can someone explain brexit?

[CaptainQuintero]

40 minutes ago, Fuzz said:

Whilst sitting in a bathtub of hot Bovril?

One can only dream!

[Ritch]

1 hour ago, Fuzz said:

Whilst sitting in a bathtub of hot Bovril?

I think he may have been speaking at the Canadian parliament if truth be told.

[gweilgi]

15 hours ago, 99call said:

Rob, your comment sounds measured, informed and well thought out.  My point is that many don't have your judgement, poise of thought or experience.  Many gobble up the nonsense narrative that is stuffed down their throats.  My point was, I don't agree with the concept that vulnerable parts of society, should be taken advantage of, just because it's possible. 

My point was that we seem to by unervingly comfortable the fact that political parties are no longer standing for something, and hoping we vote for them.  They are now profiling us online, creating a policy on that, then corrupting our vote.    I like many find them all to be a shower of muck,  and see my political life, as a personal/local community thing.  i.e. work hard, look after your family and people around you. try not to be an arsehole in general etc

Sadly any human being of any worth, is too valuable to general society to ever consider giving up on life, and become a politician. 

That is one side of the vicious equation.

The other is the people, society, the electorate:  we have become too spoiled, too apathetic, too selfish.  There are too many folk out there who believe their politicians should give them what they want rather than what they need, whose voting decisions seem to be largely determined by either what they can get for themselves or how best to do down others, who have largely given up on the quaint old-fashioned notion of asking themselves what they can do for their community and country.  Too few of us accept that rights come with responsibilities, and too many mistake entitlements for rights, demand privileges without duties.  

And this mess is then supercharged by the jet fuel of instant global media and the internet.  In the old days, politicians and their parties had to think about the policies they proposed and then they had to spend their time persuading the voters of the benefits.  Today, all they need is a consultant to run up a few internet polls in order to discover what they think people want and how popular they are -- a very convenient shortcut.  

[dageshi]

Personally the reason I voted to leave was...

1) I never voted to join in the first place, my grandparents did (I'm 37). Imagine living your entire life but never actually having the opportunity to vote on one of the most important aspects that effects you.

2) EU seemed incomprehensible and undemocratic. There was a new treaty every 10 years, it didn't matter if a country voted against it the EU  would just keep making small changes and then asking them again until they agreed. If two countries voted against it they'd just repackage it as a different treaty a few years later but not actually have any referendums on it because that was too inconvenient.

3) In normal politics you vote for a parliament and that parliament can't bind a future parliament, so every 5 years you have the opportunity to kick out the current lot and replace them with someone else who can reverse everything if needs be. Except with the EU where a treaty gets passed, the effects of it won't really kick in until the government who signed it is long gone and at that point you can't change it... so important laws get passed that you can't vote on any more and you can't even vote out the buggers who passed them in the first place, sound good don't it?

4) The EU looked like a complete shambles for 3-4 years while they lurched from one country sized bailout to the next during the Euro crisis.

5) What is the ultimate end goal of the EU? Where does it end up? What does it look like? Anyone know? Nope. The entire debate about staying in the EU or leaving was completely centered about what it is right now and what it was in the past, not what it was going to be in the future. And given that it was the only opportunity in my lifetime to actually have a say on it it's pretty important to have an idea on what you're voting for in the future right?

So I voted to leave and I'm happy with the choice. It's going about as well as I expected, better actually since we're not actually in recession (yet). I never thought it would be easy, leaving something you've been in for such a long time never was, but personally I think we really made our decision to leave when we didn't join the euro, it was obvious then that we really didn't believe in the EU the way the other big countries in the EU do.

 

 

[oliverdst]

[bpm32]

1 hour ago, oliverdst said:

That would actually be a pretty high turnout in the States, depending on what it was for.

[GavLew79]

Quite simply; a protest vote by the 'great (and ill-informed) unwashed'. Now we all get to revel in our own crapulence. I'm generalsing but IMO, people with the inability to see passed their own street, passed the (blameless and hard-working) Romanians and Poles, passed their own little blink of a life in the grand scheme of things, voted a big F-you to anyone with more than them. For the poor to have voted for everyone getting poorer, I'll never quite understand. 

[Webbo]

[99call]

7 minutes ago, Webbo said:

This boils my piss quicker than Bosch kettle

[El Presidente]

3 hours ago, GavLew79 said:

Quite simply; a protest vote by the 'great (and ill-informed) unwashed'. Now we all get to revel in our own crapulence. I'm generalsing but IMO, people with the inability to see passed their own street, passed the (blameless and hard-working) Romanians and Poles, passed their own little blink of a life in the grand scheme of things, voted a big F-you to anyone with more than them. For the poor to have voted for everyone getting poorer, I'll never quite understand. 

and the stick they use is democracy 

To be fair it wasn't just the poor. The EU  is seen by many in the UK (and Greece/Spain/Italy etc)....as the Deathstar commanded by untouchable overlords. 

........it's a province rebellion  in the finest star wars tradition. 

[99call]

8 minutes ago, El Presidente said:

Deathstar 

I can see it now. With some legislator reading over Teresa deal (499th draft).

"Oh my god!..... That things opporational!!...............no errr.....no wait an minute.....no no it's not"

[GavLew79]

7 hours ago, El Presidente said:

and the stick they use is democracy 

To be fair it wasn't just the poor. The EU  is seen by many in the UK (and Greece/Spain/Italy etc)....as the Deathstar commanded by untouchable overlords. 

........it's a province rebellion  in the finest star wars tradition. 

Granted. It was also old people! ?

But yeah, fair points. IMO it gave us far more than we contributed, but hey, I'm in the 48% 'minority'. 

[JamesKPolkEsq]

Sheeeeeeee's baaaaaaacccckkkkk... 

[Ken Gargett]

1 minute ago, SenorPerfecto said:

The only thing I don't understand is why they don't have a second vote. It seems like between all the folks who voted "leave" thinking it would be a nice protest vote but having NO inkling that the vote would actually go that way (and presumably would vote STAY if given the second chance), and the obvious Trump-style meddling from Russia in 2016, a second referendum is a no brainer. Honestly... are the British just too polite to take a Mulligan?? Are they in thrall of crooked pols who keep crowing about "respecting democracy," as though another vote wouldn't ALSO be democracy??

second vote seemed obvious to me as well, but the more i thought about it, where does that leave any election/referendum/vote in future, and not just in britain. plenty of countries around the globe screaming blue murder about the results of elections. whether alleged interference or some form of gerrymandering or idiots putting in a protest vote who then get the result they "wanted" which was not really what they wanted. you have a second vote and where does it end? no election would ever be safe again. the loud and entitled would just attack every vote that they didn't like. pretty much as like today. 

and really, if people are so braindead as to vote for something that they didn't really want then i think they get what they deserve. 

[gweilgi]

20 minutes ago, SenorPerfecto said:

The only thing I don't understand is why they don't have a second vote. It seems like between all the folks who voted "leave" thinking it would be a nice protest vote but having NO inkling that the vote would actually go that way (and presumably would vote STAY if given the second chance), and the obvious Trump-style meddling from Russia in 2016, a second referendum is a no brainer. Honestly... are the British just too polite to take a Mulligan?? Are they in thrall of crooked pols who keep crowing about "respecting democracy," as though another vote wouldn't ALSO be democracy??

IMO, there are three reasons.

Firstly, there is an established pattern within the EU to let nations repeat referendums if the result does not suit Brussels.  This looms large in the minds of the voters.

Secondly, even at this state of affairs, there are no clear indications from any halfway respectable polls that I have seen which would indicate that the British electorate has in any way resolved a majority opinion in either direction.  This makes a second referendum rather pointless.

Thirdly, I am far from certain that there would be a majority in Parliament to approve such a motion -- and this applies to members from all parties.  

[Akela3rd]

second vote seemed obvious to me as well, but the more i thought about it, where does that leave any election/referendum/vote in future, and not just in britain. plenty of countries around the globe screaming blue murder about the results of elections. whether alleged interference or some form of gerrymandering or idiots putting in a protest vote who then get the result they "wanted" which was not really what they wanted. you have a second vote and where does it end? no election would ever be safe again. the loud and entitled would just attack every vote that they didn't like. pretty much as like today. 
and really, if people are so braindead as to vote for something that they didn't really want then i think they get what they deserve. 

I agree that a second vote would be the start of a very slippery slope. But on your final point the fact of the matter is that no-one, but no-one, knew what they were voting for except some abstractions about what might or might not happen. And no-one predicted the absolute cluster-f that it's turned into. It's embarrassing.

Sent from my ActionMan walkie-talkie

[99call]

25 minutes ago, Ken Gargett said:

second vote seemed obvious to me as well

The weird thing about this, is that the majority of remainers, suggest the majority of leavers, had not the slightest idea what they were voting.  This in turn enrages them, and the bark out "leave means leave".   The reality is the majority on both sides knew very little about the process, whats at stake etc. 

Demanding a second vote, does place democracy in peril........but.........BUT   it's the way it should be framed.   It's shouldn't be a case of a second vote....both campaigns were waged in a highly illegal fashion (more so leave).  When did we set the bar so low, that we're simply happy to accept outright corruption.  As soon as illegalities were found, the government should of had the backbone to conduct and internal independent investigation, and all guilty parties  (pardon the pun) on both sides sent to prison.  

Protecting an illegally won result is not democracy.....it's the beginning of the end.   The process has proved itself to be hugely difficult, divisive, and non binary.   I would suggest that know we now a great deal more, a 'first legal vote' should be held, with about 5-6 options

[srbbones]

“Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others.”


― Winston S. Churchill

 

[Ken Gargett]

might be wise to stay well away from allegations of corruption. they will end up in bans because people cannot help themselves.

remember also, for what it is worth, i doubt that there has been a prez election without such allegations. they come from both sides, whether jfk's dad and dead voters or hanging chads. each side will believe what they want. this was not an invitation to discuss the actions of either side. let it go! 

 

as for people getting another vote because they voted for something they didn't understand, we'd have elections every week if that is the case.

keating won the supposedly unwinnable election here by pointing out that if you did not understand the tax system hewson wanted to bring in, don't vote for it. if someone is so dumb that they vote for something without a clue of the consequences, hard to have much sympathy. it was not compulsory to vote. 

[bpm32]

1 hour ago, SenorPerfecto said:

The only thing I don't understand is why they don't have a second vote. It seems like between all the folks who voted "leave" thinking it would be a nice protest vote but having NO inkling that the vote would actually go that way (and presumably would vote STAY if given the second chance), and the obvious Trump-style meddling from Russia in 2016, a second referendum is a no brainer. Honestly... are the British just too polite to take a Mulligan?? Are they in thrall of crooked pols who keep crowing about "respecting democracy," as though another vote wouldn't ALSO be democracy??

I'm not so sure--do we ever really know what we're voting for? Every decision in life has unintended consequences, both good and bad. I think it's hubris for either side to definitively claim they know.

From the American perspective, I suspect the US comes out ahead either way: the US govt. considered the UK our "guy on the inside", but then on the other hand if the UK leaves the EU, there might be an opportunity for closer economic ties. So, from a Dept. of State perspective it's a loss, but from an economic perspective it's a gain. Or not....like I said, who knows?

[Fugu]

1 hour ago, Ken Gargett said:

second vote seemed obvious to me as well, but the more i thought about it, where does that leave any election/referendum/vote in future, and not just in britain. plenty of countries around the globe screaming blue murder about the results of elections. whether alleged interference or some form of gerrymandering or idiots putting in a protest vote who then get the result they "wanted" which was not really what they wanted. you have a second vote and where does it end? no election would ever be safe again. the loud and entitled would just attack every vote that they didn't like. pretty much as like today. 

and really, if people are so braindead as to vote for something that they didn't really want then i think they get what they deserve. 

Couldn't have said it better. Thanks Ken!

[Fuzz]

1 hour ago, Ken Gargett said:

might be wise to stay well away from allegations of corruption. they will end up in bans because people cannot help themselves.

remember also, for what it is worth, i doubt that there has been a prez election without such allegations. they come from both sides, whether jfk's dad and dead voters or hanging chads. each side will believe what they want. this was not an invitation to discuss the actions of either side. let it go! 

 

as for people getting another vote because they voted for something they didn't understand, we'd have elections every week if that is the case.

keating won the supposedly unwinnable election here by pointing out that if you did not understand the tax system hewson wanted to bring in, don't vote for it. if someone is so dumb that they vote for something without a clue of the consequences, hard to have much sympathy. it was not compulsory to vote. 

Hewson shot himself in the foot with that one Mike Willesee interview. When the guy wanting to bring in the tax system, can't explain the tax system himself, it's best not to vote it in.

[gweilgi]

2 hours ago, Akela3rd said:

I agree that a second vote would be the start of a very slippery slope. But on your final point the fact of the matter is that no-one, but no-one, knew what they were voting for except some abstractions about what might or might not happen. And no-one predicted the absolute cluster-f that it's turned into. It's embarrassing.

Sent from my ActionMan walkie-talkie
 

Embarrassing?  

It's cringeworthy, shameful, disgraceful.  And I am being very, VERY polite.

But in general, no-one ever really knows what they are voting for in any election.  Voters may *think* they know.  They may have hopes, and expectations.  That's all.  What we get in the run-up is cant, posturing, appeals to fear and greed, soundbites and promises by the truckload ... that may or may not be kept once in office.  Hell, in Australia (like in Italy) the electorate  does not even get the prime minister they voted for.  So the Brexit referendum is no different, really, to any general election.  What was different was the raw appeal to emotion.  Very un-British....

[El Presidente]

2 hours ago, Ken Gargett said:

might be wise to stay well away from allegations of corruption. they will end up in bans because people cannot help themselves.

remember also, for what it is worth, i doubt that there has been a prez election without such allegations. they come from both sides, whether jfk's dad and dead voters or hanging chads. each side will believe what they want. this was not an invitation to discuss the actions of either side. let it go! 

 

 

The voice of reason!

I never thought I would see this day............. I am so proud 

[OZCUBAN]

Does this help ken options after this mornings no vote