|
||||||||
Are Brexiters realising that to oppose is a lot easier than to govern and deliver ? |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#26 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 2,311
|
Brexit is fast becoming an irrelevance, an irritant, a distraction. It s not dead because it was never alive. Ethereal as a puff of smoke it is fast disappearing, lost in the mists of its own confusion. Things are not looking good. Proponents of the flat earth theory are sounding more credible. It is all very sad.
|
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#27 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 51,606
|
Quote:
I don't do "sides". It becomes divisive and there is never compromise. Politics is full of know alls.
![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#28 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 8,542
|
Quote:
Brexit is fast becoming an irrelevance, an irritant, a distraction. It s not dead because it was never alive. Ethereal as a puff of smoke it is fast disappearing, lost in the mists of its own confusion. Things are not looking good. Proponents of the flat earth theory are sounding more credible. It is all very sad.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#29 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 3,994
|
Quote:
Brexit is fast becoming an irrelevance, an irritant, a distraction. It s not dead because it was never alive. Ethereal as a puff of smoke it is fast disappearing, lost in the mists of its own confusion. Things are not looking good. Proponents of the flat earth theory are sounding more credible. It is all very sad.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#30 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 18,881
|
Quote:
The Leave side spoke of "the freedom to forge new trade deals around the world" but I wonder if any of them actually believed any of that stuff. It's obvious Brexit was a purely political event and happened for political reasons (immigration, sovereignty).
|
|
|
|
|
|
#31 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,278
|
Quote:
Nope 48.1% remain, 51.9% leave or a leave win by 1,269.501. Not basically 50/50.
They do it by emphasising the difference (1,269.501) which swung it for Brexit whilst de-emphasising the colossal figures on both sides of the eventual vote, to make it seem like the 'lower' number on the Remain side is somehow less important. Almost half the people who voted in the referendum were against the idea of Brexit, and the Leavers won by a comparative whisker. Even Nigel Farrago said as much when he pre-empted the vote by saying a 52-48 win for Remainers would not have settled the matter. |
|
|
|
|
|
#32 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 17,637
|
Quote:
but you never queried the exit terms, or its consequences , when you voted ?
on the ballot there was neither a left wing nor a right wing perspective on leaving the EU. there was just 'leaving the EU'. by definition, one of these wings will be disappointed! Once that's agreed any terms or changes to how the UK operates on the wider world stage will evolve over many years and shaped by future governments. Whatever deal the current gov does with the EU as we terminate our membership is only a starting point. |
|
|
|
|
|
#33 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 10,733
|
Quote:
Yes, basically 50/50, no matter how much you cut the figures. Some Brexiteers are desperately trying to rewrite history by making it seem like the result wasn't as close as it actually was.
They do it by emphasising the difference (1,269.501) which swung it for Brexit whilst de-emphasising the colossal figures on both sides of the eventual vote, to make it seem like the 'lower' number on the Remain side is somehow less important. Almost half the people who voted in the referendum were against the idea of Brexit, and the Leavers won by a comparative whisker. Even Nigel Farrago said as much when he pre-empted the vote by saying a 52-48 win for Remainers would not have settled the matter. If you need a certain gap in the result for it to be valid then it should be from the beginning to be defined otherwise even if its one vote then its that way. |
|
|
|
|
|
#34 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 216
|
Quote:
Brexit is fast becoming an irrelevance, an irritant, a distraction. It s not dead because it was never alive. Ethereal as a puff of smoke it is fast disappearing, lost in the mists of its own confusion. Things are not looking good. Proponents of the flat earth theory are sounding more credible. It is all very sad.
Meanwhile I'll carry on living in the real world. |
|
|
|
|
|
#35 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 51,606
|
Quote:
Of course it was believed, it was a major point in the campaign to leave and it will happen, in fact, talks have already started to happen.
If the Leave campaign was genuinely convinced the EU was an economic disaster zone, then membership or even access to the Single Market wouldn't even be up for discussion, it would be a hard Brexit all the way. |
|
|
|
|
|
#36 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 18,881
|
Quote:
I suspect opposition to Britain's membership of the EU was primarily political and ideological. Once the referendum campaign was underway, then the Leave campaigners had to start putting forward all sorts of economic reasons why Brexit would be a good idea (ie. freedom to forge new trade deals etc), but I imagine it was issues like sovereignty and immigration that would have been at the forefront of their minds.
If the Leave campaign was genuinely convinced the EU was an economic disaster zone, then membership or even access to the Single Market wouldn't even be up for discussion, it would be a hard Brexit all the way. The EU, by way of the Eurozone is already a disaster, only held together by those who daren't let it fall apart. As the saying goes, "If you owe the bank £1000 you have a proble, if you owe a million, the bank has a problem. Make no mistake, there is hardly a country in the EU that could financially survive if their debts were called in....and that includes my country and your country, despite the brave face of the Irish on here. |
|
|
|
|
|
#37 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,582
|
Quote:
Seems everyone got a crystal ball for Mythmas.
I wish the world could be fuelled by burning know alls. You don't need a crystal ball to know what's happening, just to know how business works and a look to history to see how the government will cut corporation tax, turn a blind eye to business tax avoidance and have "special deals" with their corporate friends while sh*tting on the masses. You don't need to be a know it all to work things out, just not be a village idiot with a pitchfork wanting to burn "those magic thinking people". |
|
|
|
|
|
#38 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,582
|
Quote:
Then you suspect wrongly. There were many reasons people voted to leave but I seriously doubt that any Brexiter voted on a single issue; I certainly haven't come across one. Where you and probably every Remnant go wrong is in thinking that economic reasons were tantamount to Brexiter's decision.
The EU, by way of the Eurozone is already a disaster, only held together by those who daren't let it fall apart. As the saying goes, "If you owe the bank £1000 you have a proble, if you owe a million, the bank has a problem. Make no mistake, there is hardly a country in the EU that could financially survive if their debts were called in....and that includes my country and your country, despite the brave face of the Irish on here. |
|
|
|
|
|
#39 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,582
|
Quote:
When taking in all the votes who got the most? yes the result is close but you don't see rugby teams demanding that they replay games as they lost 52-48 etc.
If you need a certain gap in the result for it to be valid then it should be from the beginning to be defined otherwise even if its one vote then its that way. You don't change the rules of rugby after the game has ended. |
|
|
|
|
|
#40 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 51,606
|
Quote:
Then you suspect wrongly. There were many reasons people voted to leave but I seriously doubt that any Brexiter voted on a single issue; I certainly haven't come across one. Where you and probably every Remnant go wrong is in thinking that economic reasons were tantamount to Brexiter's decision.
The EU, by way of the Eurozone is already a disaster, only held together by those who daren't let it fall apart. As the saying goes, "If you owe the bank £1000 you have a proble, if you owe a million, the bank has a problem. Make no mistake, there is hardly a country in the EU that could financially survive if their debts were called in....and that includes my country and your country, despite the brave face of the Irish on here. My own impression is that Euroscepticism has always been primarily based on political grounds. There were plenty of people in Britain who wanted out of the EU even before the enlargement of the union in 2004 and at a time when the economy was doing well. |
|
|
|
|
|
#41 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 10,733
|
Quote:
But if a referendum is stated as being an opinion and not binding. You shouldn't suddenly shout that you won so it now has to be binding.
You don't change the rules of rugby after the game has ended. The main stay is that the question wasn't really well worded and probably would take at least the next 50 years and about 5 trillion ton's of paper to be able to articulate the question and thats before people complain that there was some EU edict that changed the maximum curvature of a cucumber and thus all the paperwork is out of date. By that time we'll all be speaking German probably and have very nice leather trousers
|
|
|
|
|
|
#42 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,278
|
Quote:
When taking in all the votes who got the most?
Quote:
...yes the result is close but you don't see rugby teams demanding that they replay games as they lost 52-48 etc.
Quote:
If you need a certain gap in the result for it to be valid then it should be from the beginning to be defined otherwise even if its one vote then its that way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#43 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Devon
Posts: 47,995
|
I think most brexiters know what they want, unfortunately they aren't the ones in charge of delivering it and aren't droning on endlessly as if the result of the vote wasn't in.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#44 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 14,636
|
Quote:
When taking in all the votes who got the most? yes the result is close but you don't see rugby teams demanding that they replay games as they lost 52-48 etc.
If you need a certain gap in the result for it to be valid then it should be from the beginning to be defined otherwise even if its one vote then its that way. When the decision is of such importance, it is obviously important that it is done so after a decisive accord has been reached. This referendum was far from that. It should have had a clear super majority needed for change. Like 65 or 75%. |
|
|
|
|
|
#45 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 19,783
|
Quote:
Yes, basically 50/50, no matter how much you cut the figures. Some Brexiteers are desperately trying to rewrite history by making it seem like the result wasn't as close as it actually was.
They do it by emphasising the difference (1,269.501) which swung it for Brexit whilst de-emphasising the colossal figures on both sides of the eventual vote, to make it seem like the 'lower' number on the Remain side is somehow less important. Almost half the people who voted in the referendum were against the idea of Brexit, and the Leavers won by a comparative whisker. Even Nigel Farrago said as much when he pre-empted the vote by saying a 52-48 win for Remainers would not have settled the matter. |
|
|
|
|
|
#46 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 10,733
|
Quote:
Rugby games don't usually have outcomes that result in literally decades of turmoil, a potential break up of the country, etc.
When the decision is of such importance, it is obviously important that it is done so after a decisive accord has been reached. This referendum was far from that. It should have had a clear super majority needed for change. Like 65 or 75%.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#47 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 19,783
|
Quote:
Rugby games don't usually have outcomes that result in literally decades of turmoil, a potential break up of the country, etc.
When the decision is of such importance, it is obviously important that it is done so after a decisive accord has been reached. This referendum was far from that. It should have had a clear super majority needed for change. Like 65 or 75%. |
|
|
|
|
|
#48 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 14,636
|
Quote:
Would you be saying the same had your side won? No!
You also can't really have a supermajority for both outcomes. What would a 52/48 remain result have meant? Another referendum? Ignoring the result? Madness
|
|
|
|
|
|
#49 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,278
|
Quote:
50/50? I take it maths wasn't your strong point at school?
Quote:
Would you be saying the same had your side won? No!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#50 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 19,783
|
Quote:
No, you're right, I wouldn't - because like I said in the post you quoted, supermajorities should be for a vote for change. Voting to remain is not voting for change. It is the status quo.
You also can't really have a supermajority for both outcomes. What would a 52/48 remain result have meant? Another referendum? Ignoring the result? Madness ![]() |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 23:22.




