Brexit Referendum Superthread

FrancieBrady

123shooter wrote: »

But it was discussed endlessly rolleyes: beforehand on every tv programme related to such. So what are you saying the leave voters were....deaf, blind, illiterate, stupid, unqualified, retarded or ???

No it wasn't.
If it had been we would not still be having the bungling over who thinks they are doing what the people want.
May had to go to the country and DIDN'T get the mandate she thought she had.
Plain as the nose on your face tbh.

FrancieBrady

123shooter wrote: »

No that's because the person you refer to is useless and believed her own hype.....Another Maggie Thatcher she thought she was.

Maggie had a pair of boll*x........May used to have blonde hair.........enough said.

I have no idea what that is about.

Professor Moriarty

123shooter wrote: »

But it was discussed endlessly rolleyes: beforehand on every tv programme related to such. So what are you saying the leave voters were....deaf, blind, illiterate, stupid, unqualified, retarded or ???

So what exactly have they voted on? What are the terms and conditions of their exit?

123shooter

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

So what exactly have they voted on? What are the terms and conditions of their exit?

I said this before but got slammed for it. There comes a time in a relationship when you think enough is enough if you are not happy...........so regardless of any downfalls the time comes when you have say no more and go.

So they voted to be able to determine their own destiny...........to take control of their own lives again.

123shooter

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I have no idea what that is about.

She is not up to the job..........her past record is dire..........one of these people who goes to work but gets away without actually doing anything. We all know someone like that.

ancapailldorcha

123shooter wrote: »

No that's because the person you refer to is useless and believed her own hype.....Another Maggie Thatcher she thought she was.

Maggie had a pair of boll*x........May used to have blonde hair.........enough said.

123shooter wrote: »

She is a bozo......not up to the job..........her past record is dire..........one of these people who goes to work but gets away without actually doing anything. We all know someone like that.

Enough of the name calling and nonsense please. I ask that you read the charter before posting again.

FrancieBrady

123shooter wrote: »

She is a bozo......not up to the job..........her past record is dire..........one of these people who goes to work but gets away without actually doing anything. We all know someone like that.

Whatever.
That has nothing whatever to do with the point.

Which is, The UK has no idea what it wants. And they should have found a way to decide that before offering a Yes or No option on a serious issue.

123shooter

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Whatever.
That has nothing whatever to do with the point.

Which is, The UK has no idea what it wants. And they should have found a way to decide that before offering a Yes or No option on a serious issue.

How can you say that? Are you British? Do you live in the UK?

I would have thought you had to qualify on those 2 points before passing such a qualified judgement.

FrancieBrady

123shooter wrote: »

How can you say that? Are you British? Do you live in the UK?

I would have thought you had to qualify on those 2 points before passing such a qualified judgement.

Why would you have to be British or live there to know this?

ambro25

123shooter wrote: »

Sam you can look at it any way you want. There were people like ex-pats for example who were allowed to vote and most likely voted to stay. How about all the scare stories from bozo cameroon and co etc.

Assuming that this expression relates to what Leavers dubbed 'Project Fear' before the referendum, and at the risk of pointing out the obvious to you: these scare stories have been slow to materialise since the referendum, because macro-economic changes never happen overnight (and because the Article 50 notification, which was the real and effective trigger for them, only went in 3 months ago or so)...but a year on from the referendum, they're now coming through, and at a fair rate of knots.

UK slowest growing economy in G7, inflation heading for the skies (my call is still 5% by Xmas 2017), NHS in rationing mode and recruitment crisis (-which crisis is starting to snowball at scale in other, non-medical sectors), arse fallen from the Pound Sterling with the bottom nowhere near in sight <...>

I quite fancy an interest rate rise or two before year end. There's a long way to go yet, to clear that purgatory which the UK strolled into :pac:

FrancieBrady is spot on, btw: the UK has no idea what it wants. That's because those who have been steering it since 2010 are currently at (an ideological-) war. And yes, they should have found a way to decide that before offering a Yes or No option on a serious issue. That's what sensible people do: check the that there is a parachute and that it is in working condition, before jumping off the cliff.

And before you ask, no I'm not British (but I'm married to one, 21 years: does that count?) and yes, I live in the UK (...for now, still).

123shooter

ambro25 wrote: »

Assuming that this expression relates to what Leavers dubbed 'Project Fear' before the referendum, and at the risk of pointing out the obvious to you: these scare stories have been slow to materialise since the referendum, because macro-economic changes never happen overnight (and because the Article 50 notification, which was the real and effective trigger for them, only went in 3 months ago or so)...but a year on from the referendum, they're now coming through, and at a fair rate of knots.

UK slowest growing economy in G7, inflation heading for the skies (my call is still 5% by Xmas 2017), NHS in rationing mode and recruitment crisis (-which crisis is starting to snowball at scale in other, non-medical sectors), arse fallen from the Pound Sterling with the bottom nowhere near in sight <...>

I quite fancy an interest rate rise or two before year end. There's a long way to go yet, to clear that purgatory which the UK strolled into :pac:

Possibly but is the EU's economic climite a bed of roses at present? So we can all pick and choose.

Thomas__

123shooter wrote: »

Thomas__ wrote: »

The perfect credentials to either start WWIII or a world revolution once the ordinary people start to say enough is enough and some of them have already started to say that. Plenty examples from history where the small oligarchy has been overthrown by the masses of the people once the people have been pushed too far by the "1%" and such things often ended in bloodshed. The question is just, who´s going to start it, who´s going to win and what will come afterwards, unless that other lunatic in NK is starting a nuclear war soon. He´s pushing the world towards such a conflict and it looks very serious these days, with the other tetchy moron in the WH. It´s just the Chinese who appear to keep cool headed and rational, but I don´t know for how long yet. I know that this passage is not concerning this thread, but in the bigger picture, it is relevant because in the event of a nuc war, that would plunge the whole world into catastrophe, Brexit has a very small meaning then. It means that the far-right and right-wing idiots behind Trump and Brexit who strife to ruin this world would achieve their aim faster than they thought, just that it won´t play out the way they wish for.

You could possibly be correct but your referral to when people have had enough of them.......are you not forgetting that in both cases of Trump and Brexit they were elected and voted for by the majoriaty of the people?

The majority you speak of is a very relative one when set in contrast to the whole amount of eligible voters, the whole electorate. The more who don´t go to the polling station and cast their vote, the lesser the turnout in total and that leads to small majorities when in the whole picture, they are just a majority of a minority, but it is enough to be declared the winner of a GE or a referendum.

So, who represents the non-voters and who is their voice in the whole of the political spectrum? Bearing in mind that those non-voters are just that fed up with the present politicians that they see in none of the candidates any alternative that or whom is capable to improve things for them.

There are already - presumably not less - people who started to bitterly regret that they voted for Brexit in the UK and for Trump in the USA. But now it is too late. Some may join those disillusioned sooner or later and depending on how things will unfold, how worse those yet present or meanwhile former supporters of Brexit or of Trump will be off in the near future, it might lead to second thoughts on them and turn against what they´ve voted for before. Unless one is a total dogmatic, when things change the more smart people adopt themselves to the new situations and political policies.

Thomas__

Sam Russell wrote: »

123shooter wrote: »

You could possibly be correct but your referral to when people have had enough of them.......are you not forgetting that in both cases of Trump and Brexit they were elected and voted for by the majoriaty of the people?

Trump was not voted by the majority of the people.  He was not even voted for a majority of those that voted, HC got 3 million more votes.  If 100,000 in particulat states had voted differently, HC would be POTUS.  More in the US did not vote than voted for either candidate.

Brexit was voted for by a majority of those that voted, but not of those qualified to vote.

Still, both of the voting systems are different and by European Standards, Trump had lost the election, as you pointed out the difference in votes.

Billy86

Sam Russell wrote: »

If the UK leaves the EU customs union and goes for WTO rules, then an EU purchaser of Nissan cars has a choice of a UK built one with 10% tariff or a Japanese built one with zero tariff. I know which way most people would go. Sunderland did vote to leave so they will be happy, I assume.

This may bring a bit of reality to the Brexiteers.

"They'll want superior British cars to that cheap Japanese crap. It's well known the Japanese are no good at making automobiles."

Guaranteed to hear line of reasoning that a few times in the coming while so.

123shooter

Thomas__ wrote: »

The majority you speak of is a very relative one when set in contrast to the whole amount of eligible voters, the whole electorate. The more who don´t go to the polling station and cast their vote, the lesser the turnout in total and that leads to small majorities when in the whole picture, they are just a majority of a minority, but it is enough to be declared the winner of a GE or a referendum.

So, who represents the non-voters and who is their voice in the whole of the political spectrum? Bearing in mind that those non-voters are just that fed up with the present politicians that they see in none of the candidates any alternative that or whom is capable to improve things for them.

There are already - presumably not less - people who started to bitterly regret that they voted for Brexit in the UK and for Trump in the USA. But now it is too late. Some may join those disillusioned sooner or later and depending on how things will unfold, how worse those yet present or meanwhile former supporters of Brexit or of Trump will be off in the near future, it might lead to second thoughts on them and turn against what they´ve voted for before. Unless one is a total dogmatic, when things change the more smart people adopt themselves to the new situations and political policies.

There has always been non- voters. Most people would say if you want to get your opinion heard get up off backside and vote.

People regret and others change to support those you disagree with so swings and roundabouts really.

Smart people? Are the smart people you refer to the ones who only have the same opinion as you?

ambro25

123shooter wrote: »

Possibly but is the EU's economic climite a bed of roses at present?

Can I just ask: do you do news, much? Or just baseless opinions?

The Eurostat figures showed every nation in the 28-member bloc reported first-quarter GDP figures growing faster than the UK. The strongest expansion was in Romania at 1.7%, followed by Latvia at 1.6% and Slovenia at 1.5%. The closest countries to the UK’s weak pace of growth were France and Greece, with GDP growing 0.4% in both.

source (08-Jun-17)

So we can all pick and choose.

Well, with the UK at the bottom, looks like you're out of choices amongst the remaining 27

Thomas__

FrancieBrady wrote: »

123shooter wrote: »

She is a bozo......not up to the job..........her past record is dire..........one of these people who goes to work but gets away without actually doing anything.  We all know someone like that.

Whatever.
That has nothing whatever to do with the point.

Which is, The UK has no idea what it wants. And they should have found a way to decide that before offering a Yes or No option on a serious issue.

This means to me, that what you say is going into the direction that the Brexiteers had better talked to the EU officials again to sort out what is "a go" and what "a no go" to negotiate, but the fluffy soap bubble dreams were stronger than reality and that is or was what they wanted. Until the bubble was stiched and burst, the Brexiteers fell on the ground of reality and face what is on offer. Useless manouvre cos they knew it before perferctly well, when the EU stated that the UK won´t get a better deal than that what Cameron got. This stance by the EU remains unaltered to this day and will stay so to the conclusion of the Brexit negotiations. In the end, it might very well turn out that the Brits were fooling themselves. Well, that´s their own fault anyway.

123shooter

ambro25 wrote: »

Can I just ask: do you do news, much? Or just baseless opinions?
source (08-Jun-17)

Ah now i was told before..........do not use anti EU newspapers..........so does the same apply to pro EU newspapers....maybe even more so when the figures are from ......... the EU?

Thomas__

123shooter wrote: »

Thomas__ wrote: »

The majority you speak of is a very relative one when set in contrast to the whole amount of eligible voters, the whole electorate. The more who don´t go to the polling station and cast their vote, the lesser the turnout in total and that leads to small majorities when in the whole picture, they are just a majority of a minority, but it is enough to be declared the winner of a GE or a referendum.

So, who represents the non-voters and who is their voice in the whole of the political spectrum? Bearing in mind that those non-voters are just that fed up with the present politicians that they see in none of the candidates any alternative that or whom is capable to improve things for them.

There are already - presumably not less - people who started to bitterly regret that they voted for Brexit in the UK and for Trump in the USA. But now it is too late. Some may join those disillusioned sooner or later and depending on how things will unfold, how worse those yet present or meanwhile former supporters of Brexit or of Trump will be off in the near future, it might lead to second thoughts on them and turn against what they´ve voted for before. Unless one is a total dogmatic, when things change the more smart people adopt themselves to the new situations and political policies.

There has always been non- voters.  Most people would say if you want to get your opinion heard get up off backside and vote.

People regret and others change to support those you disagree with so swings and roundabouts really.

Smart people?  Are the smart people you refer to the ones who only have the same opinion as you?

Not, not necessarilly. The people I refer to are those who are the "opportunists" and change their voting for parties of whom they deem to serve their interests at best in a relative realistical estimation. Those are people who have no political dogma they sit on, you may call them "flexible voters" or you can call them "unreliable" to count on in terms of the party-political divide. They change as they see fit, as long as they end up on and with they deem to be the winning side. It doesn´t pays off every time. Well, I am not one of them "flexible" voters cos I have my ideological stance which is left-liberal or centre-left. In the USA, I had voted for Clinton, in the UK I had voted for the LibDems (the only real Social-Democrats left in GB).

123shooter

Thomas__ wrote: »

Not, not necessarilly. The people I refer to are those who are the "opportunists" and change their voting for parties of whom they deem to serve their interests at best in a relative realistical estimation. Those are people who have no political dogma they sit on, you may call them "flexible voters" or you can call them "unreliable" to count on in terms of the party-political divide. They change as they see fit, as long as they end up on and with they deem to be the winning side. It doesn´t pays off every time. Well, I am not one of them "flexible" voters cos I have my ideological stance which is left-liberal or centre-left. In the USA, I had voted for Clinton, in the UK I had voted for the LibDems (the only real Social-Democrats left in GB).

Well thank god we are all different then.

ambro25

123shooter wrote: »

Ah now i was told before..........do not use anti EU newspapers..........so does the same apply to pro EU newspapers....maybe even more so when the figures are from ......... the EU?

Eurostat are to the EU, what the ONS are to the UK. See here.

So is it your position therefore, that Eurostat 'massage' their stats to be anti-UK?

FrancieBrady

123shooter wrote: »

Well thank god we are all different then.

What would need to happen for you to think this was a mistake? Just curious. Are you prepared to take a massive hit to the economy to be free and to be back in 'control'?

123shooter

FrancieBrady wrote: »

What would need to happen for you to think this was a mistake? Just curious. Are you prepared to take a massive hit to the economy to be free and to be back in 'control'?

At last a sensible question.

If a massive hit happens then it just wont be the UK so everybody will be taking a hit and none more than Ireland who is more exposed than any country. I dont think this massive hit will happen.

Back on to your question and now in hindsight. Would you have asked same to all those in 1916 and the following years. I think your answer may be yes you would want to be free.

123shooter

ambro25 wrote: »

Eurostat are to the EU, what the ONS are to the UK. See here.

So is it your position therefore, that Eurostat 'massage' their stats to be anti-UK?

At this present time everything in the EU is anti-UK they state it on a daily basis almost.

Nate--IRL--

123shooter wrote: »

At last a sensible question.

Which you still didn't answer..........

Nate

123shooter

Nate--IRL-- wrote: »

Which you still didn't answer..........

Nate

I said i dont think the massive hit will happen and yes to be free.

FrancieBrady

123shooter wrote: »

At last a sensible question.

If a massive hit happens then it just wont be the UK so everybody will be taking a hit and none more than Ireland who is more exposed than any country. I dont think this massive hit will happen.

Back on to your question and now in hindsight. Would you have asked same to all those in 1916 and the following years. I think your answer may be yes you would want to be free.

But the British are hardly being oppressed by a Union they went into willingly, a union they knew they would have to contribute to and would have to accept certain things. They were architects of how how the EU changed, being one of it's strongest members, so no real comparison to the situation in 1916.

So, have I got this right.
You don't care what hit the UK takes because Ireland will be more exposed to a bigger hit?

That about it?

First Up

LeinsterDub wrote:

In the case the Tory party pulls itself apart over Brexit , what do you expect Labour too do , can Corbyn maintain even partial control of the whip? Do we have any indication of Hard V Soft Brexit vote count?

I think that's a really hard one to call. The chaos after Brexit is going to change the political landscape but how the pieces fall is anyone's guess. I wouldn't have faith in Corbyn to pull them out of the mire.

123shooter

FrancieBrady wrote: »

But the British are hardly being oppressed by a Union they went into willingly, a union they knew they would have to contribute too and would have to accept certain things. They were architects of how how the EU changed, being one of it's strongest members, so no real comparison to the situation in 1916.

As Farage stated many times what the UK voted for in 1975 was not what is going on now.

So, have I got this right.
You don't care what hit the UK takes because Ireland will be more exposed to a bigger hit?

That about it?

Jeez thats a twist of words alright. I dont think the 'massive hit' will happen because it would be too costly for all so all will agree to avoid the bad stuff.

FrancieBrady

123shooter wrote: »

As Farage stated many times what the UK voted for in 1975 was not what is going on now.

The British were one of the key members that changed it. Jeez, the victim mentality people have inherited from Farage's dangerous nonsense is extraordinary.

Jeez thats a twist of words alright. I dont think the 'massive hit' will happen because it would be too costly for all so all will agree to avoid the bad stuff.

It isn't a twist, it is what you said.

And I didn't ask you what you 'think' might happen.

I asked you 'are you prepared to take a hit to take back 'control'?' Simple question