Brexit thread - what happens next

Status
Not open for further replies.
Darujhistan said:
Football match? It's not me crying about the result, or how that result came to be. That sounds like what happens after a football match to me.

So if a referendum is never a good idea, you'd agree with leaving the EU as the referendum on it was never a good idea in the first place right? Then we could start from scratch...

Remainers clearly did prefer the status quo as they voted for it.

We tried reforming the EU from the inside, have you forgotten already? I'm not surprised as Cameron came back with nothing.

It's not entirely possible to change leave the EU as no party with any chance of winning a GE in the foreseeable future supports leaving the EU.

No surprise that you give preference to a referendum from over 40 years ago to one from 1 month ago, the 1973 one is certainly more relevant to future...
Click to expand...

It was a simple binary in/out vote, so in that context Remainers could only vote for the status quo. There were no other options, such as Remain But Reform for example. Had there been I wonder what the result would have been.

I think if you talk to anyone who isn't a total hardcore hothead, there's quite a lot of middle ground where people can agree. But the referendum has totally polarised things and made it very hard to reach that middle ground, because there's no longer anywhere in the middle to stand. "Brexit means Brexit".

As for Cameron, he was never going to get change was he? We all knew this. A weak leader who history will judge very poorly.

If Cameron absolutely had to call a referendum (which I dispute) then he should at least have shaped the question better, provided more options and required a firmer majority. Then the results could have been used as a mandate for demanding reform from the EU. I think more counties throughout the EU would have rallied to the the reform cause. But if reform wasn't forthcoming from the EU, then there'd be more justification for full Brexit and more chance to prepare for it rather than negotiating from a position of weakness like we will now have to do.
 
I am actually excited for the possiblities Brexit may bring. If we have a strong PM and I think we now do. Then this could work out very nicely for GB.

Why do people want to stay isolated in the EU?
 
Cern said:
It was a simple binary in/out vote, so in that context Remainers could only vote for the status quo. There were no other options, such as Remain But Reform for example. Had there been I wonder what the result would have been.

I think if you talk to anyone who isn't a total hardcore hothead, there's quite a lot of middle ground where people can agree. But the referendum has totally polarised things and made it very hard to reach that middle ground, because there's no longer anywhere in the middle to stand. "Brexit means Brexit".

As for Cameron, he was never going to get change was he? We all knew this. A weak leader who history will judge very poorly.

If Cameron absolutely had to call a referendum (which I dispute) then he should at least have shaped the question better, provided more options and required a firmer majority. Then the results could have been used as a mandate for demanding reform from the EU. I think more counties throughout the EU would have rallied to the the reform cause. But if reform wasn't forthcoming from the EU, then there'd be more justification for full Brexit and more chance to prepare for it rather than negotiating from a position of weakness like we will now have to do.
Click to expand...



We couldn't get any real reform, if we had remain would have won, so I don't see how we'd reform with an even weaker hand after voting to remain.

I'm not sure what you mean with your 2nd paragraph. If 'Brexit means Brexit', then 'Remain means Remain' would have meant the opposite, but would be still as polarising.

If Cameron was never going to get any change, then why believe someone else would? They weren't going to reform and were continuing to march towards ever closer union. We didn't get to vote on the change from a trade area to a political union either, so a ref was long overdue. People wanted a vote on Europe.

When you say framed, do you mean framed so it was almost impossible to leave? A wishy washy question would not have satisfied anyone and would have been seen as the establishment trying to fix it.

As for the EU and referendums, it has a long history of ignoring the ones it didn't like, so I wouldn't trust them as far as I could throw them to take heed of a vote for change that still left us in the EU.

I don't think anyone wants or wanted neverendum, unless your Nicola Sturgeon of course.
 
Skunkworks said:
A more accurate way of putting it would be to obey the result of democracy or the people may rise up and cause trouble. The reason democracy works is becuase even if people don't get their way, they feel like they had a fair say. This is why the 2nd ref, or ignore the ref stuff would be far more damaging than anything Brexit could possibly do.
Click to expand...

I was listening to a (hilarious) LBC caller the other day who said he voted remain but should there be another referendum he would vote leave and tell all his friends to do the same. He was getting quite aggro and making the point about how remainers need to accept the result and make the most of the opportunity, not moan and try and ignore the result.

Too right!

craptakular said:
Why do people want to stay isolated in the EU?
Click to expand...

That's one thing that really grinds my gears about remainers saying we're "isolating" ourselves. The EU is isolationist! We're going global by removing ourselves from the political construct of the EU, not the other way around.
 
Skunkworks said:
Yeah, because Brexit is just so mega terrible that it would trump a major erosion of our centuries old democracy.

You EU ideologues need to get a grip.
Click to expand...

I don't have EU ideologues so your assumption is wrong. Also poor attempt at a snide remark.

The two points you brought up was 2nd referendum and parliament ignoring the referendum. In context to these two point explain how they would be a major erosion of our democracy considering the fact that

The referendum wasn't legally binding and is to be debated in parliament.

It was won by a slim majority 52% (I would agree with you if say 60+% of people voted to leave)

Asking the same group set of people whether they are sure they wish to go through a major and irreversible change is actually a smart idea that is incorporated in a lot of things in life.
 
Chuk_Chuk said:
I don't have EU ideologues so your assumption is wrong. Also poor attempt at a snide remark.

The two points you brought up was 2nd referendum and parliament ignoring the referendum. In context to these two point explain how they would be a major erosion of our democracy considering the fact that

The referendum wasn't legally binding and is to be debated in parliament.

It was won by a slim majority 52% (I would agree with you if say 60+% of people voted to leave)

Asking the same group set of people whether they are sure they wish to go through a major and irreversible change is actually a smart idea that is incorporated in a lot of things in life.
Click to expand...

Nah, decision's made, time to get on with it.
 
If the leavers are so convinced that they still hold the majority view, why are they, to every man, woman and dog, so set against a 2nd referendum?
 
Chuk_Chuk said:
I don't have EU ideologues so your assumption is wrong. Also poor attempt at a snide remark.

The two points you brought up was 2nd referendum and parliament ignoring the referendum. In context to these two point explain how they would be a major erosion of our democracy considering the fact that

The referendum wasn't legally binding and is to be debated in parliament.

It was won by a slim majority 52% (I would agree with you if say 60+% of people voted to leave)

Asking the same group set of people whether they are sure they wish to go through a major and irreversible change is actually a smart idea that is incorporated in a lot of things in life.
Click to expand...


Both sides, and everyone in the country understood what it meant in reality, we were staying or we were leaving.
 
inogen said:
If the leavers are so convinced that they still hold the majority view, why are they, to every man, woman and dog, so set against a 2nd referendum?
Click to expand...

Why do we need one? We didn't get one for the AV vote, we wouldn't have got one if the vote was for remain. It kinda makes a sham of democracy if you have to have two referenda if the people return a vote the government doesn't like the first time.
 
inogen said:
If the leavers are so convinced that they still hold the majority view, why are they, to every man, woman and dog, so set against a 2nd referendum?
Click to expand...

Because we can't pick and chose when a result doesn't suit us. Doesn't matter what side you're on, that should be applicable either way and is the basis of any in or out vote based on a majority victory of those who could be bothered to vote. To argue it wasn't a majority is a total irrelevance. People who could not be arsed are not worthy of another choice. If it was that important then they should have made the effort when they had the chance and not put it down to an assumptive win or luck or worse, indifference before the event anger after it.
 
I think its important for the electorate to have a choice on brexit options. There's so many variables that even leave supporters will be disappointed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom