Brexit Referendum Superthread

ancapailldorcha

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Well Horse, they aren't having talks over the state of the weather or Turkey beating the Czechs last night.

Question: What do you think is the objective of the talks?

I know what the objective is. The point is that Turkey is a long, long way off becoming a full member and you're talking as if it'll happen in the next year or so.

mansize

Turkey have a lot to change and evidence that change (ie re Human Rights) before accession

oscarBravo

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Question: What do you think is the overall objective of the talks?

The objective of the talks is Turkish membership of the EU.

That doesn't change the fact that a claim that there will be visa-free travel from Turkey to the UK in 2017 is an egregious, bare-faced lie.

BoJack Horseman

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I know what the objective is. The point is that Turkey is a long, long way off becoming a full member and you're talking as if it'll happen in the next year or so.

Nah Horse.... it's the visa waiver that will be the objective by 2017 (pending negotiations), we both know that.

But at least we agree that membership is the goal, however many years away it is the commitment is clear.

Which makes Cameron's remarks odd.
Either he is lying, or the EU are lying.

The Turks are perplexed by Cameron.... as a government advisor says:

mansize

John Barnes' piece in the Guardian, correcting Gove's lie (about him supporting Leave) is excellent

LuckyLloyd

Feeling very confident that reason will triumph tomorrow over fear.

What I would hope is that the EU collectively perceive this as a warning shot across the bows and kickoff a genuine process of self reflection and change aimed at improving perceptions of its structures and operations.

mansize

I waded through *so much* BS to write this piece so please read it and share it with your friends and acquaintances

https://www.buzzfeed.com/jamesball/are-eu-telling-porkies?utm_term=.ihBDeY5X4#.oxZD042V3

Via twitter

Bob24

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Feeling very confident that reason will triumph tomorrow over fear.

That sentence could mean two completely opposite things depending on who is pronouncing it ;-)

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

What I would hope is that the EU collectively perceive this as a warning shot across the bows and kickoff a genuine process of self reflection and change aimed at improving perceptions of its structures and operations.

I hope so as well, but to be honest if the outcome is a remain vote I think it will be seen as one more deflected crisis amongst others, back to business as usual.

Some type of leadership is needed but I don't know where it could come from. European bureaucrats will keep doing their own things, and European heads of states will keep looking after their own interests and national political calendars.

Alun

mansize wrote: »

Ruth Davidson (Con MSP) was excellent for Remain ...

I've just watched that, quite impressive and much more punchy than Cameron's rather feeble campaign. I'd never heard of her before to be honest, but she'd make a great party leader if push came to shove after the referendum, whichever way the vote goes.

130Kph

With a day to go, most of the big bookies are offering 1/4 for remain and 3/1 for leave.
At best remain might win by 60/40. This means maybe 12 million people voting to leave the EU tomorrow. Wow!

The EU isn’t an institution that is meant to be loved – like a local county council isn’t. And it isn’t the singular, perfect way of running economies & co-operation in Europe. It definitely needs more reform and a halt to ever deeper union (which as the economist magazine thinks has shuddered to a stop for the moment, for many reasons). So disliking the EU at an ideological level or wanting out (at a gut level) is not unreasonable in itself.

So, over the last 3 weeks I went looking for just one standout persuasive speaker for Leave with a hard-to-argue-with, credible, supported position.
In my opinion, there isn’t even one, which says it all really. All I could find were people like-

Digby Jones, Boris Johnston :– blustering, rabble rousing, jingoistic rhetoric and baseless, deluded child-like optimism.

The report of the 10 economists for ‘Leave’ were examined by the BBC fact checking team who found it to be full of holes, unlikely models, naïve assumptions and brash, hubristic optimism at odds with any of the hard-nosed reports of respected financial organisations (like UK Treasury, BofE, IMF, OECD etc).

If anything crystallised for me the Leave side’s argument, it was when the most credible member of team Leave: Michael Gove, asserted that the forecasts of all these economic organisations (mentioned above) can be dismissed because “people are fed up of experts” :- demented Alice in Wonderland stuff.

Danial Hannon – no comment. The former general talking about an EU army – no comment.
Street vox pops – not one leave voter mentioned or articulated that they understood the duration or difficulty of international trade negotiations (7 to 15+ years is the norm). Any that breezed past it gave the impression that they believed it was a foregone conclusion.

Plus all the usual cranks, conspiracy nuts, xenophobes, cowboy businessmen, etc etc.

The only difference between Brexit and our typical referenda is there doesn’t seem to be many advocating voting a particular way in order to give their government a kicking (which is usually 15% - 35% here).

mansize

Alun wrote: »

I've just watched that, quite impressive and much more punchy than Cameron's rather feeble campaign. I'd never heard of her before to be honest, but she'd make a great party leader if push came to shove after the referendum, whichever way the vote goes.

She's not an MP so not before an election. I can see her running for British Parliment

Is nobody else here in favour of greater EU integration, and for this reason, want the UK to leave?

I can understand pro-EU individuals in the UK wanting to remain in Europe. But I have plenty of friends in other EU countries who would love to see the back of the UK in Europe. Yet the Irish are oddly hysterical about a Brexit. Part of this can be explained by the border and trade, but I find that rather a provincial attitude to take, when the bigger picture is a prosperous and enhanced EU.

The best thing that could happen for ever-closer Europe, would be a Brexit.

I have zero interest in seeing the UK continually seeking to hamper European integration at every turn, over the course of another decade, or twenty years, until the next referendum arises.

I am very worried for the consequences that a Remain vote will have on future EU integration. Surely it is a recipe for inertia, not integration.

smjm

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Is nobody else here in favour of greater EU integration, and for this reason, want the UK to leave?

I can understand pro-EU individuals in the UK wanting to remain in Europe. But I have plenty of friends in other EU countries who would love to see the back of the UK in Europe. Yet the Irish are oddly hysterical about a Brexit. Part of this can be explained by the border and trade, but I find that rather a provincial attitude to take, when the bigger picture is a prosperous and enhanced EU.

The best thing that could happen for ever-closer Europe, would be a Brexit.

I have zero interest in seeing the UK continually seeking to hamper European integration at every turn, over the course of another decade, or twenty years, until the next referendum arises.

I am very worried for the consequences that a Remain vote will have on future EU integration. Surely it is a recipe for inertia, not integration.

Do you want to get rid of national parliaments? Do you want a single EU Army? Just wondering.

smjm

smjm wrote: »

Do you want to get rid of national parliaments? Do you want a single EU Army? Just wondering.

No I don't want to get rid of national parliaments; they could operate similarly to state parliaments in Australia or the USA.

Yes the EU should have a military force.

In the very unlikely event of a Brexit, I'd also like to see France eventually replaced on the permanent UN Security Council by a united EU seat.

timmyntc

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Is nobody else here in favour of greater EU integration, and for this reason, want the UK to leave?

I can understand pro-EU individuals in the UK wanting to remain in Europe. But I have plenty of friends in other EU countries who would love to see the back of the UK in Europe. Yet the Irish are oddly hysterical about a Brexit. Part of this can be explained by the border and trade, but I find that rather a provincial attitude to take, when the bigger picture is a prosperous and enhanced EU.

The best thing that could happen for ever-closer Europe, would be a Brexit.

I have zero interest in seeing the UK continually seeking to hamper European integration at every turn, over the course of another decade, or twenty years, until the next referendum arises.

I am very worried for the consequences that a Remain vote will have on future EU integration. Surely it is a recipe for inertia, not integration.

What is their to gain from greater EU integration? Giving more of our sovereignty to the EU? Allowing them to dictate our policy?
Keep in mind that if we bent over for the EU (re: corporation tax for one) our economy would be in pretty bad shape. The UK is like a buffer against the EU for us, both they and we have the same opt-outs to certain aspects of EU policy, we're both non-schengen states, and the UK regularly chooses not to take EU policy 'recommendations' on board.
If they leave, we're in an even tighter spot.

Walter H Price

So Junkers said it now there will be no special deal for Britain or Reform agenda pursued if Britain remain , oh and there fast tracking Turkey's membership like that's a good plan.

I hap the Brits don't bottle this like the Scots did last year , don't give in to the establishments fear agenda , the Eu was a great project once upon anytime , but not now now its just an undemocratic , top heavy bureaucratic mess , the only purpose of which seems to be to prop up a failing currency and ensure the stability of the German and to some extent the French economy's. Hopefully the Brits go and the EU falls apart shortly there after .

smjm

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

No I don't want to get rid of national parliaments; they could operate similarly to state parliaments in Australia or the USA.

Yes the EU should have a military force.

In the very unlikely event of a Brexit, I'd also like to see France eventually replaced on the permanent UN Security Council by a united EU seat.

So you do want to get rid of Ireland's neutrality? If the EU brought in 'national' service, would you expect every Irish (sorry, EU) citizen to do his/her duty?

timmyntc

timmyntc wrote: »

What is their to gain from greater EU integration? Giving more of our sovereignty to the EU? Allowing them to dictate our policy?
Keep in mind that if we bent over for the EU (re: corporation tax for one) our economy would be in pretty bad shape. The UK is like a buffer against the EU for us, both they and we have the same opt-outs to certain aspects of EU policy, we're both non-schengen states, and the UK regularly chooses not to take EU policy 'recommendations' on board.
If they leave, we're in an even tighter spot.

I disagree with almost everything you say, but I don't want to drag the thread off-topic.

I'm not surprised that people like you want less integration. But contrary to your intuition, if you really want to slow down Europe, you'd better hope for REMAIN.

What I'm really interested in, is the rationale of those who simultaneously want closer EU integration, and who also desire a Remain. There's a contradiction there which I haven't seen addressed.

Does anyone hoping for REMAIN really think the UK is going to want more integration, after this referendum? They are going to put even more roadblocks in front of ever-closer union, now that the Brits have been riled up, and in light of the inevitable, anti-EU feeling that this referendum will create in Britain.

timmyntc

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

I disagree with almost everything you say, but I don't want to drag the thread off-topic.

I'm not surprised that people like you want less integration. But contrary to your intuition, if you really want to slow down Europe, you'd better hope for REMAIN.

What I'm really interested in, is the rationale of those who simultaneously want closer EU integration, and who also desire a Remain. There's a contradiction there which I haven't seen addressed.

Does anyone hoping for REMAIN really think the UK is going to want more integration, after this referendum? They are going to put even more roadblocks in front of ever-closer union, now that the Brits have been riled up, and in light of the inevitable, anti-EU feeling that this referendum will create in Britain.

'People like me'? What does that entail exactly? Am I one of those racist little-Englanders (or Irelanders) simply because I don't agree with a Federalised European Super-state?

If you had actually read my post, you would see that I was fearful for a Brexit precisely for that reason - there would be no 'Big brother UK' to protect us from advanced EU integration.

timmyntc

timmyntc wrote: »

'People like me'? What does that entail exactly?

It isn't an insult, I'm merely distinguishing one group for another.

I'm referring to people who do not desire greater European integration, colloquially referred to as being Eurosceptic, or on that spectrum.

timmyntc

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

It isn't an insult, I'm merely distinguishing one group for another.

I'm referring to people who do not desire greater European integration, colloquially referred to as being Eurosceptic, or on that spectrum.

If that's the case, then why bother saying

I'm not surprised that people like you want less integration.

You're not surprised that Eurosceptics want less Euro integration?
Isn't that the definition of a Eurosceptic?

That's like saying I'm not surprised that vegetarians don't want meat..

/tangent

BoJack Horseman

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

What I would hope is that the EU collectively perceive this as a warning shot across the bows and kickoff a genuine process of self reflection and change aimed at improving perceptions of its structures and operations.

Your glorious president & defender of the faith has already scuppered that.

https://twitter.com/Independent/status/745634845582364672

The EU is unequivocal, she is not for reforming.

whatstherush

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Your glorious president & defender of the faith has already scuppered that.

https://twitter.com/Independent/status/745634845582364672

The EU is unequivocal, she is not for reforming.

Thats not what he said, but you're just as good at the bull**** as the rest of them.

Nate--IRL--

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Your glorious president & defender of the faith has already scuppered that.

https://twitter.com/Independent/status/745634845582364672

The EU is unequivocal, she is not for reforming.

I think you have misread what has been said.

Nate

timmyntc

timmyntc wrote: »

If that's the case, then why bother saying
You're not surprised that Eurosceptics want less Euro integration?
Isn't that the definition of a Eurosceptic?

That's like saying I'm not surprised that vegetarians don't want meat..

/tangent

Because, to be frank, I wasn't asking for your opinion, or the opinion of the Eurosceptic side in general.

I was asking why pro-EU people were favouring Remain, when a Remain vote is likely to impede EU integration over the long term.

You offered your opinion from a Eurosceptic viewpoint, but that's not what I was after at all.

A Dub in Glasgo

Alun wrote: »

I've just watched that, quite impressive and much more punchy than Cameron's rather feeble campaign. I'd never heard of her before to be honest, but she'd make a great party leader if push came to shove after the referendum, whichever way the vote goes.

I find her presentation is better than most although she has not really been tested in the Scottish Parliament as she almost hid behind Labour thus far. Now that she is leader of opposition, she will have to be more accountable for the Tory actions in WM. She would have to parachute to Mundells seat to become an MP or safe seat in England before leadership aspirations.

BoJack Horseman

whatstherush wrote: »

Thats not what he said

Our president was quite unequivocal.

Britain is not getting any more, despite 'Dave' promising otherwise.



So, as I've pointed out on the previous page wrt Turkey, either Cameron is lying or the EU are lying.

whatstherush

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Our president was quite unequivocal.

Britain is not getting any more, despite 'Dave' promising otherwise.



So, as I've pointed out on the previous page wrt Turkey, either Cameron is lying or the EU are lying.

Dave can lobby for he wants and junker can make the EU position clear that UK is getting no more special deals, but neither of that leads to this

"The EU is unequivocal, she is not for reforming."

BoJack Horseman

whatstherush wrote: »

"The EU is unequivocal, she is not for reforming."

If I'm wrong.... I look forward to and welcome the EU's comprehensive reform plan you will lay out for us to peruse..

In your own time

oscarBravo

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

If I'm wrong.... I look forward to and welcome the EU's comprehensive reform plan you will lay out for us to peruse..

In your own time

I'm curious. Are you incapable of distinguishing "the EU will make whatever changes the UK demands" from "the EU will make such reforms as all 28 member states can agree on", or are you just refusing to do so?