ChrisR Posted June 24, 2016 Author Report Share Posted June 24, 2016 When the UK first became a part of the EU, was it some massive thunderous BOOM! or was it more incremental? I don't recall it being such a prodigious rift in the sands of time, but perhaps I wasn't paying attention. Link to comment
Cole Parker Posted June 24, 2016 Report Share Posted June 24, 2016 Isn't England one of the major financiers of the EU, along with Germany? What will their exit mean to the viability of the Union? C Link to comment
vwl Posted June 24, 2016 Report Share Posted June 24, 2016 It is somehow disconcerting that such an enormous action can take place based on a simple majority. I'm surprised that those who organized the vote didn't set it up requiring a 'super-majority' of, say, 60% to authorize a change in the status quo. It otherwise sets the table for future votes in which relatively small numbers of voters could swing back and forth between BRin and BRout. And now there are the issues of Scotland, N. Ireland and Gibraltar to consider, where the vote was to stay. Fasten your seatbelts, folks. Fun times ahead. I believe Obamacare passed by one vote. Link to comment
Joe Posted June 25, 2016 Report Share Posted June 25, 2016 I don't think I'd make too many comparisons of the Brexit vote and the status of the US electorate. The US electorate is far more diverse than that of the UK and that bodes ill for Trump. Whom I've seen described as a "spoon", among other choices descriptions by UK folks. It's great, though possibly a slur on the noble spoon. If memory serves, the Republican party their ownest-own selves said they had to get at least 35% of the Hispanic vote to have any chance at the White House. They'll be lucky to get 10%. They'll be luck to get 10% of the Afro-American vote. They'll get their radical base but they'll lose everything else by double digits and the Democrats will hold the White House, probably take the senate back, and seriously reduce the Republican majority in the house Link to comment
Cole Parker Posted June 25, 2016 Report Share Posted June 25, 2016 If memory serves, the Republican party their ownest-own selves said they had to get at least 35% of the Hispanic vote to have any chance at the White House. They'll be lucky to get 10%. They'll be luck to get 10% of the Afro-American vote. They'll get their radical base but they'll lose everything else by double digits and the Democrats will hold the White House, probably take the senate back, and seriously reduce the Republican majority in the house If that happens, I foresee drastic changes in the Republican Party. With the advent of the Teabaggers, that group has seemed to be holding together the past few years with spit and bubble gum. I can see it fracturing into two or three groups. Link to comment
Merkin Posted June 25, 2016 Report Share Posted June 25, 2016 It would be fascinating to see how our national government and our election process would cope with a multi-party system. Our current two party system has historically proven to seriously limit debate whenever the larger consensus within one party glosses over the finer points in order to insist upon unanimity.Bernie Sanders has managed to twist the tail of this "tradition" and is in effect fronting a third party movement on the left. On the right we see how fractured the various conservative elements are within the Republican party, and it is only for want of effective leadership that these strands have not formed more effectively into breakaway elements. Up until the present day the general electorate has always considered that voting for a third-party candidate is a waste of a vote, but the handwriting is clearly on the wall that that division and breakdown within both current major parties is likely to lead to at least one, possibly several, formations of standalone political movements with enough mass appeal that they could become actual parties if the right bankrolls are found to support them and give them serious continuity. Link to comment
Nigel Gordon Posted June 25, 2016 Report Share Posted June 25, 2016 It is looking increasingly as if we may end up facing a second referendum here. Especially after the Leave campaign have now stated they never said that leaving the EU would reduce immigration. Technically the official Leave campaign never said it, they just allowed UKIP to say it and never contradicted them. From what I heard on the bus this morning a few people who voted for Leave are now starting to feel rather upset about the whole thing. There is currently a petition on the Government website calling for a second referendum and it has 1.5 million signatures. Any petition with over 100,000 has to be considered for debate in parliament. It will be interesting to see where this goes. Link to comment
FreeThinker Posted June 25, 2016 Report Share Posted June 25, 2016 I laughed myself silly watching Donald Trump at his resort in SCOTLAND hailing the UK vote for Brexit. In SCOTLAND. The twit. I didn't expect him to know this, but I would have expected someone on his staff, perhaps one of his kids, who seem to be the only people he listens to, to tell him that Scotland voted overwhelmingly to REMAIN. He actually used the phrase "take back their country." This is a man who a week before the vote didn't know what "Brexit" meant. This is why the thought of that man in the White House scares the pee out of me. Link to comment
Nigel Gordon Posted June 25, 2016 Report Share Posted June 25, 2016 I hope the Scots do take back their country and remain in the EU. Don't think Trump will be happy if they do - he is not very popular there and I can see them re-introducing the planning regulations he got thrown out. Link to comment
ChrisR Posted June 25, 2016 Author Report Share Posted June 25, 2016 From some of you more in the thick of things, what are the odds of Northern Ireland reopening talks about unification with Ireland? I thought it a ways far fetched but have seen it mentioned in a number of UK publications. Could 26+6=1 become a reality? Link to comment
Alien Son Posted June 25, 2016 Report Share Posted June 25, 2016 Nigel, why are you so anti-leave? Link to comment
Nigel Gordon Posted June 26, 2016 Report Share Posted June 26, 2016 Nigel, why are you so anti-leave? I was campaigning for Remain. There were a lot of reasons for that but the main one was that I see membership of the EU as a protection for individual rights. It was EU pressure on anti-discrimination which brought about the growth of anti-discrimination law in the UK. Although not directly that indirectly resulted in the laws against discrimination on grounds of sexuality. Also one requirement for membership of the EU is that member states must be signatories of the European Convention of Fundamental and Human Rights. That is a Council of Europe charter, not an EU one. There are many to the right of the Conservative party and the whole of UKIP who would like to see us withdraw from the ECHR. Whilst we are in the EU we cannot. Withdrawing from the ECHR would in my opinion be one of the worse things we can do. It would put the LGBT community at risk in a number of ways. There is an increasing pressure now for a second referendum before any final withdrawal is made. There is even a legal argument that under the EU Treaty Act of 2011 a second referendum would have to be held. I hope it is because a lot of people who voted leave are now realising that they were effectively lied to about the impact of a leave vote. Yesterday the leave campaign stated they never said that leaving the EU would reduce immigration. Technically correct, they left that to UKIP to say but when it was said they did not deny it. Link to comment
ChrisR Posted June 26, 2016 Author Report Share Posted June 26, 2016 The NZ Herald has a nice take on it all: Link to comment
Alien Son Posted June 26, 2016 Report Share Posted June 26, 2016 Thanks for your reply, Nigel. Link to comment
colinian Posted June 27, 2016 Report Share Posted June 27, 2016 Wonder how long it'll be before there's a second referendum, and the decision is made to rejoin? C Exiting the EU is complicated. Rejoining the EU will be much, much more complicated for Britain. Colin Link to comment
Nigel Gordon Posted June 27, 2016 Report Share Posted June 27, 2016 Exiting the EU is complicated. Rejoining the EU will be much, much more complicated for Britain. Colin From what has been said this morning by Boris Johnson (the main voice on the Leave side) I suspect that we will not leave before the second referendum. Johnson stated before the campaign started that there was nothing to stop us voting to leave, the negotiating better terms and having a second referendum. That appears to be what he is now playing for. He has stated that there is no reason to invoke Article 50 (the procedure in the Lisbon Treaty to leave the EU) at the moment. I have little doubt he expects to win the Tory leadership contest and be the next prime minister. Once there in all probability I can see him refusing to invoke Article 50 and pulling out the negotiations in the hope of getting better terms. He has already stated that free movement of labour is not a critical point, though immigration was the main theme of the leave campaign. Link to comment
Cole Parker Posted June 27, 2016 Report Share Posted June 27, 2016 They haven't left yet. Perhaps it'll be less complicated if they never really leave. Seems the English people are belatedly coming to their senses. C Link to comment
ChrisR Posted June 27, 2016 Author Report Share Posted June 27, 2016 John Oliver certainly seemed upset last night in his summary. It's as though he, along with many others, suddenly realized that the whole thing wasn't a joking matter. And of course he took his shot at Trump, but never mentioned any responses of Obama or Clinton -- who as former Secretary of State should have a helluva lot to say. So what's next? A second referendum? And if that goes the other way to we have a tie breaker? Best of 5? A UK-World Series best of 7? And if they do have a do-over, can we use that if needed as precedent here in November? Here's John's take: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/john-oliver-trump-brexit_us_5770cbdbe4b0f1683239f2db?section= Link to comment
Merkin Posted June 27, 2016 Report Share Posted June 27, 2016 And if they do have a do-over, can we use that if needed as precedent here in November? If that doesn't work, I reserve the right to vote with my feet. Link to comment
vwl Posted June 28, 2016 Report Share Posted June 28, 2016 Exiting the EU is complicated. Rejoining the EU will be much, much more complicated for Britain. Colin I'm not sure why Britain would want to rejoin the EU -- for rules by the unelected bureaucrats and techocrats in Brussels? for extra-territorial justice under the laws of the EU? For economics and trade? Well, there's the pesky fact that according to balance of trade statistics, the remaining EU countries sell more to Britain than Britain buys from them. So putting up barriers to trade will do more harm on the continent than in Britain. And the continent has more unemployment and a stagnant economies than Britain does and needs the trade with Britain. I don't think time is on the side of a second referendum, unless passport controls on British citizens visiting the continent drives people to the polls. Link to comment
Nigel Gordon Posted June 28, 2016 Report Share Posted June 28, 2016 I'm not sure why Britain would want to rejoin the EU -- for rules by the unelected bureaucrats and techocrats in Brussels? for extra-territorial justice under the laws of the EU? Because a lot of important social protections are based in EU rules and regulations. The whole basis of UK anti-discrimination law is EU law. Whilst we are members of the EU, and we still are and will be for at least another two years, we are protected by that fact. Once we are out of the EU there is nothing to stop a right wing government starting to unpick those laws. ​Already UKIP supporters are saying that they want the rules about discriminatory service (i.e. not being allowed to refuse to serve gay people) to be removed from the statute books. Link to comment
Pedro Posted June 28, 2016 Report Share Posted June 28, 2016 I was going to post on this topic until I realised it was going to be a long rambling rant. Suffice to say that I am embarrassed for my country (or what will be left of it when the dust settles) over the whole sorry pass that our political class have brought it to. Somehow the national football (soccer) squad made up of some of the most expensive players in the world losing to Iceland sort of sums it up. Link to comment
Cole Parker Posted June 28, 2016 Report Share Posted June 28, 2016 We have a very broken political system as well, which is what I think is the reason Trump looks appealing to some. Hillary is old school and Trump is a breath of fresh air. Of course, sometimes the breaths are foul and sometimes they blow in catastrophe, but Americans tend to be optimists and want to overlook the downsides of a Trump administration. I thought England was a bit more sophisticated than we are, having been at it longer. But obviously, people on both sides of the water are fed up with their politicians. C Link to comment
Bruin Fisher Posted June 28, 2016 Report Share Posted June 28, 2016 I thought England was a bit more sophisticated than we are, having been at it longer. C So did I. Apparently I was wrong. Pride comes before a fall... Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now