[woodpanel]

Yes it did happen.

After the referendum, the EU and Bremainers made the 2 following nation-wide elections into single-issue elections. And they burned themselves justifiably from it.

You know that is the problem with the pro EU camp, they tout their opposition as science deniers and worse, yet conveniently pretend hard numbers (ie. election results) don't exist or didn't happen - if it hurts their feelings. It's just intellectual dishonesty through and through.

[matthewmacleod]

The EU made UK elections into single-issue ones? Obviously that didn't happen.

I think you're just projecting, to be honest. The "leave the EU" side won; unexpectedly, with no clear vision of what that involved. And then the UK's internal inability to agree resulted in a tumultuous period of internal politics, the result of which is pretty much the outcome we'd've all expected.

Time to get over it, I think.

[woodpanel]

> Time to get over it, I think.

It seems like you haven't, why else would you deny the facts?

The EU tried to bully the Brits multiple times into staying [1] while its politicians made many thinly veiled threats [2], hoping they were veiled enough so that Bremain could make use of them. Luckily they overstepped with their arrogance.

The Brits noticed and the results were clear:

- The Torys won the UK parliament in a historic landslide in 2019, they broke "red wall" with their main campaign slogan being "Get Brexit done"

- in the European Parliament election in the United Kingdom prior to that the Brexit Party won almost half of all seats, >30% of the vote, the highest percentage of any party for the last 20 years

The EU could have handled this differently, but their behavior made Bremain so toxic that even Labour essentially gave up on it. As indicated by the breach of the "red wall"

Get over it

------

[1] The EU threats:

- The EU insisted on a strict sequencing of talks: citizens' rights, financial settlement ("divorce bill"), and the Irish border before any discussion of a future trade relationship. This was a deliberate pressure tactic

- The "Divorce Bill" – The EU demanded roughly €39-100 billion (estimates varied wildly) as a financial settlement – "leaving has a price." Michel Barnier (EU Chief Negotiator) insisted that this was non-negotiable.

- Irish Border / Backstop – designed to be a near-inescapable commitment if no trade deal was reached. This killed Theresa May's deal in Parliament three times.

- Granting Article 50 Extensions: Each extension (April 2019, October 2019) came with conditions and public EU reluctance — framed as a favor to the UK. This had a soft public opinion effect domestically in the UK

- No "Cherry Picking" Doctrine: Designed to make voters understand that a "soft Brexit" was not actually on offer, pressuring the Remain camp's argument.

[2] Key EU officials made pointed public statements:

- Jean-Claude Juncker (Commission President): Repeatedly warned the UK was underestimating the complexity. Said the negotiations would be "very, very, very difficult." Also warned in 2016 that there would be no informal negotiations before Article 50 was triggered — a rebuff to UK hopes for a soft start.

- Guy Verhofstadt (EU Parliament Brexit coordinator): Was openly confrontational, frequently stating the UK was living in "a fantasy world" regarding what Brexit could deliver.

- Donald Tusk (European Council President): Made the famous 2019 comment about a "special place in hell" for those who promoted Brexit without a plan — widely seen as a deliberate provocation to harden British public debate.

- Emmanuel Macron: Repeatedly said the UK could reverse Brexit at any time, keeping "Remain" psychologically alive as an option.

- Michel Barnier: "I am not hearing any whistling, just the clock ticking." July 2017 — A sharp comeback after Boris Johnson told the EU to "go whistle" over the divorce bill.

[matthewmacleod]

I'm afraid you didn't read my message – this is to be expected, since you've clearly decided on your opinion in advance.

But it's really simple:

- The "let's leave the EU" side won in the UK, no question - The UK entered a period where it struggled to figure out what "Get Brexit done" meant - Eventually they figured that out, it was pretty much the shape that was expected, and did it.

What you have described as "threats" are clearly examples of what you would expect the impact of leaving an integrated union would be. That includes negotiating the terms of the departure, and the EU was obviously in the interests of the EU.

I'm honestly just baffled that you think otherwise. The UK chose to leave the EU – fine. The EU acted to protect its interests in that exit – also fine. Weird to get so threatened by things that turned out to be obviously true.