But I thought you handled the interview very well mate.
Off Topic Brexit
- Thread starter Albert's Chip Shop
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
I voted leave as did 17.4m others,so why not just leave,all the scare mongering about a no deal,is just that, scare mongering,no one knows what would happen if we just left,no one's done it before,the EU has a plan for a no deal Brexit and are quite happy with it.
Stop dissing your old feller and Nan off
remainers and remoaners aren't the same thing!? Not to me anyway 
In fairness, they are definite remoaners though.
Both undecided up until the last minute, have no real reason for choosing Remain, now call all who voted Leave idiots.
Have you noticed that it takes two minutes to comment any old bull and a good ten to debunk it? That's why Farage always gets on Question Time, because he's always ready with a confident lie and all his opponents have is complicated truth.There is a lot of scaremongering about the treaty from both remain and leave. Its gathered enormous pace since Xmas. As is the norm with all things Brexit each side is twisting it to suit their needs. This treaty has been operational since 2009.
My personal opinion, regardless of Brexit, is The Lisbon Treaty needs re-examined (rather scrapped to be honest) as its no longer fit for purpose. The EU is in desperate need of reform as it has changed massively since 2009. To be fair the EU was aware this was coming as when it was signed they hoped and said it would be the last changes to the constitution until 2020. So they knew the landscape would change again, but perhaps didn't envisage the problems the EU is currently facing. Brexit is compounding that situation for the EU, our timing is not great.
If we listen to what Putin says about the EU, he sees that as the pawn in the battle between the worlds great superpowers in his eyes, China, Russia and the US. The EU will need to combat this and its one of the reasons people were looking so closely at whether Brexit was influenced. Brexit is right up Putins street. He wants them fragmented in the hope the economic sanctions will be lifted. He has his old allies France and Italy to help him out in this regard - Italy want them lifted and France has made similar efforts. Rejigging the treaty or creating its replacement to make it more fit for purpose can help prevent the fragmentation of the union.
I am staunchly against the remoaners and their anti democratic approach. However on this particular subject, the leavers are far worse for what they are presenting as fact. I've seen some weird and wonderful suggestions but some headliners which entertained me were:
- We lose our veto in 2020 - we don't
- The Treaty comes into force in 2020 - it doesn't, its been in force since 2009
- We become one federal state in 2022 - this is not stated anywhere in the Treaty of Lisbon
- We must join the Euro by 2022 - The treaty does reference the ultimate goal of “the euro becoming the currency of all Member States of the Union”, but that doesn’t override the UK’s opt out, and it does not set a time limit on that goal.
- We hand over our army and nuclear deterrent to the EU -
Listened earlier on today to the radio where there was a presenter, Brexit politician and woman who started petition to remain.
Quoting polls at each other. Politician stating polls for second referendum about 54% for second referendum but on other polls that number reduced to only 38% who were wanting second referendum to include option to remain.
Food for thought. I havent checked but he wasn’t pulled up on it by presenter who did seem to know his stuff. Also petition woman kept skirting over his point and asking what was wrong with principle of second referendum.
Quoting polls at each other. Politician stating polls for second referendum about 54% for second referendum but on other polls that number reduced to only 38% who were wanting second referendum to include option to remain.
Food for thought. I havent checked but he wasn’t pulled up on it by presenter who did seem to know his stuff. Also petition woman kept skirting over his point and asking what was wrong with principle of second referendum.
I have visions of you in your wheelchair, with the tartan rug over your lap and ear trumpet plugged in as you listen to your bakelite radio whilst dribbling your coffee down your cardigan.
What's wrong with that?
I know. Coffee is disgusting. But it’s all that gets put in the emergency ration drop which the Air Force make each week to the poor people in the Mackem borough Chester Le Street.
Really? What gives you that opinion?
Racism would be such a minor factor in both for me. More so leaving the EU. Racism wouldn't even feature in the top 100 reasons for me. If I had to say what I thought was the primary motive I'd definitely go for sovereignty/self governance. I'd say that was the case both before leaving the EU was ever considered, since we decided to have a vote and also since we had a vote.
Being honest over the last 20 years the phrase I've heard most on this subject, or at least variations of it, is "decisions about and for the UK, should be taken by UK people in the UK".
Yes, and decisions for Newcastle should be taken by the people in Newcastle. Decisions for people in my street should be taken by the people in my street. Decisions about my house should be taken by my wife and I. That doesn't mean we shouldn't be part of something larger than my house, my street, Newcastle or the UK.
For what it's worth (and we are all offering our only half informed opinions) I think the largest factor was an urge to say "**** you" to everyone in charge of everything that is ****ing my life up, whoever that might be.
I think you might find otherwise but we will have to wait to say I told you so either way
The problem is you can't be part of that something larger unless you are willing to give up large parts of our sovereignty and governance. That is a given and to be fair the EU have never hidden from this. We also knew this when we applied to join.
Again I think you are being a bit disrespectful to leave voters suggesting that they voted because the way they did as a **** you. Whether its this or racism, remainers don't seem to accept that leavers had genuine reasons based on genuine issues for voting as they did. We may not agree with their reasoning, but we should at least respect their opinion. They are in the majority afterall.
Some remoaners are like mackems. They are more than happy to delude themselves. It makes me laugh how the average remoaner talks as though they have spoken to all 17.4m who voted to leave and know what’s on their mind.
All the folk I know voted due to the issue of sovereignty and that bus had **** all to do with their choice.
One out of 8 or 9 doesn’t like Romanians so he voted to shut the door on them.
I am being entirely respectful. A protest vote is a well recognised democratic event.
To suggest that the majority of leave voters had a well thought out constitutional basis for their vote is to suppose that they are the best informed and educated electoral group in history. Again without being disrespectful, we know that as a group they were less than averagely well educated. I think you are ascribing an unrealistic degree of sophistication to their position.
What ?
I made a couple of comments I thought were undeniable:
- a small part of any electorate has a well reasoned basis for the way it votes
- leave supporters were, demographically, poorly educated.
Which of those do you take issue with ?
Perhaps I am not correctly understanding what you were inferring. Although if you are not inferring that you think the leave vote is down to less intelligent voters not knowing what they are voting for, then I'm not really sure why it is mentioned. You don't need to have gone to University to vote thankfully, because then this country would be truly ****ed. As you well know intelligence and being well educated are two very different things, and not going into higher education does not impact on your ability to make reasoned decisions.
If I have misread, what is the point you are trying to make? What is the impact of those two assertions?
I wasn't trying to imply anything. I was trying to say what I meant. I will give it another go.
I said that I thought that very large part of the Leave vote was an emotional response against what is generally referred to in Brexit discussions as the elite
You regarded that as disrespectful and said that the main factor was a concern about the loss of sovereignty which is inherent in belonging to a supranational organisation.
I said that it would be an unusually well educated and sophisticated electorate who had a reasoned constitutional basis for their vote. I noted that the Leave voters were demographically less than averagely well educated. I therefore suggested that you were ascribing more sophisticated reasoning to the Leave voters than was probably the case.
I purposely avoided any comment on intelligence. There is some correlation between education and intelligence but, as you note, there are smart, poorly educated people and some well educated people who are thick in a number of ways. Intelligence itself has a number of aspects. My main point was that in analysing the motivations of a group of voters (and this would include the somewhat demographically better educated Remain voters and just about any other electorate that you are likely to encounter), it is misleading to take the polished positions that the spokespeople put forward as being very representative of the motivations of the voters. Therefore, I think "**** the 'experts' and the twats they work for" is more likely to have been behind a leave vote that an analysis of the cost/benefits of belonging to a supranational organisation. In the same way, I expect "things are fine, change is scary" was a larger motivating factor in the average remain voter than having performed the same cost benefit analysis but come to a different conclusion.
Put differently, I have run into many people who will argue about Brexit with a lot of emotion and almost no logic. I have run into next to no one that can argue about it with just logic and without emotion. It is fundamentally an emotional subject and peoples positions with respect to it are primarily emotionally driven. My primary emotional response one is rage/hurt at being cut off from a host of places I'd like to call home. I also try to be logical about the process but the degree to which logic steers my position I frankly don't know.