Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Register Log in

[Politics] Brexit

If there was a second Brexit referendum how would you vote?

  • Total voters
    1,081


pastafarian

pastafarian

Well-known member
Sep 4, 2011
11,902
Sussex
Berty23 said:
What would have to happen for you to say "oh, this is caused by Brexit"
Click to expand...

End of primacy of ECJ
End of free movement of EU citizens
More parliamentary powers returned to Westminster from Brussels
Quit being members of the single market.

You know, Leaving the EU in general.
When we have left we can all say" oh, these have been caused by Brexit"
 




O

One Love

Well-known member
Aug 22, 2011
4,361
Brighton
pastafarian said:
How is it you believed from that the entire £350m would be allocated to The NHS and that all other beneficiaries of the money, which was widely discussed would actually receive £0.00 even though it was widely known other beneficiaries had been pledged funds from the supposed 350m.(Agricultural pledges, University pledges for those taking part in Horizon)
That’s incredibly gullible of you remainers.
Click to expand...

I didn't believe all of it would be pledged but a lot of voters, realising our NHS was in crisis, thought it was a way to rescue it. I'm sure the campaigners wouldn't have gone ahead with it if they thought it would have no impact.

Anyhow how much does the message infer? That the bulk of it would be available? Some? Less than 10% it seems.
 


C

CHAPPERS

DISCO SPENG
Jul 5, 2003
44,771
https://www.rte.ie/news/brexit/2017/1123/922191-brexit-embassies/

****ing shambles. The Tories and their ****ing bitching have a lot to answer for.

The report then details Mr Davis's dinner with the French Defence Minister Yves Le Drian and Nathalie Loiseau, the French Minister for European Affairs, on 23 October.

"Despite having billed this in the media in advance," the paper states, "as a meeting to 'unblock' French resistance, Davis hardly mentioned Brexit at all during the meeting, much to French surprise, focusing instead on foreign policy issues."
Click to expand...
 


L

Lincoln Imp

Well-known member
Feb 2, 2009
5,964
pastafarian said:
He is wrong.
In the same way i would be wrong if i said 4 million people only voted Remain because they believed the chancellors scare lie about £4300.
We all know it was 6 million not 4 million gullible voters :D
Click to expand...

As we all might have suspected, you feel you know more about the effects of the Leave campaign than does the man who put it together and directed it.

(While your interjection was helpful I was actually asking Dorset Seagull the question. It is clear that neither you nor he know much about how advertising and PR works though.)
 






L

Lincoln Imp

Well-known member
Feb 2, 2009
5,964
portslade seagull said:
By 2030 they are certainly hedging all their bets there. I think they inferred it would be straight away or most of your alter ego's on this site have intimated it on this thread. which one are you ???
Click to expand...

For Lord's sake, they didn't 'infer' anything - you did. Please respect our lovely language.
 




Two Professors

Two Professors

Two Mad Professors
Jul 13, 2009
7,617
Multicultural Brum
CHAPPERS said:
https://www.rte.ie/news/brexit/2017/1123/922191-brexit-embassies/

****ing shambles. The Tories and their ****ing bitching have a lot to answer for.
Click to expand...

Oh,Fathers will you look at this confidential report the milkman left this morning.

rte.jpgrte.jpg
 




mikeyjh

mikeyjh

Well-known member
Dec 17, 2008
4,485
Llanymawddwy


L

Lincoln Imp

Well-known member
Feb 2, 2009
5,964
GT49er said:
Oh ffs! The deliberately blind still no looking! How about the instant financial collapse? The thousands of lost jobs? Families £4,300 worse off? Travel to Europe being curtailed? UK aircraft not being able to fly to Europe? Oh, and instant financial collapse..........
Click to expand...

Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe the stuff about travel and UK aircraft emerged after the referendum not before. I put them in the same category (although less malign) as the claim that we were more likely to be murdered by a terrorist if we we remained in the EU. And that claim was before June 23, so would have affected the result. As was Farage's TV claim that dusky foreign types may well rape our women. As was Vote Leave's claims that food would be 17 per cent cheaper, that the average family would see its cost of living go down by £200 a month and that doctors' waiting lists would be shorter.

The Remain campaign certainly overstated the immediate economic effect of a leave vote, but as the numbers get ever gloomier it seems increasingly that their main error was one of timing. The Leave merchants were the true purveyors of doom-laden lies. As the man who directed them says, they were enough to give you the victory you dreamt of. Be grateful for the lies, but don't claim any sort of moral virtue.
 


WATFORD zero

WATFORD zero

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jul 10, 2003
25,777
To be fair, the Brexit negotiation team have managed to spread and lessen some of the immediate economic impact of Brexit that was predicted by the Leave campaign

Delay article 50, have a general election and then ask for another 2 years memberdhip :facepalm:

It was a strategy that nobody had considered before the vote :lolol:
 
Last edited:






Baldseagull

Baldseagull

Well-known member
Jan 26, 2012
10,941
Crawley
GT49er said:
Fair enough - a reasoned response from the remain side. Of course, there may have been a few who voted for this reason, but one thing I think we can agree on - none of us know exactly what was going through the minds of the other 30M plus voters when they voted. Unfortunately, a few of the more extreme remainers on here obviously think they do know! Ridiculous!
However, if there might have been a few who were moved to vote the way they did by the slogan on the big red bus - and I accept the possibility - I'm also quite sure that some people will also have been persuaded to vote remain because of the lies of Project Fear. So it's swings and roundabouts, really. Ultimately, the majority of people voted for what they wanted.
Click to expand...

I think that remain predictions of doom can be said to have been set to the wrong timetable, as it has turned out. The only lies as such from Cameron, were that he would not resign if he lost the referendum and that he would trigger article 50 immediately. I think he knew he would resign if he lost, and that as such, the next Prime Minister should have the responsibility of giving notice.
The other stuff regarding recessions, job losses and emergency budgets etc. may well have come to pass if Boris had got the job (as many thought he would), and he had taken the approach he seems to be trying to get May to take. Cameron and Osborne could also not have predicted the Bank of Englands response, to cut interest rates and stuff another £60 billion of QE into the economy, which has undoubtedly had an effect. We are not out of the woods yet, and leaving without agreements in place could make some remain predictions look a bit optimistic.
I think it true that remain voters probably had the economy in mind more than leave voters, I think leave voters had immigration more in mind than remain voters. I think both sets of voters had the best interests of the country in mind, I think both campaigns had winning in mind, and would take any measures they could get away with to do so.
Leave asked us to vote for "sunny uplands", remain asked us to vote for "more of the same". I get why remain lost the referendum, what interests me now is if significant numbers have changed their view, I have noticed less of the voices saying we should just walk away and get on with it.
 


Two Professors

Two Professors

Two Mad Professors
Jul 13, 2009
7,617
Multicultural Brum




Two Professors

Two Professors

Two Mad Professors
Jul 13, 2009
7,617
Multicultural Brum
ref.jpg

Every household had this Remain propaganda through the door,and we voted to leave.We are still leaving.
 


beorhthelm

beorhthelm

A. Virgo, Football Genius
Jul 21, 2003
35,290
Baldseagull said:
...The other stuff regarding recessions, job losses and emergency budgets etc. may well have come to pass if Boris had got the job (as many thought he would), and he had taken the approach he seems to be trying to get May to take. Cameron and Osborne could also not have predicted the Bank of Englands response, to cut interest rates and stuff another £60 billion of QE into the economy, which has undoubtedly had an effect. We are not out of the woods yet, and leaving without agreements in place could make some remain predictions look a bit optimistic.
Click to expand...

Osborne could easily have forseen the BoE response, he didn't want to include it in the predictions. Cameron could have predicted he'd leave if they lost. no one seriously thought Boris would be PM, because no one expected Cameron to step down (or a loss for that matter, remember remain was leading in the polls).

lets not rewrite history on the predictions, the least optimistic predictions were based on no deal, reverting to WTO trade rules etc, except no upsides included and some technical stuff about gravity models which favour EU based trade. and let us remember that worse case scenario with the loss of £4300 per household was based on lower growth, so if we were predicted to grow 36% under their scenario we'd only grow 30%. any loss was on a lower increase in household income in real terms, not absolute in nominal terms based on today's household income. not that they explained any of that, because they wanted you to think and believe you'd be poorer directly related to leaving, rather than a little less better off, which is what Osborne's treasury numbers said.

you're right leave sold a "sunny uplands" against remains "more of the same", remain didnt sell a positive case for being in the EU. and they didnt really focus on why it might be bad to leave, because of course they didnt want to draw attention to just how integrated we already are. some like to trot out the experts jibe, but overlook the point being made - a lot of people didnt want to told what to do, which was how the remain campaign came across. Osborne was deputy head with an economic cane telling everyone there'd be no jam if you didn't do as he said, people rebelled.
 


B

Berty23

Well-known member
Jun 26, 2012
3,192
beorhthelm said:
Osborne could easily have forseen the BoE response, he didn't want to include it in the predictions. Cameron could have predicted he'd leave if they lost. no one seriously thought Boris would be PM, because no one expected Cameron to step down (or a loss for that matter, remember remain was leading in the polls).

lets not rewrite history on the predictions, the least optimistic predictions were based on no deal, reverting to WTO trade rules etc, except no upsides included and some technical stuff about gravity models which favour EU based trade. and let us remember that worse case scenario with the loss of £4300 per household was based on lower growth, so if we were predicted to grow 36% under their scenario we'd only grow 30%. any loss was on a lower increase in household income in real terms, not absolute in nominal terms based on today's household income. not that they explained any of that, because they wanted you to think and believe you'd be poorer directly related to leaving, rather than a little less better off, which is what Osborne's treasury numbers said.

you're right leave sold a "sunny uplands" against remains "more of the same", remain didnt sell a positive case for being in the EU. and they didnt really focus on why it might be bad to leave, because of course they didnt want to draw attention to just how integrated we already are. some like to trot out the experts jibe, but overlook the point being made - a lot of people didnt want to told what to do, which was how the remain campaign came across. Osborne was deputy head with an economic cane telling everyone there'd be no jam if you didn't do as he said, people rebelled.
Click to expand...

The last bit is bang on and why the vote was stupid. How can the whole future of our country be based on people essentially saying "screw you" with little idea about what it meant. Anyone who thinks the vast majority had a good idea about all of the implications is dreaming.

I also like the dismissal of a second vote.

A simple analogy would be being told that around the corner there is a pot of gold if you go and get it. So the people voted and agreed it was a good idea. However they took a look around the corner and rather than a pot of gold there were some hungry wolves. Would the people say
1. We agreed we had to round the corner
2. Oops. Maybe this wasn't such a good idea so let's stay as we are.

Very basic analogy but it applies. A decision was made based on lots of false information (both sides) but once the reality is there for all to see wouldn't it be better to check? Obviously once facts are known there might be ten pots of gold so leave would win by even further than the massive 52 48

Or maybe government should stop evaluating policies and stop the ones not working and just plough on?
 


Westdene Seagull

Westdene Seagull

aka Cap'n Carl Firecrotch
NSC Patron
Oct 27, 2003
20,994
The arse end of Hangleton




G

Gwylan

Well-known member
Jul 5, 2003
31,336
Uffern
beorhthelm said:
no one seriously thought Boris would be PM, because no one expected Cameron to step down (or a loss for that matter, remember remain was leading in the polls).
Click to expand...

That's a bit of an urban myth. There were four polls published the day before the election: from You Gov, ComRes, Opinium and TNS. YouGov had leave and remain as equal, Com Res had remain ahead by one percent but Opinium had leave ahead by one percent, while TNS had leave ahead by two percent.

They were all too close to call, with leave narrowly ahead, but within the margin of error. It's stretching things a bit to say that remain was ahead in the polls, though.
 




You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here