EU Referendum

[Toonz]

Seen a number of Vote Leave signs up in windows and Vote Leave signs on peoples front lawns. Haven't noticed any for remain yet.

I get the impression that voting Remain isn't considered fashionable because it's the side of the establishment status quo (supported by international bodies like the IMF, the leaders of the main UK political parties, most business leaders, most economists, etc) whereas Brexit has a bit of the cheeky anti-establishment upstart to it (yes, despite being full of crusty Tories and Kippers) as it represents such a break from the past and it has more passion in its message. But my point is that, because Remain is deemed a little unfashionable - embarrasing even - then it may be that the Shy Tory phenomenon will kick in, and there'll be a larger Remain vote anyone expected.

 

[Toonz]

If we don't leave then the future for white Britain looks bleak,
the next generation will be a minority.

I must admit I winced when I read your remark, but I think I understand what you mean and your reference to 'white' was probably just a clumsy bit of categorisation rather than racism.

I think lamenting cultural change (especially rapid cultural change, and even moreso change for the worse) is perfectly valid by the way, as is fearing a dismantling of our values. I must admit, I tend not to think of them as British values - more universal "enlightenment values". Things like liberalism, tolerance, sex equality, secularism, respect for science, and so on. These are values which apply to pretty much all of what I'd call 'the West' and they're worth defending. I think it's perfectly possible for Muslims to integrate and grow to accept these values but of course when the level of immigrants is too large, it will inevitably make that integration harder and slower, for all sorts of reasons.

 

[buzz75]

If you don't try will never know what will happen. But if british people will vote to exit EU after few year's if want to come back, Europe Union will accepted.
Please don't try this at home
P.S. proud that British not adopt EUR currency & stay to pounds few years ago

 

[websaway]

It was reported in may 2002 that.
Tony Blair told Newsnight's Jeremy Paxman he would be happy to be remembered as the man who told the British people they should join the single currency and that a political rejection of the euro would be "crazy".

 

[Edwin]

If you're in favour of the "brexit" scenario:
1) Who do you realistically see negotiating Britain's terms with the EU and the rest of the world post-brexit?
2) What gives you the confidence to think the negotiations will go in the direction you'd like them to (I assume here that you have your own mental image of the shape of a future Britain post-brexit since you're voting "leave")?
3) What role, if any, would Vote Leave have in the negotiations and in the shaping of Britain's future relationships? What about LeaveEU?

 

[websaway]

Your questions sound like an employer desperately trying to hold on to a member of staff he desperately needs to remain under his employment. Or the husband of an abused woman who does not want his wife to leave him. In answer to your question, it can not be any worse for England than the road we are going down. We have to be grateful that the powers that be did not join the Euro or sign up to the schengen agreement. We have to have the confidence to trust in our great country that it can adjust its sails and navigate it's way around any problems which may arise when we extricate ourselves from this non democratic institution.

 

[Brassneck]

....which may arise when we extricate ourselves from this non democratic institution.

Genuine question. It's easy to use these kind of emotive phrases about the EU not being democratic etc. In what specific ways do you feel it is not democratic?

 

[Skinner]

All I've heard from both sides are snide comments, fallacies and shit.

Every ones emotional, no one is dropping hard facts.

Its even worse that our "reporters" aren't pushing for answers, at most they ask twice and let them get away with waffle. Pin them down, get the muslin over their face and waterboard the politician until they answer the damn question.

I saw on newsnight I think, about the 100,000 per year immigration limit from the leave camp. They were asked about 5 times, what if we need 350,000 skilled people, can we have more than 100k?, the person just waffled about election manifesto commitments, and the limit will be 100k, and we don't accept more, and and then came out as the rat they are, when they said it'll change on the next manifesto, but this manifesto is 100k. So they will tell you whatever they need to NOW but once elected they'll change their tune. I guess least they are honest about being a rat.

Either way they basically said they will choke the country to make their point then change their tune once in. This seems to the same idea from all the leave and remain people. Say whatever they need to only to change their mind later.

 

[gimpydog]

1) Who do you realistically see negotiating Britain's terms with the EU and the rest of the world post-brexit?
2) What gives you the confidence to think the negotiations will go in the direction you'd like them to (I assume here that you have your own mental image of the shape of a future Britain post-brexit since you're voting "leave")?
3) What role, if any, would Vote Leave have in the negotiations and in the shaping of Britain's future relationships? What about LeaveEU?

1, The government of the day, with the help of our civil service. It might not be the Government we have today, though.

2, Of course they will. How on earth could a post-referendum government possibly not go in that direction?

3, None. They are referendum campaign groups. What are you trying to suggest?

 

[gimpydog]

Every ones emotional, no one is dropping hard facts.

That's largely because it is hard for either side to predict the future. Facts depend on certainty & so tend to be backward-looking.

Most of what is presented as 'fact' in the media, is just opinion & speculation.

Its even worse that our "reporters" aren't pushing for answers

Don't waste your time with Newsnight. If you have the time, try something hosted by Andrew Neil.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episodes/b006mjxb

 

[gimpydog]

Magna Carta would turn in her grave!

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Edwin]

3, None. They are referendum campaign groups. What are you trying to suggest?

Simply that the groups formed to advocate for "leave" won't actually have to deal with any of the consequences of a "leave" vote, except in the abstract i.e. the same as any other citizens of the UK. That makes it incredibly easy for them to glibly say "we will negotiate this or that" while glossing over the fact that they'll actually be forcing somebody else to try and negotiate that something. In other words, they don't have any obligation to consider "likelihood" when making their pronouncements, because it's egg on others' faces if it fails, not theirs.

That's a vastly different situation from an election, for instance, where different parties put out competing visions (their manifesto) and there is at least an expectation that, should they win, they will then be implementing the commitments made in that manifesto. Of course, stuff changes or falls by the wayside, but to a large extent you know what you're voting for.

"Leave" have made no actual commitments, because they can't. They're not going to be doing any of the post-brexit work, so they can't commit to anything.

It's important to acknowledge that difference.

 

[Edwin]

BTW, there was mention earlier in this thread that the case for "remain" has been poorly articulated. I found this summary very helpful...
http://www.cambridgeforeurope.co.uk/2016/03/30/116-reasons-to-vote-in/

 

[gimpydog]

That's a vastly different situation from an election, for instance, where different parties put out competing visions (their manifesto) and there is at least an expectation that, should they win, they will then be implementing the commitments made in that manifesto.

You mean like the current government's manifesto commitment to reduce immigration to "tens of thousands" - a promise which the people of this country elected them on & might reasonably expect them to keep?

 

[Edwin]

You mean like the current governments manifesto commitment to reduce immigration to "tens of thousands" - a promise which the people of this country elected them on & might reasonably expect them to keep?

There's the option to punish them for that at the next General Election.

 

[gimpydog]

There's the option to punish them for that at the next General Election.

True, but that probably wouldn't get the policy implemented.

Far easier & much quicker to vote 'leave' in the referendum, if that is a policy people want.

 

[bonusmedia]

Current betting odds 4/1 on leave and 1/7 on remain.

 

[Edwin]

True, but that probably wouldn't get the policy implemented.

Far easier & much quicker to vote 'leave' in the referendum, if that is a policy people want.

That's a bit like curing bad breath by amputating the head. Sure, it's gone, but there are other consequences too...

 

[scottmccloud]

There's the option to punish them for that at the next General Election.

Punish them by voting for who? Corbyn? That's just punishing everyone!

 

[websaway]

BTW, there was mention earlier in this thread that the case for "remain" has been poorly articulated. I found this summary very helpful...
http://www.cambridgeforeurope.co.uk/2016/03/30/116-reasons-to-vote-in/

"What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world and suffers the loss of his own soul "