UK forum members, BREXIT?

[Brumby]

The stability of the political parties is such at the moment that new elections will add to the complexity, I think.

So basically the people get to vote again for exit and leave but this time through new elections? I wonder how that works for all the other important economic issues at hand. Did the UK twist it's own arm behind it's back?

If it goes as far as becoming a general election (called early), then in theory (N.B. I'm NO expert in politics and could be wrong) one of the parties (e.g. the main opposition, usually Labour) could offer a second referendum or something. To avoid losing votes, most/all parties could then be forced to do likewise, to avoid losing votes, since about 48% of voters are probably upset by the result.

But I'm speculating, since I'm no expert on politics, and this situation (Brexit), is a fairly new concept, so there is not much past history of similar things here (UK), to go by.

Superficially it sounds as though it could work.  The big danger is that in appeasing the remain voters the established parties may induce the outraged leave voters to defect to the fascists.  This would be UKIP in the first instance, but they are merely a front for the more organised fascists.

In practice, an election could enable a 'do-over', with no substantial political poison (well, no more than politicians already deal with.)

If, in an election campaign, you have two leading camps - one supporting 'Remain' and the other 'Exit' then whoever wins will be able to claim a mandate to pursue their declared preference ... and they will have the political numbers to follow through.

[MK14]

In practice, an election could enable a 'do-over', with no substantial political poison (well, no more than politicians already deal with.)

If, in an election campaign, you have two leading camps - one supporting 'Remain' and the other 'Exit' then whoever wins will be able to claim a mandate to pursue their declared preference ... and they will have the political numbers to follow through.

The thing is, the EU, and the member countries, DON'T want to interfere with an internal/national UK wide general election. Which is a good thing, so we can decide amongst ourselves,  which party and hence leader, we want to take us forward.

Mixing remain/leave into the mixture, messes things up.

E.g. If Conservatives go for Leave, and Labour go for remain, ignoring other parties for now.

If the EU and/or other EU countries decides to try and put its case forward, to try and swing the 52%:48%, the other way. It could mean we get pressed into choosing a party and hence new prime minister, more based on remain/leave rather than choosing the best one for leading us and running the country for the next 5 years.

E.g. Say UKip are the only ones who go for leave, the others go for remain and/or a second referendum. We could end up getting a new prime minister who may not be the primary choice, if given a "normal" election (free of any Brexit stuff).

This Brexit sort of messes things up (muddies the waters), so maybe is NOT the best "cloud" under which to have a general election.

Also I'm surprised Boris Johnson has pulled out. But he did seem to suddenly go VERY quiet, immediately after the "Brexit" result was announced. So I'm not that surprised on reflection.

[jancumps]

...

The thing is, the EU, and the member countries, DON'T want to interfere with an internal/national UK wide general election. Which is a good thing, so we can decide amongst ourselves,  which party and hence leader, we want to take us forward.
...

That is correct. Also during the referendum there was a gentleman's agreement that EU and member countries would not  interfere or try to impact.

[Zero999]

Instead of blaming THEMSELVES and deciding how to improve and solve the issues which the voting public DON'T like.

Something like 13% of the EU's population is British (give or take). Why should the EU adapt to you? What are you offering in return?

It's definitely more than 13% of the EU's population who don't like how the EU is run. There are people in other EU states who are dissatisfied with the EU. It's just their governments haven't held a referendum about it.

Then there are those like myself who voted to remain, even though I have some doubts about the EU.

There was a referendum and the results are in.  To now say, no, we're not going to do it is to say that the election was a fraud, that the opinions of the voters are irrelevant and government knows best.

Given the amount of lies told by both sides, the election was one big fraud.

Perhaps the advertising standards commission should be allowed to investigate some of the claims made? It's illegal to advertise a product based on lies so the same should apply to referendum campaign.

[Galenbo]

IMF CEO Christine Lagarde  the other day on TV actually accused the UK of being anti-intellectual,...

Everything that doesn't suit their agenda is called anti-intellectual, stupid, uneducated, low-information,...

In the mean time, "intellectual" became a swear word in my culture, kind of synonym of mis-educated or expensively-useless.

[Tepe]

It's definitely more than 13% of the EU's population who don't like how the EU is run.

There are people in other EU states who are dissatisfied with the EU.

That is very likely true, but it is beside the point...

It's just their governments haven't held a referendum about it.

...because of this.

Also, the UK has not and will not be entering into negotiations with people, meaning the electorates, in the other EU states. What matters in this case is how flexible the other governments in the EU will be.

The point I was trying to make is that the current mess is Cameron's fault.  It cannot be blamed on the other governments.

[nctnico]

Superficially it sounds as though it could work.  The big danger is that in appeasing the remain voters the established parties may induce the outraged leave voters to defect to the fascists.  This would be UKIP in the first instance, but they are merely a front for the more organised fascists.

That will sort itself. Over here we had Wilders in the government for a few months and when things got slightly difficult (oops, there really is no money to hand out for free) he pushed the eject button and we all went to vote again. Fortunately for Wilders he didn't got elected again so he could go back to yelling from the sidelines.

If the EU and/or other EU countries decides to try and put its case forward, to try and swing the 52%:48%, the other way. It could mean we get pressed into choosing a party and hence new prime minister, more based on remain/leave rather than choosing the best one for leading us and running the country for the next 5 years.

Which is what I was referring to by 'the Brittish twisting their arm behind their own back'. Any election will be all about stay or leave.

[Galenbo]

It's definitely more than 13% of the EU's population who don't like how the EU is run. There are people in other EU states who are dissatisfied with the EU. It's just their governments haven't held a referendum about it.

Then there are those like myself who voted to remain, even though I have some doubts about the EU.

I think it's strange in cases like UK, Belgium, Ukraine, Spain,.. where there is such a huge geographical split line between remain/leave, the whole country has to vote before anything can change.

Why wasn't britain allowed to vote out of EU? They clearly wanted it, and Scotland could have stayed.
With a voting result different of some percentages, the other half of the country would have been happy/unhappy.

I believe in strong voluntary partnerships, and strong rejection of unvoluntary partnerships.

[Galenbo]

... Over here we had Wilders in the government for a few months and when things got slightly difficult (oops, there really is no money to hand out for free) he pushed the eject button and we all went to vote again. Fortunately for Wilders he didn't got elected again so he could go back to yelling from the sidelines.

Why do you spread lies about your country?

Wilders was not in the goverment, but supported that minority goverment.
Wilders pushed the eject button because the others didn't want to keep the pensions for retired people on the same level.

[rch]

IMF CEO Christine Lagarde  the other day on TV actually accused the UK of being anti-intellectual,...

Everything that doesn't suit their agenda is called anti-intellectual, stupid, uneducated, low-information,...

In the mean time, "intellectual" became a swear word in my culture, kind of synonym of mis-educated or expensively-useless.

As someone said:  "Wenn ich Kultur höre ... entsichere ich meinen Browning!"


Edit:  someone in a play - but for a particular anti-intellectual audience.

[Galenbo]

...Also,Scotland was a country in its own right for hundreds of years before the formation of the UK.
If countries which were former victims of Soviet aggression can join the EU,surely that also applies to former victims of English aggression.

Where can former victims of EU agression go?
The list grows...

[Brumby]

Mixing remain/leave into the mixture, messes things up.

E.g. If Conservatives go for Leave, and Labour go for remain, ignoring other parties for now.

If the EU and/or other EU countries decides to try and put its case forward, to try and swing the 52%:48%, the other way. It could mean we get pressed into choosing a party and hence new prime minister, more based on remain/leave rather than choosing the best one for leading us and running the country for the next 5 years.

E.g. Say UKip are the only ones who go for leave, the others go for remain and/or a second referendum. We could end up getting a new prime minister who may not be the primary choice, if given a "normal" election (free of any Brexit stuff).

This Brexit sort of messes things up (muddies the waters), so maybe is NOT the best "cloud" under which to have a general election.

While I understand your point, I have to ask: How is this any different to the normal election campaign dilemma faced by voters?  Standing in the ballot booth asking yourself: I like A and B of party "X" and C and D of party "Y". Now, who to choose?

[apis]

Referendums are not legally binding, it is the parliament that has to make the decision to leave. The parliament is also elected. Referendums are a way to ask the people directly what they want, i.e. a form of direct democracy, in contrast to the parliament which is a form of representative democracy. There is a reason why all democratic countries use some form of representative democracy for almost all decisions. Most policy decisions are complex and have far reaching consequences that requires a lot of specialist knowledge to fully appreciate. It's impossible for everyone to be an expert on every issue. That is why we elect representatives whose job it is to study these complex issues and make the best informed decision possible. Consequently, if you have a referendum the people needs all the information it can get in order to make a good rational decision. Problem with the EU referendum is that British politicians and media were not providing information, they just blasted out lies and bullshit blaming all problems in Britain on the EU. It's not strange lots of people wanted to leave.

Cameron wanted to prevent a split of his own political party so he selfishly gambled that a referendum would shut up the populist anti-EU people in the Tories once and for all. That backfired and the results are really troubling for the UK, not only a majority for leave but also revealing just how divided the UK is.

Cameron was also elected by the people, he doesn't have to follow the referendum and activate article 50. But the thing is, it was Cameron who wanted the referendum, he basically said "I'll do whatever you the people decide". Now he can perfectly legally ignore the results but that is like saying "well sod it, I don't care what the plebs think, I don't want to leave so the UK is not leaving on my watch". That is probably what someone like Trump would have done, and who knows that kind of strongman rhetoric might even appeal to part of the demographic that voted leave.

EU wanted the UK to stay, there are enough problems to deal with without a Brexit. But if the people of the UK want out it seems like the right thing for the UK government to do is to activate article 50 as soon as possible. No one benefits from the uncertainty. Staying now is just rude, both towards the British people who voted leave and against the other EU member countries (and other countries like US and Japan) who are all suffering economically because of this.

[nctnico]

... Over here we had Wilders in the government for a few months and when things got slightly difficult (oops, there really is no money to hand out for free) he pushed the eject button and we all went to vote again. Fortunately for Wilders he didn't got elected again so he could go back to yelling from the sidelines.

Why do you spread lies about your country?

Wilders was not in the goverment, but supported that minority goverment.
Wilders pushed the eject button because the others didn't want to keep the pensions for retired people on the same level.

Supporting is the same as being in the government (how else could he have made it fall?). And keeping the pensions for the retired people on the same level just wasn't possible. Also though choices needed to be made at that time (around 2009 IIRC) and the sooner they where made the better. Needing to vote again didn't help the economy.

[Kalvin]

Cameron left a warm turd behind him, and now there is nobody who wants to touch it (If you touch it, the smell will stick to you and you are pretty much doomed. If you don't the smell will get worse). Cameron himself has escaped the responsibility of cleaning his own mess.

[GEuser]

IMF CEO Christine Lagarde  the other day on TV actually accused the UK of being anti-intellectual,...

Everything that doesn't suit their agenda is called anti-intellectual, stupid, uneducated, low-information,...

In the mean time, "intellectual" became a swear word in my culture, kind of synonym of mis-educated or expensively-useless.

Yeh i' aware about the past , i have looked and studied and seen what has happened with that word .

It was sort of the point i was getting at , in one sense it (Lagarde) was claiming victimization by the said common standard perpetrators in which it would have been well aware of , in other words accusing the British of being those of the past , and then in the other sense claiming it was a intellect and one should listen to it as it is a superior one at that claiming the Fame , yet the past just about says that there has been quite alot of dramas had over and rights fought for by the British (and others) which is exactly the opposite of what Lagarde was implying , if it was walking past here out the front i would have gone out there and dropped it .

In another way one could see it as "pulling the race card out" and playing it (that saying) .

Poking about in history a lot seem to forget or just do not know about Belgium and what happened there early 1900's 1st ww era, i saw a TV doco and a no bullshit one at that about the terrible story there , the doco correlated to what is in books yet it's not a common story .

anyway getting off the topic ?...

[vodka]

Cameron left a warm turd behind him, and now there is nobody who wants to touch it (If you touch it, you are pretty much doomed. If you don't the smell will get worse). Cameron himself has escaped the responsibility of cleaning his own mess.

The UK is full the Spider Captains (Spanish  expression that define a person that manipulates and  lies to other people for joining a determined action but when the action go to begin , the instigator disappears)

Boris Johnson is not presented as candidate to replace Cameron.

http://www.libertaddigital.com/internacional/europa/2016-06-30/boris-johnson-no-se-presenta-como-candidato-para-sustituir-a-cameron-1276577487/

[GEuser]

Cameron left a warm turd behind him, and now there is nobody who wants to touch it (If you touch it, you are pretty much doomed. If you don't the smell will get worse). Cameron himself has escaped the responsibility of cleaning his own mess.

The UK is full the Spider Captains (Spanish  expression that define a person that manipulates and  lies to other people for joining a determined action but when the action go to begin , the instigator disappears)

Boris Johnson is not presented as candidate to replace Cameron.

http://www.libertaddigital.com/internacional/europa/2016-06-30/boris-johnson-no-se-presenta-como-candidato-para-sustituir-a-cameron-1276577487/

HaHa out here a person who is a spider is Creepy or many hands in everything (dual purpose meaning so has to be in context) , so i wonder if Boris had pressure from outside put on him , or , it was/is just a too big a issue for him mentally ? , it'll come out much later i guess ..

A loss though imo ..

[zapta]

It's definitely more than 13% of the EU's population who don't like how the EU is run.

There are people in other EU states who are dissatisfied with the EU.

That is very likely true, but it is beside the point...

Your country seems to abandon the Schengen agreement:

[3db]

I see BoJo is not standing - perhaps he decided it was too much of a poisoned chalice after all.

Theresa May might be the best candidate to win cross party support. I'm not keen on her record as Home Sec in terms of snooping regulation but she would be in a better position to try to negotiate with the EU. As she fought (some argue luke-warmly) for the Remain campaign but is known to be fairly Euroskeptic she should appeal to both sides of the argument and, most importantly, could negotiate some form of free movement without reneging on any personal promises.

It's much more likely that he was stabbed in the back by Gove.
Boris  and the MP's in his camp most likely figured that he had no chance of winning.
It's also a smart move for him in the long term.

[3db]

IMF CEO Christine Lagarde  the other day on TV actually accused the UK of being anti-intellectual , that was at the end of one of it's talks saying generally that they have done the modeling and studies and have found out that the UK will pay dearly if they leave and it would be madness if they did , their own studies (the IMF) have found out this , so just at the end it said the anti-intellectual comment .

One would have thought to be anti-intellectual against someone or something one would have to be a (the target) intellectual in the 1st place , says the orange fake tan or not hypocrite , they are so far up their own arseholes that they do not see the Shit!  imo of course .

I also notice another comment in the posts defending that junker dude about the language use , imo ,, the language used by those types is not a misrepresentation of the English translation used from their native language , i have seen it heard it enough times lately also assuming a translation error but now have decided that there "is" no error in translation (which can happen btw) and they mean what they mean , quite pompas gits imo and very very superior .

I really dislike analyzing those types , normally i do not analyze at all unless something catches my attention , borderline insanity springs to mind there ... with a method .

It's also interesting to note that her predecessor Dominique Strauss-Kahn took the view that "The EU needed to wake up and smell the coffee"
His career took a very bad turn.
As far as I recall he wasn't convicted of anything.
Strange      

[Tepe]

Your country seems to abandon the Schengen agreement:

Doubtful - unless the agreement simply falls apart by itself. The parliament has a massive pro-EU majority.

[zapta]

Your country seems to abandon the Schengen agreement:

Doubtful - unless the agreement simply falls apart by itself. The parliament has a massive pro-EU majority.

Check the video, it reinstated passport control on the border with Germany.

[Tepe]

Check the video, it reinstated passport control on the border with Germany.

No, not passport control. Random ID checks. Citizens from Schengen have free access.

[bitslice]

I knew that immigration was an issue but the evidence is that it is generally good for an economy.

That simply illustrates that you did not fully understand the immigration issue.