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

[Politics] Brexit

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


  • Total voters
    1,085






Baldseagull

Well-known member
Jan 26, 2012
10,993
Crawley


Two Professors

Two Mad Professors
Jul 13, 2009
7,617
Multicultural Brum
I'd suggest Japan, another inward looking xenophobic island nation with a naval Imperial history. One small problem with this though is that they only take graduates. Obviously given the correlation between lack of education and proBrexit voting, it is unlikely that any of them have this option.

Every time I see one of your semi-literate,bile-filled posts,this picture comes to mind! :lolol:Hope you have turned off your ignore function,as well as your brain.

mental.jpg
 


Two Professors

Two Mad Professors
Jul 13, 2009
7,617
Multicultural Brum
Verhofstad.......'red velvet cakeism' :lolol:
 


Baldseagull

Well-known member
Jan 26, 2012
10,993
Crawley
Oh Boris....

[tweet]968406960776376320[/tweet]

The ******* knows this is not a realistic comparison, but is convinced that the public is stupid enough to be taken in by it, annoyingly, he seems to be right about that.
 




JC Footy Genius

Bringer of TRUTH
Jun 9, 2015
10,568
There is actually much more to say.

Problem is (and this was always the problem) the vote wasn't like a general election. If you vote for a party and don't like them you get the chance to vote them out next time.

This isn't the case and the result has not only split the country down the middle, it's split the interpretation of the result which ever way you voted.

A more intelligent debate would have been around trying to ascertain the public's dissatisfaction with the EU.

A vote for "I'm on the fence, but the terms of our membership need re-evaluating" would have probably won the day.

Everyone on here can argue all they like. Both are "right" and aren't going to be shifted either way.

What I find astonishing is the abuse certain politicians are getting by trying to find a middle way to bring everything and everyone (albeit in part) together.

The just over 50% of the population who voted out DID NOT on mass vote in a dictator who wants to abolish democracy.

How selfish and shame on those who think so.

If Brexit turns out as predicted by the doom merchants then I'm sure a party will stand on a 'taking us back in' ticket at some point in the future so Brexit isn't irreversible. The real problem is many on the losing side never accepted the result and are not willing to even give it a chance.

That moment came and went when Cameron tried to renegotiate terms of our membership and came back with very little. Proving how delusional the view of Leading from within truly is.

Politicians that are all from the Remain side and think it acceptable to dilute Brexit to a point where they will probably end up saying it's hardly worth leaving now … lets call the whole thing off. No wonder they are getting stick.
 


Baldseagull

Well-known member
Jan 26, 2012
10,993
Crawley
i believe the government have given their approach, we're leaving the EU, single market, customs union etc. its certainly wavered back and forth on the details of implementation and how to address problems, but the general position has been clear, many simply dont like it so have rejected it. Corbyn's position is pretty much the same, he's take a policy position light on detail and off course he doesn't have to worry about implementation. i'm somewhat surprised how little he's had to give to gain acceptance, i thought being in the single market, the freedom of movement, the ECJ, MEPs, member of European Commission etc had more importance to remainers.

As I said before, half in is better than fully out, it isn't my desire, just not as bad as the worst alternative.
 






Baldseagull

Well-known member
Jan 26, 2012
10,993
Crawley
If Brexit turns out as predicted by the doom merchants then I'm sure a party will stand on a 'taking us back in' ticket at some point in the future so Brexit isn't irreversible. The real problem is many on the losing side never accepted the result and are not willing to even give it a chance.

That moment came and went when Cameron tried to renegotiate terms of our membership and came back with very little. Proving how delusional the view of Leading from within truly is.

Politicians that are all from the Remain side and think it acceptable to dilute Brexit to a point where they will probably end up saying it's hardly worth leaving now … lets call the whole thing off. No wonder they are getting stick.

After we have left, returning to the EU with the same status we have now, rebates, vetoes etc. is highly unlikely, so once we are out it is not reversible to our current standing. If we reverse now, we keep the current status, for as long as we want to, without the need to deepen the relationship, with the need to have a referendum on any new treaty or treaty change that did deepen the relationship as is in law.
You know this.
 


highflyer

Well-known member
Jan 21, 2016
2,440
i believe the government have given their approach, we're leaving the EU, single market, customs union etc. its certainly wavered back and forth on the details of implementation and how to address problems, but the general position has been clear, many simply dont like it so have rejected it. Corbyn's position is pretty much the same, he's take a policy position light on detail and off course he doesn't have to worry about implementation. i'm somewhat surprised how little he's had to give to gain acceptance, i thought being in the single market, the freedom of movement, the ECJ, MEPs, member of European Commission etc had more importance to remainers.

The governments problem is that there is a real risk that the 'half a kneecapping' option presented by Labour is likely to tempt the strongest pro-EU Conservatives to rebel and they will not be able to hold the line that they have taken.
I do agree with you that, when you look at the detail Labour seems to have moved less than it might at first appear. The idea of being in 'a' customs union, but retaining an independent voice in trade negotiations may be hard to sell to the EU (it would be an ideal option if it could be achieved though - the lack of transparency in how the EU negotiates trade deals has always been a problem and does open the process to behind the scenes corporate lobbying).

In my (not very informed) view this is a risky, but potentially clever, move by Labour. Let's see what happens now...
 


WATFORD zero

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jul 10, 2003
25,998
Oh Well,

20 Months after the vote and no sign of any trade negotiations outside of the EU even beginning
8th December 1st phase agreement now being put into legislation (Here For those who have forgotten)
Announcement this week of what we are actually going to ask of the EU on trading
No agreement on extension/implementation period
And 13 months to go

Next few weeks could be interesting

Tick f***ing Tock indeed :lolol:
 
Last edited:




JC Footy Genius

Bringer of TRUTH
Jun 9, 2015
10,568
After we have left, returning to the EU with the same status we have now, rebates, vetoes etc. is highly unlikely, so once we are out it is not reversible to our current standing. If we reverse now, we keep the current status, for as long as we want to, without the need to deepen the relationship, with the need to have a referendum on any new treaty or treaty change that did deepen the relationship as is in law.
You know this.

Yes, the terms would be different but the point is once enacted, Brexit (leaving the EU) is not irreversible.
 


Baldseagull

Well-known member
Jan 26, 2012
10,993
Crawley
Yes, the terms would be different but the point is once enacted, Brexit (leaving the EU) is not irreversible.

I concur. But you must agree, if we are in 15 years time EU members, we would almost certainly be in a better position if we remained, rather than left and came back.
I get the sense (when you are posting your true thoughts, and not just your wind up stuff) that you are hopeful, rather than certain that Brexit would be an economic success. I also get the sense that being a little bit better or worse off economically is not what concerns you with Brexit, but I can't work out what it really is you want, what it is that for you, will mean Brexit was a success? I don't mean the no ECJ rules, or control of immigration, I mean what will be different materially about Britain?
 






Garry Nelson's teacher

Well-known member
May 11, 2015
5,257
Bloody Worthing!
"The real problem is many on the losing side never accepted the result and are not willing to even give it a chance." Well that's one way to frame it. But it isn't really a matter of just being a bad loser. It's seeing that the case was flawed, misrepresented and that in the cold light of day it looks worse with every turn of events. It's like watching a car crash in slow motion. But I'll await Dr Fox's speech today and then Mrs May's on Friday and search for realistic grounds for optimism. We've had naff-all so far.
 


nicko31

Well-known member
Jan 7, 2010
17,656
Gods country fortnightly
Looks like 2 interest rate rises as a minimum this year. Gotta love this inflation. Is this the Brexit dividend?
 




Garry Nelson's teacher

Well-known member
May 11, 2015
5,257
Bloody Worthing!
Just listened to Fox's speech. I'll say one thing for him: it was several miles better than that of Boris, although that sets the bar a bit low.

There was a lot of forward looking stuff and metrics of new markets and therefore (arguably) opportunities. But some of the metrics were 30 years away eg the growth of the African middle class. There was a lot of crowing about the capabilities of UK businesses to take advantage of new opportunities - eg digital trading. Yet he didn't mention the obvious: that these capabilities have been developed while we've been in the EU.

He did gives us an insight into some of the work that his department has been doing behind the scenes and this at least showed that there has been a degree of proactivity in the approach. But it did seem to be bits and pieces and I'm not sure how much it adds up to.

There was a lot of Bojo type stuff about the UK 'leading' the new global trading landscape. Well I suppose you either believe that or you don't. And you might need someone serious as Foreign Secretary for a start.

Unless I missed something, the ONLY specific case that he referred to was the benefit to the UK brewing industry and its spectacular improvement in sales to South Korea following a trading agreement. Great news! But this agreement was negotiated via the EU (which he did reference)!

In my view it was better than I expected but woefully short on the sort of evidence we'd need to take the Big Gamble. Others might find more substance to feast on but to me it would take a massive leap of faith for anyone to be convinced by this. And meanwhile, forget the ambitious global pretensions - we can't even sort out the Northern Irish issue in our own back yard.
 








Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here