Brexit discussion thread IV

Strazdas

briany wrote: »

One place where Leave absolutely stomped Remain was in public relations with blue collar/working class voters. Nigel Farage may be a businessman from the City, but he had a way of connecting, even if he was selling snake oil. All Remain seemed to have was lecturing politicians from the established parties, concerned experts, and comedians who somehow had fooled themselves into believing they could go toe-to-toe in late night TV debates.

So, what I'm saying is that Remain can't frame their argument as 'Leave = Apocalypse' and they have to be careful in who is delivering it. For many of those already ensconced in the Leave mentality, it's not even an argument they'll hear, especially by Eddie Izzard in his pink beret. It'll have to be an argument that both attempts to reach across the divide and hear the concerns of the Leavers and offer some sort of solution that isn't just more of the status quo.

And even if it all gets to another vote, which is completely up in the air at this point.

Keep in mind that the Leave campaign could promise the most outlandish and fantastical things for life post-Brexit. They were never going to be in position to implement a single bit of it. It was the easiest thing in the world for them to put forward their theoretical proposition of Brexit when they didn't even have a plan for the blasted thing (or even have to have a plan).

briany

Strazdas wrote: »

Keep in mind that the Leave campaign could promise the most outlandish and fantastical things for life post-Brexit. They were never going to be in position to implement a single bit of it. It was the easiest thing in the world for them to put forward their theoretical proposition of Brexit when they didn't even have a plan for the blasted thing (or even have to have a plan).

We're all fairly well-aware of all the stuff Leave said to get over the line at this stage. The problem with it (from a Remain perspective) was that it played great with a certain section of the electorate, for whom it was an emotional argument. I don't know if it's going to cease being that for those people.

The worry for Remain would be that, in another vote, they don't really change their strategy so much as hope that circumstances become more amenable to it. And there's grounds to believe that alone would swing it for them, but just
going back to the status quo may not be enough, long term. There's still reconciliation to be done with Leave supporters or British society will remain very divided, politically. No good telling the other half to just sit down and shut up whichever way it goes.

J Mysterio

Enzokk

kunst nugget wrote: »

What happens if there is a second referendum and they vote to stay in terms of Article 50 already being triggered..

Then no single market or customs union it will be. As long as voters make an informed decision. But there was no defined meaning to Brexit. If leave campaigns on leaving the single market and customs union and doesn't conflate it by one person promising to stay in the single market but not the customs union and another to stay in the customs union but not the single market then the people have spoken.

briany wrote: »

One place where Leave absolutely stomped Remain was in public relations with blue collar/working class voters. Nigel Farage may be a businessman from the City, but he had a way of connecting, even if he was selling snake oil. All Remain seemed to have was lecturing politicians from the established parties, concerned experts, and comedians who somehow had fooled themselves into believing they could go toe-to-toe in late night TV debates.

So, what I'm saying is that Remain can't frame their argument as 'Leave = Apocalypse' and they have to be careful in who is delivering it. For many of those already ensconced in the Leave mentality, it's not even an argument they'll hear, especially by Eddie Izzard in his pink beret. It'll have to be an argument that both attempts to reach across the divide and hear the concerns of the Leavers and offer some sort of solution that isn't just more of the status quo.

And even if it all gets to another vote, which is completely up in the air at this point.

The reason they won us because they promised people they would not be worse off but would have control of immigration. They also promised that more money would be available to be spent on the NHS. None of these things were true and the remain campaign was not able to articulate their warnings. David Cameron and George Osborne were warning about recessions but there was no data. Now we have data on what leaving will mean to the economy. We also know they can control immigration to a degree that people were not aware of before the vote.

Hence my belief that a properly run remain campaign should easily be able to overcome any argument to leave. Yes there will be quite a lot of support to leave the EU, then again people also thought Donald Trump would be a good president and not the disaster he is.

Edited to add: Remain would also be able to articulate the benefits of staying in the EU to the people. Show them the tangible benefits of being in the EU, not just roaming charges and the rich being able to travel or study in the EU, but the benefits to the NHS by being in the EU. The benefit of having staff from the EU working for the people. There was too little focus on the good the EU does for people and just scare tactics.

Panrich

Sterling has fallen to it's lowest level since March and trending downwards all week.


https://www.xe.com/currencycharts/?from=GBP&to=EUR&view=1Y

trellheim

Remain campaign talked down to voters and did not connect with a lot of poor people who only see the Mail and the Express who are happy to blame the EU.

There is no party support for 2nd Ref given those common numbers ain't happening . the only thing to talk about is how far the shrapnel flies.

Professor Moriarty

Enzokk wrote: »

Then no single market or customs union it will be. As long as voters make an informed decision. But there was no defined meaning to Brexit. If leave campaigns on leaving the single market and customs union and doesn't conflate it by one person promising to stay in the single market but not the customs union and another to stay in the customs union but not the single market then the people have spoken.





The reason they won us because they promised people they would not be worse off but would have control of immigration. They also promised that more money would be available to be spent on the NHS. None of these things were true and the remain campaign was not able to articulate their warnings. David Cameron and George Osborne were warning about recessions but there was no data. Now we have data on what leaving will mean to the economy. We also know they can control immigration to a degree that people were not aware of before the vote.

Hence my belief that a properly run remain campaign should easily be able to overcome any argument to leave. Yes there will be quite a lot of support to leave the EU, then again people also thought Donald Trump would be a good president and not the disaster he is.

Edited to add: Remain would also be able to articulate the benefits of staying in the EU to the people. Show them the tangible benefits of being in the EU, not just roaming charges and the rich being able to travel or study in the EU, but the benefits to the NHS by being in the EU. The benefit of having staff from the EU working for the people. There was too little focus on the good the EU does for people and just scare tactics.

There was an in depth study done last year on why people voted Leave (I linked to it previously but on phone now). It concluded that Farage's and Johnson's personalities were deciding factors in the Leave win.

Leonard Hofstadter

Panrich wrote: »

Sterling has fallen to it's lowest level since March and trending downwards all week.


https://www.xe.com/currencycharts/?from=GBP&to=EUR&view=1Y

Almost went below 1.12 earlier today, still just hovering above it.

J Mysterio

The pressure is getting very serious on May now.

Boris has certainly raised the temperature and has essentially joined with the ERG to form a Brexiteer supergroup. He even made some good points in his speech and seemed to command some authority. But really his solutions are sill airy fairy for the most part and will result in a no deal Brexit. He might succeed May sooner rather than later though.

Tough day for May (no sympathy): aside from the hammering by Corbyn, Parliament at large and finally Boris, Yvette Cooper finally had her chance to grill May and boy did she. Accompanying video in UK Independent article here.

May either couldnt or wouldnt understand/ answer Cooper's questions on her far fetched customs plan.

Seperately, May also said 'there isnt a sort of simple answer to that' when asked if no deal would result in a hard border in NI.

Enzokk

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

There was an in depth study done last year on why people voted Leave (I linked to it previously but on phone now). It concluded that Farage's and Johnson's personalities were deciding factors in the Leave win.

Their lies are also some of the most prominent that can be easily dismissed when pressed. Nigel Farage wondered if it would be so terrible if the UK were like Norway, but failed to expand if he just meant a rich country or one outside of the EU but with a close relationship. If pushed on what he means he would have to clarify if he means he wants EEA or not.

As for Boris Johnson, he would need to explain how the UK will have £350m per week extra if there is a hit to UK GDP as a result of leaving the EU. I am not surprised they were a focal reason for the result, snake oil salesman are usually good at selling a fantasy to people who want to believe. It would be up to the opposition to provide people with the facts if there are none from the other side, not just their own rhetoric.

Leonard Hofstadter

Yvette Cooper is very good at skewering anyone who starts telling her nonsense.

What a shame she's not the leader of the Labour Party over there.

An Ciarraioch

Main take from Varadkar's press conference: 1,000 customs officials required if no deal Brexit, €450m in loans available for business and agri-sector:

https://www.rte.ie/news/brexit/2018/0718/979422-cabinet-to-discuss-preparations-for-hard-brexit/

Dyr

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Main take from Varadkar's press conference: 1,000 customs officials required if no deal Brexit, €450m in loans available for business and agri-sector:

https://www.rte.ie/news/brexit/2018/0718/979422-cabinet-to-discuss-preparations-for-hard-brexit/

Ah.. money for rich farmers so. FG will always find a way in any crisis to funnel money to their pals

Infini

Bambi wrote: »

Ah.. money for rich farmers so. FG will always find a way in any crisis to funnel money to their pals

To be fair Farming is one of the big sector's going to be affected by this British failure to cop on. If anything we should target to replace any of britains farm export's in the event of a Hard Brexit to offset the damage as well as make the point that everything from here is above board compared to little britain.

prawnsambo

I love Boris's line that "it's not too late to save Brexit".

Leroy42

Enzokk wrote: »

Their lies are also some of the most prominent that can be easily dismissed when pressed. Nigel Farage wondered if it would be so terrible if the UK were like Norway, but failed to expand if he just meant a rich country or one outside of the EU but with a close relationship. If pushed on what he means he would have to clarify if he means he wants EEA or not.

As for Boris Johnson, he would need to explain how the UK will have £350m per week extra if there is a hit to UK GDP as a result of leaving the EU. I am not surprised they were a focal reason for the result, snake oil salesman are usually good at selling a fantasy to people who want to believe. It would be up to the opposition to provide people with the facts if there are none from the other side, not just their own rhetoric.

What gives you the confidence that all this will have changed from the last time? All the stuff you mentioned was known during the last campaign but either people weren't listening or the media was asking the right questions. Do you think that people are listening now or the media will suddenly start skewering the likes of Farage and Boris?

Because neither of those two or happening at the moment.

And who are all these people going to come out in favour of Remain? There are only a handful of Tory MP's, a handful of Labour MP's, and no campaign with the Lib Dems in charge is going to win

trellheim

I love Boris's line that "it's not too late to save Brexit".

This is solely aimed at being the next PM which - on balance - I cannot see any serious contenders - maybe Dominic Grieve

Enzokk

Leroy42 wrote: »

What gives you the confidence that all this will have changed from the last time? All the stuff you mentioned was known during the last campaign but either people weren't listening or the media was asking the right questions. Do you think that people are listening now or the media will suddenly start skewering the likes of Farage and Boris?

Because neither of those two or happening at the moment.

And who are all these people going to come out in favour of Remain? There are only a handful of Tory MP's, a handful of Labour MP's, and no campaign with the Lib Dems in charge is going to win

Well you can never be sure of elections, but the way I see it the leave side hit their peak and had it all in their favour in the referendum. They overspent in the campaign, they were able to coordinate with all the other leave campaigns and they used Cambridge Analytica to target voters. Added to that they gave people such a variety of reasons to vote for Brexit that those on the fence could find a reason to vote for it. I think the main reasons to leave were amplified (secure borders, take control of laws) but a variety of politicians told them the different ways any damage would be negated. This information isn't new or groundbreaking as we have been posting about it many ties before.

So from Leave reaching their peak I believe the remain campaign was sloppily run and they were complacent. They thought that common sense on the economy would prevail and just told people scare stories on what could happen. This worked for them with the Scottish Independence Referendum so they thought they had it worked out. A new campaign would hopefully have more details on what would happen if they leave the EU. They would explain how companies like Airbus and Jaguar Land Rover and Nissan would leave unless they have the same conditions they have now. This is not a threat but reality of the vote. If you add complexity to the way companies operate now you add cost. By adding cost you force them examine why they would stay in the UK. Some would not care about this, I believe many that voted to leave would see sense and change their vote.

trellheim

I believe many that voted to leave would see sense and change their vote.

possibly the hardest convincing is someone who is told you were wrong so vote again ( see Ireland, treaty, Lisbon of ) especially as there is a ton of rancour in it all

Leroy42

J Mysterio wrote: »

The pressure is getting very serious on May now.


Tough day for May (no sympathy): aside from the hammering by Corbyn, Parliament at large and finally Boris, Yvette Cooper finally had her chance to grill May and boy did she. Accompanying video in UK Independent article here.

May either couldnt or wouldnt understand/ answer Cooper's questions on her far fetched customs plan.

My Jebus, that was awful from May. Some sort of formula she kept blatering on about. If she can't even answer, what really is quite a simple question, no wonder they have so little faith in her.

Absolute car crash.

Enzokk

trellheim wrote: »

possibly the hardest convincing is someone who is told you were wrong so vote again ( see Ireland, treaty, Lisbon of ) especially as there is a ton of rancour in it all

Don't frame it that way then. Tell them the vote wasn't fair as one side overspent and there was interference from outside which means it has to be re-run. You aren't telling people they were wrong, you are asking them to examine the choices again...or something silly like that.

prawnsambo

Enzokk wrote: »

Don't frame it that way then. Tell them the vote wasn't fair as one side overspent and there was interference from outside which means it has to be re-run. You aren't telling people they were wrong, you are asking them to examine the choices again...or something silly like that.

No, you never revisit the vote. People are still quoting the Lisbon Treaty, even though that was renogotiated to amend the issues that had become hot here and elsewhere.

You take a final vote on the exit deal. With the option to reject it all and revoke the A50. It's a new vote on new issues.

But it won't happen. The lemmings are heading for the cliff edge and no lemming ever stopped and said "are you sure we're going the right way?"

Enzokk

prawnsambo wrote: »

No, you never revisit the vote. People are still quoting the Lisbon Treaty, even though that was renogotiated to amend the issues that had become hot here and elsewhere.

You take a final vote on the exit deal. With the option to reject it all and revoke the A50. It's a new vote on new issues.

But it won't happen. The lemmings are heading for the cliff edge and no lemming ever stopped and said "are you sure we're going the right way?"

Nothing to disagree with there. There seems to be no appetite to have a second vote with those in power right now in any case. Theresa May is too busy fighting from week to week to worry about such things and while I am sure Jeremy Corbyn is aware of the damage Brexit will do he is all too happy that its the Tories that are forcing this on the country and at the end of it he will get to implement his socialist utopia on the UK without EU interfering when he wants to subsidize the railways and energy companies that he nationalizes.

The SNP is in a similar position in that a hard Brexit will make Scottish independence more likely and they know they have no way of changing anything with their votes in any case.

An Ciarraioch

Of course, one would expect an Open Skies agreement to be finalised by March, but that remains a potential consequence of no deal:

https://twitter.com/gavreilly/status/1019636060001918980

flatty

May's natural habitat hard brexit little englander clique. There will be no rerun with her or anyone from the brexit wing in charge. And they won't relinquish the reins til it's too late. There will be no rerun.
Hard brexit is the only course now I'd imagine.

Capt'n Midnight

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Did they vote for the 350m that won't be going into the NHS?

Enzokk wrote: »

As for Boris Johnson, he would need to explain how the UK will have £350m per week extra if there is a hit to UK GDP as a result of leaving the EU.

When you compare the UK economy to how everyone else is getting on, the actual cost of the vote for Brexit is £440m a week in lost tax revenue.

And this is before the effects of reduced investment kick in.

And there is still the possibility of undoing Article 50.

badtoro

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

£440m a week in lost tax revenue.

Anyone else seeing Chief Brody saying we're gonna need a bigger bus while reading that.

Capt'n Midnight

kunst nugget wrote: »

I wonder will we still hear that wonderful 'Germany needs us more than we need them because of car sales' argument...

Yeah, the theory that the EU will cave in because it needs UK money more than it's principles.



Oh Look , principles.

http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-18-4581_en.htm

Antitrust: Commission fines Google €4.34 billion for illegal practices regarding Android mobile devices to strengthen dominance of Google's search engine

trellheim

Antitrust: Commission fines Google €4.34 billion for illegal practices

off topic but that will soften a few coughs

swampgas

<puts philosophical hat on>

It's looking like a hard Brexit.

It struck me that while this might not be quite the same as the Berlin wall coming down or the collapse of the Soviet Union, a hard Brexit would be an extremely significant event. It could be the end of the United Kingdom as we know it. Ireland and Scotland could be reshaped, and the political map of Europe altered significantly.

So while mostly I'm concerned about the impact on people's lives, the impact on the economy and jobs, the situation in NI, et cetera et cetera, I also aware that I've got a ringside seat to what might be one of the defining events of the decade, if not the century.

If that's the only consolation I can take from this, it will have to do.

<takes philosophical hat off>