The EU: In, out, shake it all about.... (115 Viewers)

As of right now, how are thinking of voting? In or out

  • Remain

    Votes: 23 37.1%
  • Leave

    Votes: 35 56.5%
  • Undecided

    Votes: 3 4.8%
  • Not registered or not intention to vote

    Votes: 1 1.6%

  • Total voters
    62
  • Poll closed .

dancers lance

Well-Known Member
It's more the total lack of ideas about what or how they intend to do anything.

It's almost like Johnson was only doing this for play and personal ambition without any foundation of policy... which wouldn't be like him at all.
Boris is an idiot, but not a single person can comment on the way forward until we have negotiated the exit, if after all the talks we still have no idea what to do, then that is the time to worry, now is to early.
 

Moff

Well-Known Member
Can we not have a trial by combat to decide like game of thrones?

Bojo slaps Cameron in the face with his white leather glove and challenges him to a dual, muskets at Dawn?

Rather that than a drinking contest, Farage would wipe Cameron out.
 

clint van damme

Well-Known Member
We can't possibly know what to do next (and I understand that this scares people) until we start to negotiate with Europe and sit at the table with other non EU countries, we are four days in.
can't go along with this, a smart politician would have anticipated Camerons resignation and u-turn on triggering article 50 for a start had had a contingency.
Boris seemed genuinely shocked so went off grid for a few hours then nipped out for a game of tennis.
A smart politician would have anticipated the EU wanting to move quickly, (especially as it seems spite is their main motivation), and would have had a rough idea of the negotiating teams thehy were going to put in place.
A basic framework for Brexit should have already been formulated.
 

dancers lance

Well-Known Member
can't go along with this, a smart politician would have anticipated Camerons resignation and u-turn on triggering article 50 for a start had had a contingency.
Boris seemed genuinely shocked so went off grid for a few hours then nipped out for a game of tennis.
A smart politician would have anticipated the EU wanting to move quickly, (especially as it seems spite is their main motivation), and would have had a rough idea of the negotiating teams thehy were going to put in place.
A basic framework for Brexit should have already been formulated.
I the EU can't move quickly, they can only move when we formally notify them of our intent to leave, (they have no legal right to force this) and then they have give us 2 years under article 50, unless we chose to change our laws in this country and revoke legislation so we can speed up the process.
 

clint van damme

Well-Known Member
I the EU can't move quickly, they can only move when we formally notify them of our intent to leave, (they have no legal right to force this) and then they have give us 2 years under article 50, unless we chose to change our laws in this country and revoke legislation so we can speed up the process.
that's my point, we have to trigger article 50. Cameron said he would do it immediately in the event of a leave vote, he reneged on this. Boris, (or some other prominent leaver), should have anticipated this could happen, that they didn't is quite worrying.
If they can't 2nd guess a spurned David Cameron they're going to get ring run round them in Brussels.
Basically, Boris wanted his main opponent in the referendum to do the post referendum dirty work for him and now seems shocked that he won't.
 

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
That means they would have to take on the Euro.
Indeed and a big deal was made of that at the time. Now they are talking about something different. I suspect the angle that will be played by the EU is that Scotland is already in the EU and have voted to stay therefore if they wish to do so they are already a member and can stay on the same terms. Something along those lines. The Scots would then get a referendum on independence but knowing they were in Europe and could keep the pound.
 

clint van damme

Well-Known Member
That means they would have to take on the Euro.
yep, which sorts out one of the issues the SNP had before the first referendum, people weren't clear on what currency would be used if they voted yes.
It'll be decided for them on this occasion. (if they want EU membership).
 

dancers lance

Well-Known Member
that's my point, we have to trigger article 50. Cameron said he would do it immediately in the event of a leave vote, he reneged on this. Boris, (or some other prominent leaver), should have anticipated this could happen, that they didn't is quite worrying.
If they can't 2nd guess a spurned David Cameron they're going to get ring run round them in Brussels.
Basically, Boris wanted his main opponent in the referendum to do the post referendum dirty work for him and now seems shocked that he won't.
But it just proved how full of shit Cameron is, if he really wanted to hurt Boris and co, he would have invoked article 50 on Friday morning, then resigned leaving them to deal with the shit. The fact is, no one is willing to make a statement on our future as they, as yet, do not run this country. As it stands we are living in a country that has no leader.
 

Captain Dart

Well-Known Member
that's my point, we have to trigger article 50. Cameron said he would do it immediately in the event of a leave vote, he reneged on this. Boris, (or some other prominent leaver), should have anticipated this could happen, that they didn't is quite worrying.
If they can't 2nd guess a spurned David Cameron they're going to get ring run round them in Brussels.
Basically, Boris wanted his main opponent in the referendum to do the post referendum dirty work for him and now seems shocked that he won't.

You seen this, I rather PMSL.
 

clint van damme

Well-Known Member
But it just proved how full of shit Cameron is, if he really wanted to hurt Boris and co, he would have invoked article 50 on Friday morning, then resigned leaving them to deal with the shit. The fact is, no one is willing to make a statement on our future as they, as yet, do not run this country. As it stands we are living in a country that has no leader.
but again, they should have had at last a rudimentary idea of what to do.
After months of campaigning to leave the best Boris can now offer us now is, "there's no rush".

I honestly don't believe for one minute that he though the electorate were going to vote leave.
I think he wanted to appeal to the right of the tory party for when he had a shot at the leadership in a couple of years time. He's absolutely fucked up.
 

Ashdown

Well-Known Member
We were part of this European experiment for 41 years. It started off with good intentions but it changed and morphed into something that wasn't altogether democratic or realistic. We've voted to leave 4 days ago, lets give people the chance to sit down and start to work out requirements for the future. Someone suggested there should be a cross party committee to move us forward.........well why not ??, but it can't involve Corbyn, Blair, Brown, Osborne or Cameron !!
 

Covstu

Well-Known Member
But it just proved how full of shit Cameron is, if he really wanted to hurt Boris and co, he would have invoked article 50 on Friday morning, then resigned leaving them to deal with the shit. The fact is, no one is willing to make a statement on our future as they, as yet, do not run this country. As it stands we are living in a country that has no leader.
This would just give whoever is in power the excuse. We weren't ready etc..
 

Ashdown

Well-Known Member
The Huffington post, fucksake, load of shit stirring idiots, not making things any better.
Of course you will get morons around, but those same morons will be trying to fight someone or another anyway. This is why though that the politicians have to start making some clear statements on national TV to make it clear that pathetic racist attacks are just as cowardly and punishable by the full force of the law now, as they ever were ! We need leadership true but we don't need left wing activists trying their best to create bad feeling either.
 

Marty

Well-Known Member
FAO- CCFC Germany (It won't let me quote for some reason)

I wish that it wasn't true but I can't help thinking it is, I was at the polling station when a fella popped his ballot sheet in and turned to me and say, I'm leave, I'm sick of these niggers coming here being doctors and nurses. What is wrong with people? I mean seriously. People come here for a better life and provide us with a service we can't ourselves.

Did these idiots really not expect a deal where our migrants can stay in the EU and EU citizens can live here.
 

clint van damme

Well-Known Member
The Huffington post, fucksake, load of shit stirring idiots, not making things any better.
Of course you will get morons around, but those same morons will be trying to fight someone or another anyway. This is why though that the politicians have to start making some clear statements on national TV to make it clear that pathetic racist attacks are just as cowardly and punishable by the full force of the law now, as they ever were ! We need leadership true but we don't need left wing activists trying their best to create bad feeling either.

on the day the right wing press printed a picture of Jeremy Corbyn mocked up as a vampire and urging labour supporters to kill him, (days after Jo Cox was murdered), you give it to the left wing press for shit stirring, or as I call it printing the news!
 

mark82

Super Moderator
I think whatever happens, not much will actually change. We'll still end up in the single market, with freedom of movement and be governed by a number of EU laws similar to Switzerland. We'll basically be in the EU by a different name. Biggest difference is we'll now have no influence.
 

dutchman

Well-Known Member
I think whatever happens, not much will actually change. We'll still end up in the single market, with freedom of movement and be governed by a number of EU laws similar to Switzerland.

That remains to be seen. I believe Britain is in a much stronger negotiating position than either Switzerland or Norway.

Biggest difference is we'll now have no influence.

I very much doubt you had any influence before as was demonstrated when Cameron tried to renegotiate terms and failed miserably.
 

mark82

Super Moderator
That remains to be seen. I believe Britain is in a much stronger negotiating position than either Switzerland or Norway.



I very much doubt you had any influence before as was demonstrated when Cameron tried to renegotiate terms and failed miserably.

They won't make allowances for us that they wouldn't for other countries, particularly on freedom of movement. The reason they didn't give in to Switzerland is because everyone else would want the same.

We had influence in that we were one of three countries that could veto any law along with France & Germany. We certainly haven't taken on any laws our government weren't happy to accept.
 

mark82

Super Moderator
That remains to be seen. I believe Britain is in a much stronger negotiating position than either Switzerland or Norway.



I very much doubt you had any influence before as was demonstrated when Cameron tried to renegotiate terms and failed miserably.

They won't make allowances for us that they wouldn't for other countries, particularly on freedom of movement. The reason they didn't give in to Switzerland is because everyone else would want the same.

We had influence in that we were one of three countries that could veto any law along with France & Germany. We certainly haven't taken on any laws our government weren't happy to accept.
Again, that remains to be seen.



Do you have a link to support that statement because I certainly couldn't find any?

Sorry, writing in middle of night shift after not having much sleep yesterday. I'm misquoting there, and may have got wires crossed. I'll have another go after I've had a sleep. :)

I think the point I was trying to make is we have highest vote weighting along with France & Germany (and I think Italy) and therefore can heavily influenced votes. I believe we can go further than that and veto in some cases but need to check my facts when more with it. I'm no expert by any means. Only bits I've picked up over last couple months while researching my vote. It's certainly a complicated beast (maybe overcomplicated)
 

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
I think whatever happens, not much will actually change. We'll still end up in the single market, with freedom of movement and be governed by a number of EU laws similar to Switzerland. We'll basically be in the EU by a different name. Biggest difference is we'll now have no influence.

I think you're pretty much bang on with that. Some members of the leave campaign kept hinting at an arrangement like Norway. Norway have to allow free movement of people from the EU as part of that deal as do Iceland. They joined the EEA to gain access to the common market and that's a stipulation of joining it. I can't see them making up new rules for us if for no other reason than they will have to be approved by the European Parliament and if you couple the fact that we're not exactly flavour of the month and any deal they agree for us Norway and Iceland will probably want also.

I think we'll have two take it or leave it options. Remain in the EU or join the EEA. So basically no change but less say on the latter option and still no extra funding going to the NHS. The leave voters have been seriously hoodwinked and are going to be seriously disappointed on the whole because let's face it the majority voted leave because they thought it would stop free movement of people into the UK from the EU.
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top