Brexit discussion thread XI (Please read OP before posting)

ancapailldorcha

Strazdas wrote: »

Yes, Brexit has been a bit of a perfect storm. A lying, toxic media coupled with a failed political system with no constitution.....it couldn't have happened in any other country in Europe.

I don't see how a constitution would have prevented Brexit to be honest. Countries like Ireland aren't really a fair example given how widely and often referenda are used there.

Tea Shock

Mr.Wemmick wrote: »

Seriously, the country has woken up.. the longer Johnson doesn't deliver, the more clued-in folks will become.

have you got an explanation for last weeks ComRes poll saying 54% want to honour the referendum result?

A larger than normal sample set and seems at odds with some other recent polling

Varta

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

The press.

Not enough of a reason in itself. Another big reason is that many British people have never moved on from the colonial era. At least in their heads. The idea of sharing any kind of power or authority doesn't sit well with them. A little bit like the DUP when you think about it.

Water John

I would look at the wording. If the question was about 'honouring' then the negative of that is 'dishonour'. So the question possibly skewed the result.
Who responds to a Poll, suggesting to dishonour something?

Strazdas

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I don't see how a constitution would have prevented Brexit to be honest. Countries like Ireland aren't really a fair example given how widely and often referenda are used there.

Cameron couldn't have held his 'would you like to leave the EU?' referendum with a written constitution. He would have to decide to leave the EU and put that decision to the electorate for ratification.

VinLieger

Strazdas wrote: »

Cameron couldn't have held his 'would you like to leave the EU?' referendum with a written constitution. He would have to decide to leave the EU and put that decision to the electorate for ratification.

Indeed and such a result would have been legally binding meaning either the referendum would have been far stricter OR the stuff the leave campaign got up to would have meant the result being thrown out by the courts.

ancapailldorcha

Varta wrote: »

Not enough of a reason in itself. Another big reason is that many British people have never moved on from the colonial era. At least in their heads. The idea of sharing any kind of power or authority doesn't sit well with them. A little bit like the DUP when you think about it.

Having lived here for nearly a decade, I don't think there is anything to this. The anti-EU papers have been purveying their poison unchallenged for decades now. That and the economic downturn many have experienced have made for the perfect recipe for the Leave vote.

Strazdas wrote: »

Cameron couldn't have held his 'would you like to leave the EU?' referendum with a written constitution. He would have to decide to leave the EU and put that decision to the electorate for ratification.

Only if the constitution had provisions to this end.

Going Strong

Strazdas wrote: »

Apparently, many of the Leave voting OAPs are well off, middle class pensioners in the south of England with three bedroom houses and two cars in the driveway.

It would be fascinating to discover how this demographic acquired such a hatred of the EU.

I read somewhere that this demographic is mostly the same one that, 40 years ago, took a gamble on Margaret Thatcher. The curbing of trade unions, deregulating nationalised utilities and breaking open the housing market benefited them and they saw Brexit as another opportunity to diminish state control once again.


After all, they've voted Conservative to impose austerity on "Work Shy Scroungers" and deter immigrants from "Clogging up the NHS". Brexit should return sovereignty to Westminster to remove any EU-related impediments to further cuts in government spending so that "The Squeezed Middle" such as themselves can be feather-bedded some more.

In short, they feel that, whatever downsides there might be to Brexit, they will be immune from it and relatively wealthy enough to profit from it at the expense of the 'undeserving'.

Seth Brundle

Gerry T wrote: »

Decades of this crap didn't help
https://blogs.ec.europa.eu/ECintheUK/euromyths-a-z-index/

Out of curiosity, do the EU have similar stats for any other member state?

prawnsambo

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Having lived here for nearly a decade, I don't think there is anything to this. The anti-EU papers have been purveying their poison unchallenged for decades now. That and the economic downturn many have experienced have made for the perfect recipe for the Leave vote.

Only if the constitution had provisions to this end.

Well it's likely that the constitution (like ours) would have to be changed in the event of brexit. So it would be a constitutional referendum.

ancapailldorcha

prawnsambo wrote: »

Well it's likely that the constitution (like ours) would have to be changed in the event of brexit. So it would be a constitutional referendum.

The UK just doesn't have that culture of using referenda this way though. Here, they've only really been used in regions to settle local issues with the exception of the 1975 and 2011 referenda. Three referenda spread out over nearly 45 years is indicative of this. Parliament here is sovereign, not the people so Parliament is ultimately trusted to do the right thing and get on with it. Until recently, I would have been a proponent of this model as it has ensured relatively smooth and stable government for this nation for several centuries with the obvious exception of David Cameron opening of Pandora's Political Pythos in 2016.

prawnsambo

Tea Shock wrote: »

have you got an explanation for last weeks ComRes poll saying 54% want to honour the referendum result?

A larger than normal sample set and seems at odds with some other recent polling

There are roughly 20% in that poll preferring no deal. Still a lot of people in that camp. For the record, the question that the 54% above were asked was

"Regardless of the way you voted in the 2016 referendum, do you support or oppose the UK abiding by the referendum result and leaving the EU?"

prawnsambo

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

The UK just doesn't have that culture of using referenda this way though. Here, they've only really been used in regions to settle local issues with the exception of the 1975 and 2011 referenda. Three referenda spread out over nearly 45 years is indicative of this. Parliament here is sovereign, not the people so Parliament is ultimately trusted to do the right thing and get on with it. Until recently, I would have been a proponent of this model as it has ensured relatively smooth and stable government for this nation for several centuries with the obvious exception of David Cameron opening of Pandora's Political Pythos in 2016.

No, but it's become clear that the current so-called constitution is a bit of a misnomer. There is no rule set down in law that can't be ignored by any government with the numbers in parliament to do that. Literally anything can be done in that scenario since there is no higher law that prevents that.

LeinsterDub

prawnsambo wrote: »

No, but it's become clear that the current so-called constitution is a bit of a misnomer. There is no rule set down in law that can't be ignored by any government with the numbers in parliament to do that. Literally anything can be done in that scenario since there is no higher law that prevents that.

That's what Parliament is sovereign means.

I'll write down the UK's constitution for you now

Section 1
Parliament is sovereign
Section 2
Refer to section 1

ancapailldorcha

prawnsambo wrote: »

No, but it's become clear that the current so-called constitution is a bit of a misnomer. There is no rule set down in law that can't be ignored by any government with the numbers in parliament to do that. Literally anything can be done in that scenario since there is no higher law that prevents that.

It isn't. The UK constitution is a series of Acts passed by Parliament. What you are referring to is a codified constitution. Parliament is effectively an elected, 650-person dictatorship.

prawnsambo

LeinsterDub wrote: »

That's what Parliament is sovereign means.

I'll write down the UK's constitution for you now

Section 1
Parliament is sovereign
Section 2
Refer to section 1

Yes. I know. I think I prefer Ancapailldorcha's definition better though..

Sam Russell

I think there is a negative bias in the UK towards the EU.

For example:

1. UK: FoM means 'they' can come over 'here' (UK) and take our jobs and clog up the NHS while claiming benefits. Mind you, Spain is a super cheap place to retire, but the locals speak Spanish there, but there are loads of Brits so you do not have to learn it.
Rest of EU: 'We' can go over 'there'. FoM means we can travel to other parts of the EU, learn a new language and culture, and maybe settle a while.

2: UK: EU regulations are the EU trying to control us, and do daft things like prevent us enjoying our milk chocolate-flavoured confections.
RofEU: EU Regulations mean that we can trust labels to tel the truth, and that products are safe for us to use or consume. More regulations are safer.

3: UK: We pay too much into the EU.
RofEU: We pay into the EU so that poorer regions can get out of poverty, and, besides, we get back better results and at less cost than if we had to do ourselves all the things EU does by combined effort of the many EU institutions.

Plus many more.

The UK are just not team players at the international level. They think they have a 'special' relationship with the USA, but the real 'special' relationship that the USA has is with Ireland, and possibly Israel. The UK is considered quaint by most Americans. I have never heard an American claim to be UK-American or even British-American.

Varta

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Having lived here for nearly a decade, I don't think there is anything to this. The anti-EU papers have been purveying their poison unchallenged for decades now. That and the economic downturn many have experienced have made for the perfect recipe for the Leave vote.

Only if the constitution had provisions to this end.

It would be a mistake to assume that leavers only read the anti-EU papers. And I disagree with you when it comes to the colonial attitude. It is still prevalent among many British people and when not immediately visible, it is rarely far below the surface.

LuckyLloyd

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

This is from August:



From LBC:

https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/remain-55-45-second-referendum-brexit-poll/

Prorogation won't have hurt Remain's odds.

This is more recent:



Source.

Remain loses a rerun on those numbers imo. Leave campaign will be simpler, more emotional and better able to trumpet nonsense about freedom and sovereignty and whatever else.

SeaBreezes

SeaBreezes wrote: »

##Mod Snip##

Please don't link dump

Explain the link , give your opinion on it etc. Don't just drop it in the thread.

Thanks

Sorry, thought I had...


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OtkP3Hkc1cM

Explain: Jason Hunter talks Brexit, including what leaving on WTO rules would mean.


Opinion: Jason is an international trade negotiator so he knows what he's talking about, and for Brexit it's pretty gloomy.
He presents it very well.

My opinion: it's the reason hard Brexit will never be an option for the UK.

ancapailldorcha

Varta wrote: »

It would be a mistake to assume that leavers only read the anti-EU papers. And I disagree with you when it comes to the colonial attitude. It is still prevalent among many British people and when not immediately visible, it is rarely far below the surface.

Can you provide a link to show that the leave vote was driven in any significant part by this colonial attitude you allude to?

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Remain loses a rerun on those numbers imo. Leave campaign will be simpler, more emotional and better able to trumpet nonsense about freedom and sovereignty and whatever else.

Doesn't mean it will be either as effective as in 2016 or more so. Many people in this country have already made their choice and few, if any of them will be for turning. It's the ones who don't spend much time engaging with politics that will be deciding and they've seen only farce and weakness in the last few years. I don't know how much use polls are as we'll have remain and leave campaigns again which will make an impact but the upbeat unicorns employed by Vote Leave in 2016 are dead.

LuckyLloyd

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Can you provide a link to show that the leave vote was driven in any significant part by this colonial attitude you allude to?



Doesn't mean it will be more effective. Many people in this country have already made their choice and few, if any of them will be for turning. It's the ones who don't spend much time engaging with politics that will be deciding and they've seen only farce and weakness in the last few years. I don't know how much use polls are as we'll have remain and leave campaigns again which will make an impact but the upbeat unicorns employed by Vote Leave in 2016 are dead.

3 of 5 of the polls shown indicate significant numbers of don’t knows, so we’ll have a campaign. The upbeat unicorns are still trotted out in the press and on shows like QT, etc and remain counter arguments are shouted down with force. Still, after all that has gone on. Now you will add to that emotional stuff about democracy denied; people vs parliament; EU bullies. I’m not seeing it.

You would need polling averages in the high 50’s imo, and you don’t have it.

Letwin_Larry

Strazdas wrote: »

Apparently, many of the Leave voting OAPs are well off, middle class pensioners in the south of England with three bedroom houses and two cars in the driveway.

It would be fascinating to discover how this demographic acquired such a hatred of the EU.

Daily Mail, or The Telegraph would be my guess. Such bias is often passed from one generation to the next, so possibly it's a hangover from WW2, the blitz etc.

My ex-manager who if still alive would certainly fit the bill.
A nice man, but his dislike of foreigners was something to witness. Wasn't unlike a Little Britain sketch when I recall some of his comments.

prawnsambo

Varta wrote: »

It would be a mistake to assume that leavers only read the anti-EU papers. And I disagree with you when it comes to the colonial attitude. It is still prevalent among many British people and when not immediately visible, it is rarely far below the surface.

I'm struggling to think of any pro-EU newspapers other than the Guardian/Observer and Independent. On the other side are the Times, Telegraph, Mail, Sun, Star, Mirror, Express and nearly all of those have a much higher circulation individually than the others combined. The Sun has almost four times the circulation of the 'pro-EU' papers.

ancapailldorcha

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

3 of 5 of the polls shown indicate significant numbers of don’t knows, so we’ll have a campaign. The upbeat unicorns are still trotted out in the press and on shows like QT, etc and remain counter arguments are shouted down with force. Still, after all that has gone on. Now you will add to that emotional stuff about democracy denied; people vs parliament; EU bullies. I’m not seeing it.

You would need polling averages in the high 50’s imo, and you don’t have it.

They will be trotted out but they'll be damp squibs this time. Nobody is even pretending that Brexit will provide economic benefits anymore. All people see now are lies, corruption and incompetence. I could be wrong of course. QT audiences I have no respect for. They clap for virtually everything and seem to consist of people who turn up simply to moan on TV.

Either way, a People's Vote sorts this. Either the UK will leave knowing all the facts or it stays and ends this whole pointless and expensive charade.

Varta

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Can you provide a link to show that the leave vote was driven in any significant part by this colonial attitude you allude to?

Smart ar&e reply, but you know very well that not every possible reason has been researched and therefore not every possible reason can be demonstrated by research. It doesn't mean that those reasons don't exist. You seem to hold a very pro British attitude. Fine. I see them as an ex colonial power that has yet to come to terms with its loss of empire and I believe that played a significant part in the decision to brexit. I also believe that they are making a terrible mistake in leaving the EU, however, it was their decision to make and now I would like them to go as soon as possible and cease interfering in the day-to-day business of the EU.

ancapailldorcha

Varta wrote: »

Smart ar&e reply, but you know very well that not every possible reason has been researched and therefore not every possible reason can be demonstrated by research. It doesn't mean that those reasons don't exist. You seem to hold a very pro British attitude. Fine. I see them as an ex colonial power that has yet to come to terms with its loss of empire and I believe that played a significant part in the decision to brexit. I also believe that they are making a terrible mistake in leaving the EU, however, it was their decision to make and now I would like them to go as soon as possible and cease interfering in the day-to-day business of the EU.

You have a baseless claim based on a lazy stereotype and now you are moving the goalposts. I never claimed that this attitude does not exist, I simply asked for evidence that it played a significant role in returning a leave vote.

Joe_ Public

prawnsambo wrote: »

I'm struggling to think of any pro-EU newspapers other than the Guardian/Observer and Independent. On the other side are the Times, Telegraph, Mail, Sun, Star, Mirror, Express and nearly all of those have a much higher circulation individually than the others combined. The Sun has almost four times the circulation of the 'pro-EU' papers.

Mirror traditionally a more pro than anti eu paper i would think. More on remain side too though it might hedge its bets a bit, pippa crear is frequently on talk shows and comes across very pro remain. I read the times and find it very balanced, not overtly pro leave. But leave side very definitely still holds sway in overall coverage, no doubt on that i'd say.

ArmaniJeanss

prawnsambo wrote: »

I'm struggling to think of any pro-EU newspapers other than the Guardian/Observer and Independent. On the other side are the Times, Telegraph, Mail, Sun, Star, Mirror, Express and nearly all of those have a much higher circulation individually than the others combined. The Sun has almost four times the circulation of the 'pro-EU' papers.

Daily Mirror urged a vote for remain in its front page editorial before the referendum. The Times also.

Neither are rabidly pro-EU admittedly, compared to the anti-EU side.

prawnsambo

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

Daily Mirror urged a vote for remain in its front page editorial before the referendum. The Times also.

Neither are rabidly pro-EU admittedly, compared to the anti-EU side.

It's more their readership as evidenced by article comments that I'd be going by. But yeah, I forgot that the Mirror was advocating remain.