[Politics] Brexit

[Triggaaar]

It's just gone past 3 million.

Let us know when it's past 50% of individuals who were eligible to vote.

Brilliant, this cannot be ignored!

Sure it can, it's nonsense.

 

[Two Professors]

It's just gone past 3 million.

View attachment 76121

If it gets to 19 million,they've won-but it's got my name on there,so must be fraudulent,and therefore inadmissable

 

[GT49er]

Even when I am completely bolloxed I can put a sentence together. I'm obviously not drinking enough and that will be rectified in due course

I expect when you're not completely bolloxed you'll wonder what your bolloxed befuddled mind was thinking about when it deluded you into posting this.



Hope your head ain't throbbing too badly!

 

[Captain Sensible]

right here is the problem. you have been drawn so far in to the remain myth you dont even reconise the reality anymore. they never actually said there would be financial collapse, they said you might be a bit poorer in 2030 out of the EU, than you would be if in. because that was largely ignored they started saying there might be a recession on a shorter time scale, though they were less qualified about that and you should have seen this was an escalation of the fear. then they stated £ and stock market collapse, true we saw one of these but even that was half the claims. the fact is in reality nothing changed friday and will not change in laws or regulation for a couple of years, giveing time for people and companies to adjust. yes, we wont grow as much because of the distraction, but the forecast was/is to still grow. you wont be poorer, you might be a little less well off than you would otherwise have been , assuming a hundred other negative factors dont come to pass if in the EU. so in short, the remainers never said we wouldnt progress outside of EU, just progress a bit slower.

You are talking of the best case scenario, the one where we say sorry for all the trouble old chap, let's just carry on as before but just we get no say in your parliament but we have to do as you say. thank you old boy!
Do you really think the Tory party right wingers, UKIP and those in the poorest labour heartlands that now want to see all the foreigners kicked out will accept 'everything the same as before'? You need to look at this again and realise what has just happened in this country. Don't forget, bojo the bozo is outside number 10 with his removal truck.

 

[One Love]

Didn't he suggest he's instigate Article 50 straight away, but now it's off for a few months. Those campaigning to leave cannot make these decisions, they're not the government.

From the guardians comments section:

If Boris Johnson looked downbeat yesterday, that is because he realises that he has lost.

Perhaps many Brexiters do not realise it yet, but they have actually lost, and it is all down to one man: David Cameron.

With one fell swoop yesterday at 9:15 am, Cameron effectively annulled the referendum result, and simultaneously destroyed the political careers of Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and leading Brexiters who cost him so much anguish, not to mention his premiership.

How?

Throughout the campaign, Cameron had repeatedly said that a vote for leave would lead to triggering Article 50 straight away. Whether implicitly or explicitly, the image was clear: he would be giving that notice under Article 50 the morning after a vote to leave. Whether that was scaremongering or not is a bit moot now but, in the midst of the sentimental nautical references of his speech yesterday, he quietly abandoned that position and handed the responsibility over to his successor.

And as the day wore on, the enormity of that step started to sink in: the markets, Sterling, Scotland, the Irish border, the Gibraltar border, the frontier at Calais, the need to continue compliance with all EU regulations for a free market, re-issuing passports, Brits abroad, EU citizens in Britain, the mountain of legistlation to be torn up and rewritten ... the list grew and grew.

The referendum result is not binding. It is advisory. Parliament is not bound to commit itself in that same direction.

The Conservative party election that Cameron triggered will now have one question looming over it: will you, if elected as party leader, trigger the notice under Article 50?

Who will want to have the responsibility of all those ramifications and consequences on his/her head and shoulders?

Boris Johnson knew this yesterday, when he emerged subdued from his home and was even more subdued at the press conference. He has been out-maneouvered and check-mated.

If he runs for leadership of the party, and then fails to follow through on triggering Article 50, then he is finished. If he does not run and effectively abandons the field, then he is finished. If he runs, wins and pulls the UK out of the EU, then it will all be over - Scotland will break away, there will be upheaval in Ireland, a recession ... broken trade agreements. Then he is also finished. Boris Johnson knows all of this. When he acts like the dumb blond it is just that: an act.

The Brexit leaders now have a result that they cannot use. For them, leadership of the Tory party has become a poison chalice.

When Boris Johnson said there was no need to trigger Article 50 straight away, what he really meant to say was "never". When Michael Gove went on and on about "informal negotiations" ... why? why not the formal ones straight away? ... he also meant not triggering the formal departure. They both know what a formal demarche would mean: an irreversible step that neither of them is prepared to take.

All that remains is for someone to have the guts to stand up and say that Brexit is unachievable in reality without an enormous amount of pain and destruction, that cannot be borne. And David Cameron has put the onus of making that statement on the heads of the people who led the Brexit campaign.

 

[Bodian]

Agreed - I voted Remain, and I'm very upset at the result. However, we can't change the rules now. The main thing is that we negotiate an appropriate new relationship. And that HAS to recognise that over 48% of the voting population do not want to leave the EU. Amongst the many further complicating factors is that the Leave campaign didn't have a vision of what a Brexit actually looks like, so there will have to be a lot of "interpretation" of the will of the majority. Chris Grayling wants to retain free movement of people, for example, whilst obviously Farage and his gang definitely do NOT.

I have now watched quite a few interviews with Leavers, and it is quite clear that the reasons for voting Leave were incredibly varied. And when asked [paraphrased] 'so what sort of deal would you accept with movement/trade now', there was a confusing set of answers. I think it is going to be virtually impossible for any incoming government / prime minister to determine what it actually is that the public have voted for. Other than 'Change' - which seems to have been the main underlying reason for many voters.

I suspect that the percentage who want full withdrawal and a complete break with the EU would actually be very small if we all knew all the possible options. But we don't, and probably never will.

 

[Dick Head]

Well Cameron and corbyn have both said they support the result and will not request another referendum for sore losers. You can keep posting it but please just bore off. The decision has been made and leave won by 1.3M votes
O

Did you open the link?

 

[Pondicherry]

I am convinced that the government and the leave campaigners (apart from the lunatic Farage) never expected a Brexit majority.

Who is going to take over as PM and trigger Article 50, the most important economic decision in our history?

The current cabinet and Cameron are in charge. IMO they should have remained neutral during the debate so they could have implemented the will of the people in the short term whatever the result (they are elected to serve). There was always a possibility they would lose the referendum. The way they have acted has created a power vacuum. Given where we are, I think a Ministry for Exit should be created immediately with the head of that ministry effectively in charge of the exit (and progressing the exit) until a permanent solution to a new PM and cabinet can be resolved.

 

[Diego Napier]

Idiot.



I'm Labour through and through. Tony Benn was a leader of the don't join campaign in 1975.

Just because you are a Labour voter doesn't make your original comment any less hysterical or any more plausible and in addition, referring to Benn's stance on the EEC over 40 years ago further diminishes your credibility.

 

[portslade seagull]

From the guardians comments section:

If Boris Johnson looked downbeat yesterday, that is because he realises that he has lost.

Perhaps many Brexiters do not realise it yet, but they have actually lost, and it is all down to one man: David Cameron.

With one fell swoop yesterday at 9:15 am, Cameron effectively annulled the referendum result, and simultaneously destroyed the political careers of Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and leading Brexiters who cost him so much anguish, not to mention his premiership.

How?

Throughout the campaign, Cameron had repeatedly said that a vote for leave would lead to triggering Article 50 straight away. Whether implicitly or explicitly, the image was clear: he would be giving that notice under Article 50 the morning after a vote to leave. Whether that was scaremongering or not is a bit moot now but, in the midst of the sentimental nautical references of his speech yesterday, he quietly abandoned that position and handed the responsibility over to his successor.

And as the day wore on, the enormity of that step started to sink in: the markets, Sterling, Scotland, the Irish border, the Gibraltar border, the frontier at Calais, the need to continue compliance with all EU regulations for a free market, re-issuing passports, Brits abroad, EU citizens in Britain, the mountain of legistlation to be torn up and rewritten ... the list grew and grew.

The referendum result is not binding. It is advisory. Parliament is not bound to commit itself in that same direction.

The Conservative party election that Cameron triggered will now have one question looming over it: will you, if elected as party leader, trigger the notice under Article 50?

Who will want to have the responsibility of all those ramifications and consequences on his/her head and shoulders?

Boris Johnson knew this yesterday, when he emerged subdued from his home and was even more subdued at the press conference. He has been out-maneouvered and check-mated.

If he runs for leadership of the party, and then fails to follow through on triggering Article 50, then he is finished. If he does not run and effectively abandons the field, then he is finished. If he runs, wins and pulls the UK out of the EU, then it will all be over - Scotland will break away, there will be upheaval in Ireland, a recession ... broken trade agreements. Then he is also finished. Boris Johnson knows all of this. When he acts like the dumb blond it is just that: an act.

The Brexit leaders now have a result that they cannot use. For them, leadership of the Tory party has become a poison chalice.

When Boris Johnson said there was no need to trigger Article 50 straight away, what he really meant to say was "never". When Michael Gove went on and on about "informal negotiations" ... why? why not the formal ones straight away? ... he also meant not triggering the formal departure. They both know what a formal demarche would mean: an irreversible step that neither of them is prepared to take.

All that remains is for someone to have the guts to stand up and say that Brexit is unachievable in reality without an enormous amount of pain and destruction, that cannot be borne. And David Cameron has put the onus of making that statement on the heads of the people who led the Brexit campaign.

Watch BBC now you can relive the night

 

[Two Professors]

Well that's another lie nailed!Junker has written to all British employees of the EU to tell them their jobs are safe.'You work for Europe and that door is not closing for you'.One less thing to whinge and cry about!

 

[Triggaaar]

I agree with the sentiment, but do you honestly think the leave campaign would have left it alone if the reverse result had come in? Farage had already stated that a 52% vote for remain would not have been good enough and. A second referendum would have been pursued.
Are the SNP going to leave their democratic referendum result in place?

Do I believe that 100% of 'leavers' would have left it alone - no, of course not. UKIP is (obviously) a party founded on the wish for UK independence, so of course they're not going to leave it alone. Just as the SNP cannot leave the question of Scottish independence alone. But that doesn't mean the general public would be asking for a second vote, that's just stupid.

And just because the SNP are saying they should have another vote, doesn't mean they should. That's the SNP, what do you expect them to say. As the SNP said in the run up to their referendum, it was a once in a lifetime vote, they don't get another go, and nor do we.

The trouble is just over a third of the electorate voted to leave.

Is that enough to justify the chaos that could ensue? Especially as the vast majority of those haven't got a clue about the economic repercussions of leaving and the rest can't be certain.

No one could be certain what would have happened if we had stayed, and no doubt plenty of those that voted remain also don't understand the economic repercussions.

The EU has taken some of our political power without the public ever having had a say in it, of course we should have had that say. We never should have given them the power in the first place.

 

[studio150]

I used to have a Raleigh Chopper
Great bike!
I had a Grifter as well
Bunny hoping all weekend

The EU were issuing more and more directives exactly as if they issuing diktats from The Kremlin. That all stops now.

There is a great deal of difference from the Kremlin, given that diktats would be issued with zero dicussion with other Eastern block countries and would have to be enacted as written and fulky adhered to. However EU Directives ate not just issued without discussion. A draft would be shaped and issued where all national governments would be able to digest and suggest amendments. After further discussions and drafts some aspects of the Directive would reflect individual country concerns. All this could take around 5 years or so.
There are many examples of where a member if the EU wanted a syricter approach but the UK goverment were able to achieve a final version which reglected the UK position or close to it.

 

[Motogull]

Second EU Referendum Petition Started By Leave Voter William Oliver Healey

He started it in the event of a Remain win. - Huffington Post [link]

 

[portslade seagull]

Did you open the link?

Sorry DH I have now. What a way to shoot yourself in the foot

 

[Triggaaar]

when asked [paraphrased] 'so what sort of deal would you accept with movement/trade now', there was a confusing set of answers. I think it is going to be virtually impossible for any incoming government / prime minister to determine what it actually is that the public have voted for. Other than 'Change' - which seems to have been the main underlying reason for many voters.

I suspect that the percentage who want full withdrawal and a complete break with the EU would actually be very small if we all knew all the possible options. But we don't, and probably never will.

As I've tried to point out with the poll I made, it's pretty obvious that the majority of UK voters want to keep the EU trade agreement & free movement combo.

The current cabinet and Cameron are in charge. IMO they should have remained neutral during the debate so they could have implemented the will of the people in the short term whatever the result (they are elected to serve). There was always a possibility they would lose the referendum. The way they have acted has created a power vacuum. Given where we are, I think a Ministry for Exit should be created immediately with the head of that ministry effectively in charge of the exit (and progressing the exit) until a permanent solution to a new PM and cabinet can be resolved.

That makes some sense, but I'm glad it's not what happened. I would hate for someone like Farage to be in charge of our exit. He's on the extreme of what the leavers want. I want a pro European in charge right now. Someone that endears our closest allies, not someone that gets their backs up.

 

[GT49er]

Just because you are a Labour voter doesn't make your original comment any less hysterical or any more plausible and in addition, referring to Benn's stance on the EEC over 40 years ago further diminishes your credibility.

Keep taking the tablets... ... ...

 

[Motogull]

I think it is going to be virtually impossible for any incoming government / prime minister to determine what it actually is that the public have voted for. Other than 'Change' - which seems to have been the main underlying reason for many voters.

They'll simply take it at face value.

The terms to be agreed are probably set in stone within the EU framework. Whoever negotiates will do their best for us. I have no idea what will happen if terms cannot be agreed.

 

[Triggaaar]

From the guardians comments section:

Just a bit of humour, nothing more.

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

The UK fell from fifth to sixth largest world economy on Friday after the vote. That's immediate evidence.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Very debatable though even from the remain camp:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/b...the-uk-in-size-since-last-night-a7101361.html