Brexit Discussion Thread VI

WomanSkirtFan8

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

By the way, Jacob Rees-Mogg left his mic on at that rally and compared the audience to members of China's Communist party. He also refused to stand at the end. Here is a condensed clip:

https://streamable.com/fqchn

Well isn't that just nice of him?. Comparing all brexiteers to communists. That just shows the absolute utter contempt he has for all those in the UK who want him to be their prime minister. All of those there in that audience will probably end up either unemployed or starving by this time next year. Not something I like to have to say. It's like something out of a Charles Dickens novel

Infini

SNIP. No meme dumps please.

LeinsterDub

Gintonious wrote: »

https://twitter.com/antmiddleton/status/1073661776724680704

Is this the peak of it? Suffer together to being the country together?

Christ on a bike...

If that tweet wasn't sent from a bluetick account I would have dismissed it as an attempt to troll. Brexit needs Poe's law now it seems

Strazdas

Gintonious wrote: »

https://twitter.com/LeaveMnsLeave/status/1074243900255203328

Imagine believing this kind of garbage. Viewing things in a simplistic fashion like this is the reason the vote got through, Tim fails to mention that the EU is the largest single market in the world (I am sure they already know this) or that he won't be affected by a hard Brexit, due to his 450 million fortune.

He is also advocating leaving without paying the divorce bill, do that in one of his pubs and see how that goes down.

One of the main reasons this is garbage is that most of the richest economies in the world are located in the EU Single Market. He's speaking as if there is no difference between the UK trading with Belgium, Netherlands and Sweden as with Gambia, Peru and Vietnam.

An Ciarraioch

Dan O'Brien writes today about alternatives to the backstop, but unfortunately, none are particularly attractive. His first is an NI economic referendum, but aside from enhanced internal tensions, RoI would have the additional drawback of tariffs with GB. The second involves customs barriers only on the RoI side of the Border, but aside from reducing negotiating leverage, it would be identical to a no-deal scenario. Finally, he reaches for the Intergovernmental Conference, but that avenue can be pursued already. In summary, little reason for Dublin to change course now.

Strazdas

Gintonious wrote: »

https://twitter.com/antmiddleton/status/1073661776724680704

Is this the peak of it? Suffer together to being the country together?

Christ on a bike...

Good response to this lunatic underneath :

https://twitter.com/ChrisJDawson/status/1074196252097695744

Modern historians have pointed out that the "Blitz spirit" was largely a myth and that ordinary people were fed up, depressed and often angry with their lot. The idea that WW2 was a jolly big adventure and "we're all in this together" is delusion.

Strazdas

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Dan O'Brien writes today about alternatives to the backstop, but unfortunately, none are particularly attractive. His first is an NI economic referendum, but aside from enhanced internal tensions, RoI would have the additional drawback of tariffs with GB. The second involves customs barriers only on the RoI side of the Border, but aside from reducing negotiating leverage, it would be identical to a no-deal scenario. Finally, he reaches for the Intergovernmental Conference, but that avenue can be pursued already. In summary, little reason for Dublin to change course now.

If you were to give me a free bet at the bookies, I'd say Brexit will be cancelled. No majority for any Brexit outcome and impossible for them to get behind any single Brexit outcome. They'll probably go to the cliff edge and be hanging off the edge, but then pull A50 at the very last moment.

Capt'n Midnight

Gintonious wrote: »

Is this the peak of it? Suffer together to being the country together?

Christ on a bike...

Hows does actively encouraging Scotland and NI to leave keep the country together ?

john9876

2nd referendum now odds on

https://www.oddschecker.com/insight/politics/20181216-second-brexit-referendum-now-odds-on-with-some-bookies

Dyr

Strazdas wrote: »

Good response to this lunatic underneath :

https://twitter.com/ChrisJDawson/status/1074196252097695744

Modern historians have pointed out that the "Blitz spirit" was largely a myth and that ordinary people were fed up, depressed and often angry with their lot. The idea that WW2 was a jolly big adventure and "we're all in this together" is delusion.

When you were living in a big house in the country it probably was.

Water John

People need the ammunition ready if they take on a 2nd Ref. That clip of JRM mouthing about the plebs is a godsend. When Liam Fox opens his mouth ask him where are all the wonderful trade agreements he was bringing home?

axer

It looks like May is leaking the possibility of a second referendum to get the Brexiteers onside for passing the deal. I wonder if a referendum could really happen anyway as I doubt the house of commons could even agree the wording as to whether it is a referendum of remain vs leave or May's deal vs no deal. If the brexiteers call May's bluff then her deal is truly out the window and we are back to a last minute cancellation or pausing of A50 or a default no WA brexit.

Water John

Are the Brexiteers being double bluffed all around?? Chucka Umunna offering No Deal a place on the ballot, May threatening them with a 2nd Ref or support her Deal.

briany

LeinsterDub wrote: »

If that tweet wasn't sent from a bluetick account I would have dismissed it as an attempt to troll. Brexit needs Poe's law now it seems

There was that welsh man in the BBC Question Time audience a couple of weeks ago who said that Britain survived WWII with its blockades and its bombings, so Britain could get through Brexit.

Firstly, WWII mostly unified the British public behind the war effort. It even united all the major parties into an emergency coalition.

Brexit, on the other hand, has made the political landscape of the UK look like WWI, circa 1915. Two sides dug into their trenches. Occasionally one side chucks a 'shell' at the other in the form of a soundbite, e.g. "17.4 million people voted!!...." *whistling noise and a miss*. You could split the two main UK parties into four at this stage.

The moment that any hardship hits the UK, which can be directly traced to Brexit, you'll have a finger-pointing conga line going on. The Remainers will blame the Brexiteers, the Brexiteers will blame the EU, and the EU will blame the British politicians. It won't be accepted as this thing that should be carried on through, because neither the Brexiteers or the Remainers will accept that any extra hardship needed have been gone through in the first place, although they'll have different reasons for believing that.

cml387

It should be pointed out that at the end of WWII, the "Spirit Of The Blitz" manifested itself in a 145 seat majority for Labour.

RobMc59

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-46552486

I saw this interesting post which explains the Republic`s method of voting for the benefit of those of us not familiar with it(most of the British public I think!).

WhiteMan32

If there is to be a second UK referendum on Brexit sometime in 2019, the Brexiteers will require the result to be just 51% (or more) for the Leave side to (re-)claim victory.

However, would the polar opposite result be sufficient enough for the Remain side? While I would like to think so, my sense is that they would need to achieve a bigger percentage of voters opting to stay in the EU...... than the Leave side achieved back in 2016. While a 2:1 majority in favour of remaining in the EU may be too much to strive for, Remainers would probably need the outcome to be at least 60:40 in their favour, otherwise demands for a best-of-three would overtime be eventually conceded to.

Earlier today, the Conservative MP Liam Fox said he would be calling for a 3rd referendum on Brexit IF parliament were to proceed to legislate for a 2nd Brexit referendum - and that same MP is a supporter of Theresa May's Brexit Deal, unlike Davis, Rees-Mogg, Johnson etc.

Fr Tod Umptious

RobMc59 wrote: »

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-46552486

I saw this interesting post which explains the Republic`s method of voting for the benefit of those of us not familiar with it(most of the British public I think!).

That article talks about our need for a referendum on EU treaty matters.

It says nothing about our 'method of voting'

An Ciarraioch

Wheres Me Jumper? wrote: »

john9876 wrote: »

2nd referendum now odds on

https://www.oddschecker.com/insight/politics/20181216-second-brexit-referendum-now-odds-on-with-some-bookies

Not a chance. if the 1st one can be ignored, why would a 2nd one carry any authority?

If Varadkar is not careful, he will end up with a very Hard Border shoved up his precious Backstop!

WARNING! This thread is meant to be an open discussion, but as we all know it is not. It is a dumping ground for Remainers, to comfort and reassure one another. TBH this sad ecuse for a discussion thread is little more than an empty echo.
Expressing a contrary view will earn you a BANNING, as the moderator clearly cannot tolerate any views which do not pander to his/her Remainer view-point.

I fully expect to be BANNED for expressing this point of view. I willingly accept it as a badge of honour.
10, 9, 8, 7, ............ BYEEEEE LOL

Because a second Leave victory would at least have to define the exact terms upon which the UK would exit the EU, which, as we have seen, has yet to be clarified after three years.

Donald Trump

Wheres Me Jumper? wrote: »

Not a chance. if the 1st one can be ignored, why would a 2nd one carry any authority?

If Varadkar is not careful, he will end up with a very Hard Border shoved up his precious Backstop!

WARNING! This thread is meant to be an open discussion, but as we all know it is not. It is a dumping ground for Remainers, to comfort and reassure one another. TBH this sad ecuse for a discussion thread is little more than an empty echo.
Expressing a contrary view will earn you a BANNING, as the moderator clearly cannot tolerate any views which do not pander to his/her Remainer view-point.

I fully expect to be BANNED for expressing this point of view. I willingly accept it as a badge of honour.
10, 9, 8, 7, ............ BYEEEEE LOL

You mean if a 2nd can be ignored then why would a 3rd carry any authority?


Given that they had their first one in the '70s. And that was ignored for the last one. Apparently the acceptable time between referenda is arbitrary and subjective





For the record, I don't think another referendum does anything other than cause riots. Unless there is a swing to something like 80%.

CelticRambler

RobMc59 wrote: »

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-46552486

I saw this interesting post which explains the Republic`s method of voting for the benefit of those of us not familiar with it(most of the British public I think!).

Does it? To me, it's a very superficial description of the RoI's method of voting in a referendum (which isn't at all the same procedure as used in parliamentary or presidential elections) and it doesn't emphasise that there is no way the Republic's electorate would have been presented with as simple and naïve a choice as "Leave" or "Remain". But I have long since given up visiting the BBC for anything of substance. Or anything at all, come to think of it!

UsedToWait

RobMc59 wrote: »

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-46552486

I saw this interesting post which explains the Republic`s method of voting for the benefit of those of us not familiar with it(most of the British public I think!).

I saw this interesting clip, which explains the UK's system of government for the benefit of those of us not familiar with it.

https://youtu.be/wFG-h_SFagQ

RobMc59

CelticRambler wrote: »

Does it? To me, it's a very superficial description of the RoI's method of voting in a referendum (which isn't at all the same procedure as used in parliamentary or presidential elections) and it doesn't emphasise that there is no way the Republic's electorate would have been presented with as simple and naïve a choice as "Leave" or "Remain". But I have long since given up visiting the BBC for anything of substance. Or anything at all, come to think of it!

I thought it shows how the people of Ireland get to decide what happens unlike the UK system which seems to be what the polticians think is best.

CelticRambler

Wheres Me Jumper? wrote: »

WARNING! This thread is meant to be an open discussion, but as we all know it is not. It is a dumping ground for Remainers, to comfort and reassure one another. TBH this sad ecuse for a discussion thread is little more than an empty echo.

Far from it: over and over again we have invited those of a contrary view to engage in "robust" :rolleyes: discussion, with the only stipulation that any opinion is backed up with reliable data or relevant real-world examples that illustrate their point. Unfortunately, we're still waiting for such a contribution; the typical contrarian (of which there have been many) tend to fall into a pattern of repeating a meaningless phrase over and over again without ever putting meat on the bones of their argument ... perhaps inspired by Theresa May's tendency to do exactly the same in her Brexit speeches.

So what, exactly, was your point about a second referendum and how is Leo Varadkar implicated in whether or not to have one?

prawnsambo

Wheres Me Jumper? wrote: »

Not a chance. if the 1st one can be ignored, why would a 2nd one carry any authority?

If Varadkar is not careful, he will end up with a very Hard Border shoved up his precious Backstop!

The problem for you is you have yet to come up with a cogent basis for any of your opinions. Hence the snipped flounce. Throwing insults around is just the last resort.

CelticRambler

RobMc59 wrote: »

I thought it shows how the people of Ireland get to decide what happens unlike the UK system which seems to be what the polticians think is best.

Umm, well ... yeah, kind of. But it hardly needed a whole article to say "the written constitution of Ireland requires the Irish electorate to ratify changes to EU treaties through a referendum"

What would have been more useful would be to show how the STV-PR creates a political landscape that largely prevents any one party steamrolling its policies through parliament, and encourages compromise between the different parties, a behaviour that comes in very hand when sharing our sovereignty with our EU partners.

jimmycrackcorm

Wheres Me Jumper? wrote:

Not a chance. if the 1st one can be ignored, why would a 2nd one carry any authority?

Because it would carry a significant majority in favour to remain, and because the Brexiter infighting just demonstrates that they can't decide what sort of exit they want. Any further referendums would also fail for that reason.

Brexiteers won't be able to depend on the lies they told to get it through again.

prawnsambo

CelticRambler wrote: »

Umm, well ... yeah, kind of. But it hardly needed a whole article to say "the written constitution of Ireland requires the Irish electorate to ratify changes to EU treaties through a referendum"

What would have been more useful would be to show how the STV-PR creates a political landscape that largely prevents any one party steamrolling its policies through parliament, and encourages compromise between the different parties, a behaviour that comes in very hand when sharing our sovereignty with our EU partners.

They even left out the fact that we have an independent referendum commission which is resposnible for publishing the facts surrounding whatever referendum is currently being debated.

Sam Russell

UsedToWait wrote: »

I saw this interesting clip, which explains the UK's system of government for the benefit of those of us not familiar with it.

https://youtu.be/wFG-h_SFagQ

It does not mention our use of a Referendum Commission that explains in factual terms what the vote is about, and it can fact check claims.

For example:

If you vote to remain in the EU, the nothing changes and all EU treaties and laws remain in effect.

If you vote to leave, the all EU treaties and laws will no longer apply to the UK. This will mean that none of the 36 EU agencies will cover UK activity, and will have to be replaced by UK equivalent ones, paid for solely by the HMG. The UK will lose access to many EU activities like Gallileo GPS, the Erasmus scheme for students, and many other initiatives. The UK will lose access to the Customs Union, The Single Market, and Freedom of Movement. This will mean an increase in Customs and Excise documentation costing huge costs to industry, and delays at ports, rending much JIT manufacturing and supply impossible. (JIT is used to reduce inventory in supply chains and is used in manufacturing and food supply).

Ordinary people will lose the EHIC giving equivalent cover for health in other EU countries. The return of roaming charges, and credit card charges. The possible imposition of obtaining a Visa to visit EU states. They will also lose the ability to work or retire to European destinations like France and Spain.



Probably requires more, but it would at least show some balance. You would not hear 'Brexit means Brexit' after such a referendum.

McGiver

correct horse battery staple wrote:

137k want no deal, apparently queues at ports will focus EUs attention and agree to all their demands. The insanity of it all, Putin and his trolls must be rofling

It's 161k now! The map showing the votes per constituency is very interesting, it's the exactly same areas which had high % of leave votes in the referendum, you know the ones Westminster didn't bother to invest but which got EU structural funds money invested in them