they were very clear about one thing. A border down the Irish Sea was unacceptable to them and, if it was implemented, they would not allow the Stormont Assembly to reconvene. Unsurprisingly, this has come to pass. All this could have been foreseen in 2019. Which begs the question, why did the UK government sign the current Withdrawal Agreement? There can only be two possible conclusions: (1) Despite the DUP warnings, the UK government did not fully understand what the Withdrawal Agreement entailed. In this case, it was incompetent. (2) The UK government had no intention of honouring the terms of the Agreement. In this case, it was (is) duplicitous. Not a very good look either way.

Are you incapable of seeing what's staring you in the face? If Brexit was done as you claim - something which is contrary to what some of your fellow Brexiters suggest - then the UK government would not be trying to rewrite the Withdrawal Agreement! There are many differences between 'Remainers' and 'Leavers', but a fundamental one is that 'Remainers' try to quantify the economic effects of withdrawing from the EU, whilst Leavers do nothing other than talk of some undefined future, nebulous, unquantified benefits.

And in the meantime, the country suffers from economic decline as a result. What did you expect? The UK is no longer a member of the EU so why should it expect to be granted the same benefits as its' members? Of course, the EU is protectionist by definition. It exists to protect the interests of its' members. What do you mean by "extreme protectionism" (as opposed to 'normal' protectionism)? Given that you are replying to my post, I assume that you consider me to be an "extremist, hardline remainer"? What differentiates me from a run of the mill remainer? " ... a major benefit in itself..." is just an admission that there is no empirical evidence to support your position. If only you hadn't added 'Brexit', we could have agreed on something.

A number of your fellow Brexiters e.g. TheHammer2021 seem to disagree with you. Without wishing to put words into his mouth, I very much doubt that he would describe himself as a "Socialist Remainer".

I don't suppose you have any evidence to support this?

Your original post was simply a statement. You offered no explanation or evidence to suggest that the rural electorate would become disenfranchised under a system of PR, nor any explanation of how the 'first past the post' system protects the rural electorate.

Please show some patience. It will take time as this article shows (although I wouldn't discount the strong probability that this article is more fiction peddled by the bias left-wing media). https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1562981/brexit-news-jacob-rees-mogg-boris-johnson-cabinet-reshuffle-guy-verhofstadt-tweet

I'd hazard a guess that if you want a visa for say Spain, a good place to start looking would be the local Spanish embassy/ consulate.

I don't understand your point? Can you elaborate please.

Your implication that the UK was somehow discriminated against in terms of number of employees is incorrect. The UK (and other member states) were entitled to numbers in proportion to their respective populations. The UK was unable to supply its' quota (presumably because UK workers did not find the T&C attractive). Given that most of the EU institutions are located in Brussels, why should it be a surprise that local staff make up a significant number of workforce if there are vacancies?

Can you explain why a country dweller's vote is worth less than a city dweller's vote under a PR based voting system?

"Bingo!". 4 corners.

As a Remainer, I accepted the Brexit result a long time ago. What I now want is for you Brexiters to take accountability and responsibility for your decision and deliver the promised (undefined) benefits based on an international agreement which was signed less than 3 years ago Unfortunately, what we get instead is constant whining and complaining from Brexiters about how unfair it is that the EU choose to implement the terms of that agreement. No system of electoral democracy is perfect. It's a tired, and flawed, old argument that the UK system of government - where less than 43% of votes cast delivers a government with a cast-iron parliamentary majority - is somehow superior and more democratic than the system of PR used at an EU level

????????It's comes as no surprise that you think one of the major policy issues is irrelevant to a discussion above the suitability of the PM candidates.

Of course you're ".. not interested". As usual, you can't support your position with a reasoned argument.

Take your pick. Neither seem apparent.

So the benefits of Brexit will miraculously start to become apparent wef 2024? Excellent. Something to look forward to.... unless of course they don't and you've been sold a pup. Really? Not what most Johnson apologists on this board would have us believe. Anyway, 2.5 years (at most) to finish a process that has not(?) been rumbling on since 2016. Cutting things a bit tight.

I wouldn't have thought that unilaterally breaking an international agreement was the best way to win friends and influence the wider international community.

Which supports the view that the "vociferous left-wing media" aren't as influential as the Johnson apologists would have us believe.

So you didn't approve of Sunak's furlough scheme? You would have preferred that workers were made redundant during the pandemic, and that businesses went bust? China and the US have grown more rapidly than the UK during this period. Russia has not, and has been even more economically mismanaged than the UK. Brexit was in 2016. The Tories had already been in power for 6 years. Six years of unnecessary austerity politics instigated by 'Boy' George, followed by an unnecessary event (Brexit) caused by 'Call me Dave' gambling his own and the country's political future; weak leadership by May, who was undermined by her own party; 3 years being led by an opportunist chancer, and now the prospect of being led by a political chameleon. 12 years in power. How long before these promised benefits arrive?

Don't you think that the ongoing fall-out from Brexit is still relevant to today's political discussion?

If the "vociferous left wing media" is as influential as you suggest, why hasn't it translated into election victories for Labour? Re Johnson in particular: Johnson supplied an awful lot of tinder to light the fire.

You never tire of hitting the Ctrl+V buttons do you, even when the content is completely irrelevant to the topic under discussion.

I have no experience of the US health care system, but to suggest that European systems lag behind because they are "socialized" is over-simplistic. I have (relatively) recent experience of the Belgian and UK systems. Both systems might be described as "socialized". The Belgian health care system is excellent, the UK's is not. Again, over-simplistic. The waiting lists in Europe vary according to the individual country, and within the individual nations, according to the procedure.