So leaving the EU seems less intimidating from an economic perspective.
In addition: no nation had the relationship with Britain on which the plans for Scottish independence were predicated. On the other hand, Leave can point to a variety of nations as models for our future membership- all of which, frankly, seem to have it better than we do now.
Channel 5 should broadcast a debate between him and Izzard. I'd watch it.
Actually, what's been the worst celebrity endorsement of this referendum campaign? Bryan Adams for Leave and June Sarpong for Remain must be contenders, surely.
Eddie Izard has to be the worst celebrity endorsement because he looks like a stupid, garish, idiotic, twat. He is about as appealing or compelling as a ferret down your skidders. What is he thinking with that beret and lipstick and heels? Knob
Boris Johnson was embroiled in an extraordinary row last night after he admitted discussing the possibility of a leadership challenge against David Cameron with a fellow Tory MP.
Mr Johnson, the clear favourite to be the next Tory leader, met Alec Shelbrooke in his Commons office and speculated about the number of Tory MPs prepared to back a no-confidence vote in the Prime Minister.
According to one version of the encounter, Boris said: 'Are there 50 names?' – a reference to the number of renegade MPs required to trigger a contest.
The former London Mayor last night confirmed that he met Mr Shelbrooke in his office and held a conversation about how many Tory MPs backed a coup – but insisted he had talked about 'how vital it was to keep the party together under Dave's leadership'.
So leaving the EU seems less intimidating from an economic perspective.
In addition: no nation had the relationship with Britain on which the plans for Scottish independence were predicated. On the other hand, Leave can point to a variety of nations as models for our future membership- all of which, frankly, seem to have it better than we do now.
Channel 5 should broadcast a debate between him and Izzard. I'd watch it.
Actually, what's been the worst celebrity endorsement of this referendum campaign? Bryan Adams for Leave and June Sarpong for Remain must be contenders, surely.
Eddie Izard has to be the worst celebrity endorsement because he looks like a stupid, garish, idiotic, twat. He is about as appealing or compelling as a ferret down your skidders. What is he thinking with that beret and lipstick and heels? Knob
@RichardTyndall - for me the Norway option is by far the best Brexit outcome. I'd just be very surprised if most Leavers felt the same way, given that it means ongoing contributions and continued high levels of immigration.
It doesn't mean high levels of migration.
We charge £5K PA for the NHS (above tax) and no benefits at all for a start.
Then we could make employers using non UK staff pay extra still to fund training. Makes low skilled immigration uneconomic.
That only makes sense if you believe that people will stop coming if they can't access the NHS or get benefits and that businesses in areas of low unemployment should be prevented from growing.
Well, no, when the cross the border, they either have insurance or they don't cross.
Areas of low unemployment are also generally full and have a housing shortage so if the businesses want to grow they need to find another way or location.
It does show how far we've come that we now treat a poll with a narrow LEAVE lead, 11 days before the vote, with a yawn and a shrug.
If any of us had claimed, a year ago, that LEAVE would be narrowly ahead less than two weeks before the referendum, they'd have been laughed to scorn.
A LEAVE lead is the new normal. So LEAVE are likely to win. Discuss.
You can wallow in your leave orgy with your Ingerlund fans, EDL, BNP comrades and so on, so... well done. And for the years after you can enjoy Ingerlund as we experience an economic crisis, austerity, political and economic instability led by the likes of Farage, Gove, Johnson and Priti Patel.
Brexit is lowest common denominator politics, with less intellectual scrutiny than Big Brother. Well done. A prize is in order.
I thought you had left us? Please go back to wallowing in your self pity in Italy.
The problem is I cannot...as long as intelligent people like you engage in this nihilistic nonsense that will only make Britain, Europe and the world a much worse place.
I seriously (seriously) am begging Brexiters to think through the consequences of what they are doing, or what they are hoping to achieve.
The consequences may be rough, initially, but I would hope as a nation we are not so terrible we could not overcome those issues. The consequence of remaining is being part of a club that is headed in directions we don't like, and a club that clearly does not want us so long as we don't sign up to head in the same direction or else it would have shifted course.
If the EU does not want to shift course, which it doesn't and why would it, then better for them and us to part than to remain in acting bitter. There's some talk of Germany and others liking us in as a counterweight to some other sides, but clearly it is not a big concern or else more would have been offered. If without us as a counterweight they don't like things, well, that would perhaps indicate they have deep problems with the whole thing too.
They want us to Remain on their terms. That is not unreasonable. We only want in on our terms. That is not unreasonable either. And the two positions appear irreconcilable for about 45-50% of Britons.
When there is such fundamental disagreement, a split becomes the best option even if it involves some hardship. It will only defer trouble unless the fundamental issues are addressed, of which there is precisely zero chance.
@RichardTyndall - for me the Norway option is by far the best Brexit outcome. I'd just be very surprised if most Leavers felt the same way, given that it means ongoing contributions and continued high levels of immigration.
The problem with Brexit is you let that populist, nationalist genie out of the bottle. The likes of Richard Tyndall think they are in control of it, but they aren't.
There are some fucking serious headbangers on this site...Plato, Watford, Casino, Sean Fear...people who couldn't compromise in a lifetime. They appear reasonable, but they aren't.They are ideologically driven nutters who couldn't care less if the UK goes to shyte provided their version of dark politics prevails.....
And then there are other posters, many other posters, who are seemingly attracted by this Brexit, nihilistic nonsense...... in the last few days Cameron needs to appeal to these
You're starting to talk like an EU official. Britain has never embraced political radicalism and it won't now I suspect - even in a world that is heading that way. We are an island which helps keep tensions to a minimum - people are grumpy not about to put on the jackboots. And we are an ageing society.
I wonder how the secret Turkish visa scheme will go down.
Like a bowl of cold sick I'd have thought?
Cameron wants to let in 1m Turks while threatening Granny's pension...
#YouDoTheMath
"Let them in". You mean visit the UK without needing a visa. Are you saying they will all stay here illegally? What makes you believe that? And how does a visa prevent someone breaking the law?
Boris Johnson was embroiled in an extraordinary row last night after he admitted discussing the possibility of a leadership challenge against David Cameron with a fellow Tory MP.
Mr Johnson, the clear favourite to be the next Tory leader, met Alec Shelbrooke in his Commons office and speculated about the number of Tory MPs prepared to back a no-confidence vote in the Prime Minister.
According to one version of the encounter, Boris said: 'Are there 50 names?' – a reference to the number of renegade MPs required to trigger a contest.
The former London Mayor last night confirmed that he met Mr Shelbrooke in his office and held a conversation about how many Tory MPs backed a coup – but insisted he had talked about 'how vital it was to keep the party together under Dave's leadership'.
So leaving the EU seems less intimidating from an economic perspective.
In addition: no nation had the relationship with Britain on which the plans for Scottish independence were predicated. On the other hand, Leave can point to a variety of nations as models for our future membership- all of which, frankly, seem to have it better than we do now.
Channel 5 should broadcast a debate between him and Izzard. I'd watch it.
Actually, what's been the worst celebrity endorsement of this referendum campaign? Bryan Adams for Leave and June Sarpong for Remain must be contenders, surely.
Eddie Izard has to be the worst celebrity endorsement because he looks like a stupid, garish, idiotic, twat. He is about as appealing or compelling as a ferret down your skidders. What is he thinking with that beret and lipstick and heels? Knob
ROFLMAO!
On this my dear friend we are in total agreement!
He was having a go at Farage for querying immigration numbers as his family came over in the 17th century so were immigrants. I don't think that went down well.
Boris Johnson was embroiled in an extraordinary row last night after he admitted discussing the possibility of a leadership challenge against David Cameron with a fellow Tory MP. l
I don't know that I'd call that an extraordinary row, except insofar as the one area the Tories are showing admirable discipline for the most part is pretending Cameron can continue on after a Leave vote/will not be forced out(or to name a date for standing down earlier than wishes) after a Remain vote.
There seem to be a lot of parallels between this Referendum and the General Election,
In 2015 the underlying fundamentals said that there was a strong chance of a Tory majority which was never reflected in the polls. When you consider the fundamentals of the EU Referendum, they say that Leave has to win while the polls just don't seem to be indicating the strength of the Leave side. Comparing to the Scottish Referendum, it was generally thought there was a hardcore on either side, with about 25% for Independence no matter what and 35% for Union no matter what. in the end this was the actual difference in the result, a 10% margin for No.
Now with the EU Referendum, there is clearly a side which will vote Leave regardless of the arguments, it could be the UKIP vote of 18% but is likely higher with some Tory and Labour voters being hardcore Leavers. But where is the comparative hardcore Remain vote? Some of the Lib Dems who currently poll 5%. Or Greens currently polling similar numbers. There just does not seem to be an identifiable and substantial number of Remain no matter what voters.
If this is true, then Leave starts out with a huge lead, with between 20% and 30% who will always vote Leave and cannot be persuaded. This means Remain needs to get something in the region of 70% of all other voters to vote Remain or they lose. These are the underlying fundamentals of this Referendum and why I just cannot see any other result than Leave.
There was a similar sentiment from Laura Kunsberg. She said there were 10 million hard core leavers and only 5 million hard ish remainers. That being the case, leave has to be odds on not odds off.
Plus that's just the underlying fundamental starting position.
You then get to wrap one side up in the Union Jack, proclaiming Independence and Nationalism and it again says that all the cards are with Leave and the chance of Remain clinging on with no national symbols to help it out is just too weak to succeed.
Yes wrapped itself up in the saltire in Scotland and lost, albeit narrowly. Yes there was more sentiment there for the Union than there is for the EU but ultimately it was the economy there which was the deciding factor
I wasn't talking about the arguments being put foward, I was talking about the fundamentals of where the campaigns start and where they go. In Scotland, Independence had a 25% core, the Union had a 35% core and both had at least some nationalist sentiment to aid their cause.
My point is that Leave starts with something like 20% to 30% of the electorate backing them, unpersuadable and certain to vote. Remain doesn't have anything like this sort of support and their core is massively smaller, it could be as low as 10%. On top of that, only Leave has a nationalist flag waving aspect to bolster its support, There aren't going to be many people waving the Flag of Europe around. There were lots waving the Union Flag in Scotland.
By the end Independence had a 40% core. Of course if it was core Leavers v core Eurofederalists Leave would win but it is not and it is undecideds and voters in the middle who will decide it. The Union Flag in Scotland was mainly waved by the Orange Order and dwarfed by Saltires, there was a bit more sentiment attached to it than the EU stars but it was not sentiment that won it for No but the economy and desire to send a message to London but not sever the relationship altogether
@RichardTyndall - for me the Norway option is by far the best Brexit outcome. I'd just be very surprised if most Leavers felt the same way, given that it means ongoing contributions and continued high levels of immigration.
The problem with Brexit is you let that populist, nationalist genie out of the bottle. The likes of Richard Tyndall think they are in control of it, but they aren't.
There are some fucking serious headbangers on this site...Plato, Watford, Casino, Sean Fear...people who couldn't compromise in a lifetime. They appear reasonable, but they aren't.They are ideologically driven nutters who couldn't care less if the UK goes to shyte provided their version of dark politics prevails.....
And then there are other posters, many other posters, who are seemingly attracted by this Brexit, nihilistic nonsense...... in the last few days Cameron needs to appeal to these
Earlier you complained about a lack of intellectual scrutiny. But, so far I haven't read any intellectual argument from you about why Remain should win. Just a lot of personal insults which, I'm afraid, sound a bit like a 'serious headbanger... who couldn't compromise'.
Boris Johnson was embroiled in an extraordinary row last night after he admitted discussing the possibility of a leadership challenge against David Cameron with a fellow Tory MP.
Mr Johnson, the clear favourite to be the next Tory leader, met Alec Shelbrooke in his Commons office and speculated about the number of Tory MPs prepared to back a no-confidence vote in the Prime Minister.
According to one version of the encounter, Boris said: 'Are there 50 names?' – a reference to the number of renegade MPs required to trigger a contest.
The former London Mayor last night confirmed that he met Mr Shelbrooke in his office and held a conversation about how many Tory MPs backed a coup – but insisted he had talked about 'how vital it was to keep the party together under Dave's leadership'.
I wonder how the secret Turkish visa scheme will go down.
Like a bowl of cold sick I'd have thought?
Cameron wants to let in 1m Turks while threatening Granny's pension...
#YouDoTheMath
"Let them in". You mean visit the UK without needing a visa. Are you saying they will all stay here illegally? What makes you believe that? And how does a visa prevent someone breaking the law?
Don't have a go at me. I'm just suggesting how it will be perceived on the day Cameron is in the Papers threatening Granny's pension.
Personally I've stayed away from all the immigration stuff because I'm quite relaxed about it (I'm Brexit for good old fashioned sovereignty which I've been consistent about since I started posting here ten years ago)
@RichardTyndall - for me the Norway option is by far the best Brexit outcome. I'd just be very surprised if most Leavers felt the same way, given that it means ongoing contributions and continued high levels of immigration.
It doesn't mean high levels of migration.
We charge £5K PA for the NHS (above tax) and no benefits at all for a start.
Then we could make employers using non UK staff pay extra still to fund training. Makes low skilled immigration uneconomic.
That only makes sense if you believe that people will stop coming if they can't access the NHS or get benefits and that businesses in areas of low unemployment should be prevented from growing.
Well, no, when the cross the border, they either have insurance or they don't cross.
Areas of low unemployment are also generally full and have a housing shortage so if the businesses want to grow they need to find another way or location.
Brilliant! So visas for all and the state telling businesses in London and other low unemployment areas how they should grow, or not. Thus, not the Norway option at all. Which was my original point.
@RichardTyndall - for me the Norway option is by far the best Brexit outcome. I'd just be very surprised if most Leavers felt the same way, given that it means ongoing contributions and continued high levels of immigration.
The problem with Brexit is you let that populist, nationalist genie out of the bottle. The likes of Richard Tyndall think they are in control of it, but they aren't.
There are some fucking serious headbangers on this site...Plato, Watford, Casino, Sean Fear...people who couldn't compromise in a lifetime. They appear reasonable, but they aren't.They are ideologically driven nutters who couldn't care less if the UK goes to shyte provided their version of dark politics prevails.....
And then there are other posters, many other posters, who are seemingly attracted by this Brexit, nihilistic nonsense...... in the last few days Cameron needs to appeal to these
The problem I, as I would hope not a nutter, have with such predictions, is if the nation is in such a state that Brexit would unleash such hell, then counter intuitively we have bigger problems than Brexit and it hardly matters which option we pick!
I wonder how the secret Turkish visa scheme will go down.
Like a bowl of cold sick I'd have thought?
Cameron wants to let in 1m Turks while threatening Granny's pension...
#YouDoTheMath
"Let them in". You mean visit the UK without needing a visa. Are you saying they will all stay here illegally? What makes you believe that? And how does a visa prevent someone breaking the law?
Mere details SO. This is PB where right wing sensationalism is the name of the game.
Boris Johnson was embroiled in an extraordinary row last night after he admitted discussing the possibility of a leadership challenge against David Cameron with a fellow Tory MP.
Mr Johnson, the clear favourite to be the next Tory leader, met Alec Shelbrooke in his Commons office and speculated about the number of Tory MPs prepared to back a no-confidence vote in the Prime Minister.
According to one version of the encounter, Boris said: 'Are there 50 names?' – a reference to the number of renegade MPs required to trigger a contest.
The former London Mayor last night confirmed that he met Mr Shelbrooke in his office and held a conversation about how many Tory MPs backed a coup – but insisted he had talked about 'how vital it was to keep the party together under Dave's leadership'.
You really think people will switch from Leave to Remain because Boris Johnson wants to be PM?
I know a few who are thinking of doing just that (although also because of the economic shock, but Boris being in charge was mentioned), but I don't think it is a game winner for Remain.
@RichardTyndall - for me the Norway option is by far the best Brexit outcome. I'd just be very surprised if most Leavers felt the same way, given that it means ongoing contributions and continued high levels of immigration.
The problem with Brexit is you let that populist, nationalist genie out of the bottle. The likes of Richard Tyndall think they are in control of it, but they aren't.
There are some fucking serious headbangers on this site...Plato, Watford, Casino, Sean Fear...people who couldn't compromise in a lifetime. They appear reasonable, but they aren't.They are ideologically driven nutters who couldn't care less if the UK goes to shyte provided their version of dark politics prevails.....
And then there are other posters, many other posters, who are seemingly attracted by this Brexit, nihilistic nonsense...... in the last few days Cameron needs to appeal to these
The problem I, as I would hope not a nutter, have with such predictions, is if the nation is in such a state that Brexit would unleash such hell, then counter intuitively we have bigger problems than Brexit and it hardly matters which option we pick!
Turks might visit the UK without visas. They're coming for us. The Turks. Yes, if that's how the conversation is going we clearly have huge problems.
@RichardTyndall - for me the Norway option is by far the best Brexit outcome. I'd just be very surprised if most Leavers felt the same way, given that it means ongoing contributions and continued high levels of immigration.
The problem with Brexit is you let that populist, nationalist genie out of the bottle. The likes of Richard Tyndall think they are in control of it, but they aren't.
There are some fucking serious headbangers on this site...Plato, Watford, Casino, Sean Fear...people who couldn't compromise in a lifetime. They appear reasonable, but they aren't.They are ideologically driven nutters who couldn't care less if the UK goes to shyte provided their version of dark politics prevails.....
And then there are other posters, many other posters, who are seemingly attracted by this Brexit, nihilistic nonsense...... in the last few days Cameron needs to appeal to these
You make it sound like populism and nationalism (which to me seems to be code for racism and xenophobia) went away. They didn't. The Liberal project only succeeded in removing the debate from the public sphere.
But that debate never actually ended. It just wasn't on the BBC and much of the mainstream media. The underlying prejudices and fears lingered within people and the Liberal project never took a moment to address those prejudices and fears.
@RichardTyndall - for me the Norway option is by far the best Brexit outcome. I'd just be very surprised if most Leavers felt the same way, given that it means ongoing contributions and continued high levels of immigration.
The problem with Brexit is you let that populist, nationalist genie out of the bottle. The likes of Richard Tyndall think they are in control of it, but they aren't.
There are some fucking serious headbangers on this site...Plato, Watford, Casino, Sean Fear...people who couldn't compromise in a lifetime. They appear reasonable, but they aren't.They are ideologically driven nutters who couldn't care less if the UK goes to shyte provided their version of dark politics prevails.....
And then there are other posters, many other posters, who are seemingly attracted by this Brexit, nihilistic nonsense...... in the last few days Cameron needs to appeal to these
Gosh. Big G from Wales had a hissy fit tonight and flounced off the site because I used the word shame.
He would have had a cardiac to be on the receiving end of that tirade of abuse.
@RichardTyndall - for me the Norway option is by far the best Brexit outcome. I'd just be very surprised if most Leavers felt the same way, given that it means ongoing contributions and continued high levels of immigration.
The problem with Brexit is you let that populist, nationalist genie out of the bottle. The likes of Richard Tyndall think they are in control of it, but they aren't.
There are some fucking serious headbangers on this site...Plato, Watford, Casino, Sean Fear...people who couldn't compromise in a lifetime. They appear reasonable, but they aren't.They are ideologically driven nutters who couldn't care less if the UK goes to shyte provided their version of dark politics prevails.....
And then there are other posters, many other posters, who are seemingly attracted by this Brexit, nihilistic nonsense...... in the last few days Cameron needs to appeal to these
Agree 100% with this.
I'm only an occasional poster on this blog, but I read it almost every day. This post motivated me to log in and respond.
I am probably best known on here for my posts in support of Jeremy Corbyn during the Labour leadership campaign last summer. I haven't necessarily agreed with everything he's done since winning that race in September, but I still think compared to the alternatives he was the right choice - and he was excellent on The Last Leg yesterday.
I strongly support LEAVE. My reasons have nothing to do with immigration and only a little to do with sovereignty. Rather, it's because the EU (not Europe) is doomed to fail, and the sooner it fails the better.
It is built on a fatally flawed foundation, a conceit that it is possible to subsume more than two dozen distinct nations into one political entity. It is fundamentally incompatible with democracy, and the backlash that is growing not just in the UK but across the continent has been inevitable for some time. The longer the charade that political union is feasible goes on, the worse the endgame will be.
My view is unpopular among those with whom I share many of my other political beliefs, but it is what it is.
So leaving the EU seems less intimidating from an economic perspective.
In addition: no nation had the relationship with Britain on which the plans for Scottish independence were predicated. On the other hand, Leave can point to a variety of nations as models for our future membership- all of which, frankly, seem to have it better than we do now.
Channel 5 should broadcast a debate between him and Izzard. I'd watch it.
Actually, what's been the worst celebrity endorsement of this referendum campaign? Bryan Adams for Leave and June Sarpong for Remain must be contenders, surely.
Eddie Izard has to be the worst celebrity endorsement because he looks like a stupid, garish, idiotic, twat. He is about as appealing or compelling as a ferret down your skidders. What is he thinking with that beret and lipstick and heels? Knob
ROFLMAO!
On this my dear friend we are in total agreement!
He was having a go at Farage for querying immigration numbers as his family came over in the 17th century so were immigrants. I don't think that went down well.
I can't understand why he is rolled out constantly - if he was at the height of his fame, yes, but that was nearly 25 years ago.
I wonder how the secret Turkish visa scheme will go down.
Like a bowl of cold sick I'd have thought?
Cameron wants to let in 1m Turks while threatening Granny's pension...
#YouDoTheMath
"Let them in". You mean visit the UK without needing a visa. Are you saying they will all stay here illegally? What makes you believe that? And how does a visa prevent someone breaking the law?
Don't have a go at me. I'm just suggesting how it will be perceived on the day Cameron is in the Papers threatening Granny's pension.
Personally I've stayed away from all the immigration stuff because I'm quite relaxed about it (I'm Brexit for good old fashioned sovereignty which I've been consistent about since I started posting here ten years ago)
It has nothing to do with immigration. Granny could only get worried if she was told lies about it.
@RichardTyndall - for me the Norway option is by far the best Brexit outcome. I'd just be very surprised if most Leavers felt the same way, given that it means ongoing contributions and continued high levels of immigration.
The problem with Brexit is you let that populist, nationalist genie out of the bottle. The likes of Richard Tyndall think they are in control of it, but they aren't.
There are some fucking serious headbangers on this site...Plato, Watford, Casino, Sean Fear...people who couldn't compromise in a lifetime. They appear reasonable, but they aren't.They are ideologically driven nutters who couldn't care less if the UK goes to shyte provided their version of dark politics prevails.....
And then there are other posters, many other posters, who are seemingly attracted by this Brexit, nihilistic nonsense...... in the last few days Cameron needs to appeal to these
You're starting to talk like an EU official. Britain has never embraced political radicalism and it won't now I suspect - even in a world that is heading that way. We are an island which helps keep tensions to a minimum - people are grumpy not about to put on the jackboots. And we are an ageing society.
But Frank, you are playing with fire. Post Brexit there will be a an economic shock. The immigrants that Brexit Britain doesn't like...black and Muslim....they won't go away. And with an economic shock, we are in a much worse position to protect vital public services....the NHS. And global capital will invest outside the UK...so the UK will diminish further, and our public services will diminish further. We'll have inflation, and falling employment and investment. And who'll be to blame in this culture of lowest common politics?
It is built on a fatally flawed foundation, a conceit that it is possible to subsume more than two dozen distinct nations into one political entity.
This just comes back to the British aversion to federalism combined with a lack of vision about the EU. The addition of a common European layer of political institutions does not mean that the core expression of democratic politics will cease to be at the national level. We are not building an exact copy of the USA, but something unique that will allow us to make our continent work better and be less prone to conflict.
@RichardTyndall - for me the Norway option is by far the best Brexit outcome. I'd just be very surprised if most Leavers felt the same way, given that it means ongoing contributions and continued high levels of immigration.
The problem with Brexit is you let that populist, nationalist genie out of the bottle. The likes of Richard Tyndall think they are in control of it, but they aren't.
There are some fucking serious headbangers on this site...Plato, Watford, Casino, Sean Fear...people who couldn't compromise in a lifetime. They appear reasonable, but they aren't.They are ideologically driven nutters who couldn't care less if the UK goes to shyte provided their version of dark politics prevails.....
And then there are other posters, many other posters, who are seemingly attracted by this Brexit, nihilistic nonsense...... in the last few days Cameron needs to appeal to these
The problem I, as I would hope not a nutter, have with such predictions, is if the nation is in such a state that Brexit would unleash such hell, then counter intuitively we have bigger problems than Brexit and it hardly matters which option we pick!
Turks might visit the UK without visas. They're coming for us. The Turks. Yes, if that's how the conversation is going we clearly have huge problems.
In which case what is the solution? The problem, as ever, appears to be not that we have the wrong sort of system or government (though this may also be so), but the wrong sort of people.
The Turks don't bother me, but it does most people it seems, and clearly the EU knows it. If it cannot convince people it is not a problem, if it cannot convince people of its own worth, cannot justify its own existence to the people, then what bloody good is it? What good is a system if it is utterly convinced of its own goodness but unable to communicate that convincingly to its people?
Though in fairness despite rising skepticism it is still mostly us who are not convinced. At present. Less incompetence and arrogance and the EU would not be in this mess now, as people like me, who don't care about immigration and can get on board with some form of dream of a united europe, would not have switched.
No-one ever mentions Penny Mordaunt as a potential PM. Not that I actually expect it to happen but she's a decent media performer, has ministerial experience, is a Leaver, and being female probably doesn't hurt.
Indeed but even Remains inference of the removal of someone's pension is an evil wicked ploy by to play on the old and vulnerable.
Remain really really are in complete panic because this would never have been said had they felt anywhere near winning. I am starting to agree with others on here. They think or perhaps know they are going to lose. They had the NHS the other day being destroyed because of Brexit , now pensions they are just going for all the soft targets. What next Brexit and we kill all your first born with pitchforks.
Cameron is so fucked now whatever the result happens to be. He is going to end up being he more hated than Blair or Brown and I never thought possible ever. The other big danger of course is that Remainers will also never be forgiven because they as directly associated with these remarks and even cheering them on.
He is not talking about pensioners losing their pension. He is saying that if the economy is adversely affected the triple lock could come under pressure.
"So here is the reality: if we leave, the pensioner benefits would be under threat, and the Triple Lock could no longer be guaranteed in the long term."
No different to the Bank of England and IFS warnings but then who are they!!
I was struck by his omission of the overseas aid budget from potential cuts. Cameron's priorities are just wrong, I'm sorry to say.
I don't disagree on foreign aid cut backs but David Cameron is coming from the view that the economy will be hit and that the triple lock is certainly one that has been exempt from any cuts. I also object in the strongest manner to leave supporters abuse and the idiotic 'shame on you' comment. I do not need this abuse and am leaving the site for a short period and hope when I return all differing views will be respected. Good night
Bang on the money there Mr NorthWales, and I really hope that you will reconsider your decision to leave the site at this time. Considering the polls right now, its striking that there are so few Remain voters commenting here. And as for the issue of pensions if the economy suffers an exit shock, been amazed its taken this long for that issue to have some prominence. The Pension issue was a very real concern for many Scottish voters before the Indy Ref, and simple shouting abuse at Cameron, Remain campaign or anyone here that tries to point out the risks does not address those genuine concerns.
A bit of googling shows this is POSSIBLY Nice Ultras attacking Irish and Polish fans, who were happily drinking together before the match.
Perhaps tyson would like Poland, Ireland and France thrown out of Europe, along with England.
I wonder if French Muslim football fans have decided to sabotage the entire competition, by causing mayhem; a kind of ISIS-lite.
There are some horrible England supporters who travel abroad only to make trouble. They are scum. And they are generally white and working class. But these days England fans of all backgrounds are generally the innocent victims. Picked on by others seeking to take the English. It's been happening for years.
Boris Johnson was embroiled in an extraordinary row last night after he admitted discussing the possibility of a leadership challenge against David Cameron with a fellow Tory MP.
Mr Johnson, the clear favourite to be the next Tory leader, met Alec Shelbrooke in his Commons office and speculated about the number of Tory MPs prepared to back a no-confidence vote in the Prime Minister.
According to one version of the encounter, Boris said: 'Are there 50 names?' – a reference to the number of renegade MPs required to trigger a contest.
The former London Mayor last night confirmed that he met Mr Shelbrooke in his office and held a conversation about how many Tory MPs backed a coup – but insisted he had talked about 'how vital it was to keep the party together under Dave's leadership'.
There is a name in that article who is mentioned in what seems like every single plot to topple Cameron. Their reason for disliking Cameron is most amusing.
@RichardTyndall - for me the Norway option is by far the best Brexit outcome. I'd just be very surprised if most Leavers felt the same way, given that it means ongoing contributions and continued high levels of immigration.
The problem with Brexit is you let that populist, nationalist genie out of the bottle. The likes of Richard Tyndall think they are in control of it, but they aren't.
There are some fucking serious headbangers on this site...Plato, Watford, Casino, Sean Fear...people who couldn't compromise in a lifetime. They appear reasonable, but they aren't.They are ideologically driven nutters who couldn't care less if the UK goes to shyte provided their version of dark politics prevails.....
And then there are other posters, many other posters, who are seemingly attracted by this Brexit, nihilistic nonsense...... in the last few days Cameron needs to appeal to these
You're starting to talk like an EU official. Britain has never embraced political radicalism and it won't now I suspect - even in a world that is heading that way. We are an island which helps keep tensions to a minimum - people are grumpy not about to put on the jackboots. And we are an ageing society.
And who'll be to blame in this culture of lowest common politics?
.
The public have been extensively warned of the most hyperbolic risks of both options on the table. We will be to blame if we remain or exit.
@RichardTyndall - for me the Norway option is by far the best Brexit outcome. I'd just be very surprised if most Leavers felt the same way, given that it means ongoing contributions and continued high levels of immigration.
It doesn't mean high levels of migration.
We charge £5K PA for the NHS (above tax) and no benefits at all for a start.
Then we could make employers using non UK staff pay extra still to fund training. Makes low skilled immigration uneconomic.
That only makes sense if you believe that people will stop coming if they can't access the NHS or get benefits and that businesses in areas of low unemployment should be prevented from growing.
Well, no, when the cross the border, they either have insurance or they don't cross.
Areas of low unemployment are also generally full and have a housing shortage so if the businesses want to grow they need to find another way or location.
Brilliant! So visas for all and the state telling businesses in London and other low unemployment areas how they should grow, or not. Thus, not the Norway option at all. Which was my original point.
So if there are no barristas available for a new coffee shop in London at £10 per hour we have to let someone in who then can't afford rent within travel distance of work so has to be subsidised?
That's the sort of growth we have, Is that the sort you think is desirable?
@RichardTyndall - for me the Norway option is by far the best Brexit outcome. I'd just be very surprised if most Leavers felt the same way, given that it means ongoing contributions and continued high levels of immigration.
The problem with Brexit is you let that populist, nationalist genie out of the bottle. The likes of Richard Tyndall think they are in control of it, but they aren't.
There are some fucking serious headbangers on this site...Plato, Watford, Casino, Sean Fear...people who couldn't compromise in a lifetime. They appear reasonable, but they aren't.They are ideologically driven nutters who couldn't care less if the UK goes to shyte provided their version of dark politics prevails.....
And then there are other posters, many other posters, who are seemingly attracted by this Brexit, nihilistic nonsense...... in the last few days Cameron needs to appeal to these
You make it sound like populism and nationalism (which to me seems to be code for racism and xenophobia) went away. They didn't. The Liberal project only succeeded in removing the debate from the public sphere.
But that debate never actually ended. It just wasn't on the BBC and much of the mainstream media. The underlying prejudices and fears lingered within people and the Liberal project never took a moment to address those prejudices and fears.
I cannot agree with you more on this. But what do you do? How long can you spend trying to persuade people who are set in their own, narrow views.
BTW I am not a democrat. I really do believe that anyone who is sufficiently racist, narrow minded, thick, simplistic, stupid, ill educated and ill informed (BTW Brexit...those are the people who support you)....they should be disenfranchised.......
There seem to be a lot of parallels between this Referendum and the General Election,
In 2015 the underlying fundamentals said that there was a strong chance of a Tory majority which was never reflected in the polls. When you consider the fundamentals of the EU Referendum, they say that Leave has to win while the polls just don't seem to be indicating the strength of the Leave side. Comparing to the Scottish Referendum, it was generally thought there was a hardcore on either side, with about 25% for Independence no matter what and 35% for Union no matter what. in the end this was the actual difference in the result, a 10% margin for No.
Now with the EU Referendum, there is clearly a side which will vote Leave regardless of the arguments, it could be the UKIP vote of 18% but is likely higher with some Tory and Labour voters being hardcore Leavers. But where is the comparative hardcore Remain vote? Some of the Lib Dems who currently poll 5%. Or Greens currently polling similar numbers. There just does not seem to be an identifiable and substantial number of Remain no matter what voters.
If this is true, then Leave starts out with a huge lead, with between 20% and 30% who will always vote Leave and cannot be persuaded. This means Remain needs to get something in the region of 70% of all other voters to vote Remain or they lose. These are the underlying fundamentals of this Referendum and why I just cannot see any other result than Leave.
There was a similar sentiment from Laura Kunsberg. She said there were 10 million hard core leavers and only 5 million hard ish remainers. That being the case, leave has to be odds on not odds off.
Plus that's just the underlying fundamental starting position.
You then get to wrap one side up in the Union Jack, proclaiming Independence and Nationalism and it again says that all the cards are with Leave and the chance of Remain clinging on with no national symbols to help it out is just too weak to succeed.
Yes wrapped itself up in the saltire in Scotland and lost, albeit narrowly. Yes there was more sentiment there for the Union than there is for the EU but ultimately it was the economy there which was the deciding factor
I wasn't talking about the arguments being put foward, I was talking about the fundamentals of where the campaigns start and where they go. In Scotland, Independence had a 25% core, the Union had a 35% core and both had at least some nationalist sentiment to aid their cause.
My point is that Leave starts with something like 20% to 30% of the electorate backing them, unpersuadable and certain to vote. Remain doesn't have anything like this sort of support and their core is massively smaller, it could be as low as 10%. On top of that, only Leave has a nationalist flag waving aspect to bolster its support, There aren't going to be many people waving the Flag of Europe around. There were lots waving the Union Flag in Scotland.
By the end Independence had a 40% core. Of course if it was core Leavers v core Eurofederalists Leave would win but it is not and it is undecideds and voters in the middle who will decide it. The Union Flag in Scotland was mainly waved by the Orange Order and dwarfed by Saltires, there was a bit more sentiment attached to it than the EU stars but it was not sentiment that won it for No but the economy and desire to send a message to London but not sever the relationship altogether
I went canvassing in East London on Friday. Spoke to a remainer, who produced a full size EU flag and draped it out of his window as we left. I thought that was rather helpful for Brexit, all things considered.
Boris Johnson was embroiled in an extraordinary row last night after he admitted discussing the possibility of a leadership challenge against David Cameron with a fellow Tory MP.
Mr Johnson, the clear favourite to be the next Tory leader, met Alec Shelbrooke in his Commons office and speculated about the number of Tory MPs prepared to back a no-confidence vote in the Prime Minister.
According to one version of the encounter, Boris said: 'Are there 50 names?' – a reference to the number of renegade MPs required to trigger a contest.
The former London Mayor last night confirmed that he met Mr Shelbrooke in his office and held a conversation about how many Tory MPs backed a coup – but insisted he had talked about 'how vital it was to keep the party together under Dave's leadership'.
There is a name in that article who is mentioned in what seems like every single plot to topple Cameron. Their reason for disliking Cameron is most amusing.
It is built on a fatally flawed foundation, a conceit that it is possible to subsume more than two dozen distinct nations into one political entity.
This just comes back to the British aversion to federalism combined with a lack of vision about the EU. The addition of a common European layer of political institutions does not mean that the core expression of democratic politics will cease to be at the national level. We are not building an exact copy of the USA, but something unique that will allow us to make our continent work better and be less prone to conflict.
I think you're right. The British are averse to federalism, which is why we agreed to join an economic community rather than a political one. Now we have a chance to review that decision in the light of the last 30+ years of increasing federalism and come to a decision about whether we share the vision of our neighbours. Although there's much to criticise Cameron for at the moment we should at least be grateful for the opportunity to express our democratic will - regardless of the outcome.
@RichardTyndall - for me the Norway option is by far the best Brexit outcome. I'd just be very surprised if most Leavers felt the same way, given that it means ongoing contributions and continued high levels of immigration.
The problem with Brexit is you let that populist, nationalist genie out of the bottle. The likes of Richard Tyndall think they are in control of it, but they aren't.
There are some fucking serious headbangers on this site...Plato, Watford, Casino, Sean Fear...people who couldn't compromise in a lifetime. They appear reasonable, but they aren't.They are ideologically driven nutters who couldn't care less if the UK goes to shyte provided their version of dark politics prevails.....
And then there are other posters, many other posters, who are seemingly attracted by this Brexit, nihilistic nonsense...... in the last few days Cameron needs to appeal to these
The problem I, as I would hope not a nutter, have with such predictions, is if the nation is in such a state that Brexit would unleash such hell, then counter intuitively we have bigger problems than Brexit and it hardly matters which option we pick!
Turks might visit the UK without visas. They're coming for us. The Turks. Yes, if that's how the conversation is going we clearly have huge problems.
In which case what is the solution? The problem, as ever, appears to be not that we have the wrong sort of system or government (though this may also be so), but the wrong sort of people.
The Turks don't bother me, but it does most people it seems, and clearly the EU knows it. If it cannot convince people it is not a problem, if it cannot convince people of its own worth, cannot justify its own existence to the people, then what bloody good is it? What good is a system if it is utterly convinced of its own goodness but unable to communicate that convincingly to its people?
Though in fairness despite rising skepticism it is still mostly us who are not convinced. At present. Less incompetence and arrogance and the EU would not be in this mess now, as people like me, who don't care about immigration and can get on board with some form of dream of a united europe, would not have switched.
The assumption is these million or so Turks - among the wealthiest in their country - will visit us visa free and give up everything they have at home to break our laws and live here illegally. For no other reason than they are Turks. It's racism, I'm afraid. We either pander to it or we don't.
@RichardTyndall - for me the Norway option is by far the best Brexit outcome. I'd just be very surprised if most Leavers felt the same way, given that it means ongoing contributions and continued high levels of immigration.
The problem with Brexit is you let that populist, nationalist genie out of the bottle. The likes of Richard Tyndall think they are in control of it, but they aren't.
There are some fucking serious headbangers on this site...Plato, Watford, Casino, Sean Fear...people who couldn't compromise in a lifetime. They appear reasonable, but they aren't.They are ideologically driven nutters who couldn't care less if the UK goes to shyte provided their version of dark politics prevails.....
And then there are other posters, many other posters, who are seemingly attracted by this Brexit, nihilistic nonsense...... in the last few days Cameron needs to appeal to these
The problem I, as I would hope not a nutter, have with such predictions, is if the nation is in such a state that Brexit would unleash such hell, then counter intuitively we have bigger problems than Brexit and it hardly matters which option we pick!
Turks might visit the UK without visas. They're coming for us. The Turks. Yes, if that's how the conversation is going we clearly have huge problems.
It is built on a fatally flawed foundation, a conceit that it is possible to subsume more than two dozen distinct nations into one political entity.
This just comes back to the British aversion to federalism combined with a lack of vision about the EU. The addition of a common European layer of political institutions does not mean that the core expression of democratic politics will cease to be at the national level. We are not building an exact copy of the USA, but something unique that will allow us to make our continent work better and be less prone to conflict.
I think you're right. The British are averse to federalism, which is why we agreed to join an economic community rather than a political one. Now we have a chance to review that decision in the light of the last 30+ years of increasing federalism and come to a decision about whether we share the vision of our neighbours. Although there's much to criticise Cameron for at the moment we should at least be grateful for the opportunity to express our democratic will - regardless of the outcome.
This site doesn't have a "like" function, but that's how I want to respond to this comment. Spot on.
@RichardTyndall - for me the Norway option is by far the best Brexit outcome. I'd just be very surprised if most Leavers felt the same way, given that it means ongoing contributions and continued high levels of immigration.
The problem with Brexit is you let that populist, nationalist genie out of the bottle. The likes of Richard Tyndall think they are in control of it, but they aren't.
There are some fucking serious headbangers on this site...Plato, Watford, Casino, Sean Fear...people who couldn't compromise in a lifetime. They appear reasonable, but they aren't.They are ideologically driven nutters who couldn't care less if the UK goes to shyte provided their version of dark politics prevails.....
And then there are other posters, many other posters, who are seemingly attracted by this Brexit, nihilistic nonsense...... in the last few days Cameron needs to appeal to these
Agree 100% with this.
I'm only an occasional poster on this blog, but I read it almost every day. This post motivated me to log in and respond.
I am probably best known on here for my posts in support of Jeremy Corbyn during the Labour leadership campaign last summer. I haven't necessarily agreed with everything he's done since winning that race in September, but I still think compared to the alternatives he was the right choice - and he was excellent on The Last Leg yesterday.
I strongly support LEAVE. My reasons have nothing to do with immigration and only a little to do with sovereignty. Rather, it's because the EU (not Europe) is doomed to fail, and the sooner it fails the better.
It is built on a fatally flawed foundation, a conceit that it is possible to subsume more than two dozen distinct nations into one political entity. It is fundamentally incompatible with democracy, and the backlash that is growing not just in the UK but across the continent has been inevitable for some time. The longer the charade that political union is feasible goes on, the worse the endgame will be.
My view is unpopular among those with whom I share many of my other political beliefs, but it is what it is.
However unpopular your view is your analysis of the EU problem is absolutely correct.
"UEFA is launching an investigation into violence at the end of England's first Euro 2016 match against Russia which finished 1-1"
"Marseille city like a battlefield."
"Alexander Shprygin, head of the All-Russian Fans' Union, a body with backing from the Russian government told AP that Russian supporters were involved.
"The reason (for the fighting) was that the English are drinking a lot and are behaving badly," he said."
It is built on a fatally flawed foundation, a conceit that it is possible to subsume more than two dozen distinct nations into one political entity.
This just comes back to the British aversion to federalism combined with a lack of vision about the EU. The addition of a common European layer of political institutions does not mean that the core expression of democratic politics will cease to be at the national level. We are not building an exact copy of the USA, but something unique that will allow us to make our continent work better and be less prone to conflict.
@RichardTyndall - for me the Norway option is by far the best Brexit outcome. I'd just be very surprised if most Leavers felt the same way, given that it means ongoing contributions and continued high levels of immigration.
It doesn't mean high levels of migration.
We charge £5K PA for the NHS (above tax) and no benefits at all for a start.
Then we could make employers using non UK staff pay extra still to fund training. Makes low skilled immigration uneconomic.
That only makes sense if you believe that people will stop coming if they can't access the NHS or get benefits and that businesses in areas of low unemployment should be prevented from growing.
Well, no, when the cross the border, they either have insurance or they don't cross.
Areas of low unemployment are also generally full and have a housing shortage so if the businesses want to grow they need to find another way or location.
Brilliant! So visas for all and the state telling businesses in London and other low unemployment areas how they should grow, or not. Thus, not the Norway option at all. Which was my original point.
So if there are no barristas available for a new coffee shop in London at £10 per hour we have to let someone in who then can't afford rent within travel distance of work so has to be subsidised?
That's the sort of growth we have, Is that the sort you think is desirable?
It is also the Norway option.
Nope, we don't have to let anyone in. We can let the business - paying well above the minimum wage - wither and die, and we can reduce competition, make coffee more expensive for everyone, reduce government tax take and provide fewer opportunities, while doing nothing to solve the issues facing the true unemployment blackspots where there are very few EU immigrants. You are not a genuine Tory who believes in free enterprise and a smaller state, are you? I thought Brexit was supposed to set business free.
@RichardTyndall - for me the Norway option is by far the best Brexit outcome. I'd just be very surprised if most Leavers felt the same way, given that it means ongoing contributions and continued high levels of immigration.
The problem with Brexit is you let that populist, nationalist genie out of the bottle. The likes of Richard Tyndall think they are in control of it, but they aren't.
There are some fucking serious headbangers on this site...Plato, Watford, Casino, Sean Fear...people who couldn't compromise in a lifetime. They appear reasonable, but they aren't.They are ideologically driven nutters who couldn't care less if the UK goes to shyte provided their version of dark politics prevails.....
And then there are other posters, many other posters, who are seemingly attracted by this Brexit, nihilistic nonsense...... in the last few days Cameron needs to appeal to these
You make it sound like populism and nationalism (which to me seems to be code for racism and xenophobia) went away. They didn't. The Liberal project only succeeded in removing the debate from the public sphere.
But that debate never actually ended. It just wasn't on the BBC and much of the mainstream media. The underlying prejudices and fears lingered within people and the Liberal project never took a moment to address those prejudices and fears.
I cannot agree with you more on this. But what do you do? How long can you spend trying to persuade people who are set in their own, narrow views.
BTW I am not a democrat. I really do believe that anyone who is sufficiently racist, narrow minded, thick, simplistic, stupid, ill educated and ill informed (BTW Brexit...those are the people who support you)....they should be disenfranchised.......
Ah. Only "the right sort of people" get the vote.
You would have loved communist Russia or indeed China today.
@RichardTyndall - for me the Norway option is by far the best Brexit outcome. I'd just be very surprised if most Leavers felt the same way, given that it means ongoing contributions and continued high levels of immigration.
The problem with Brexit is you let that populist, nationalist genie out of the bottle. The likes of Richard Tyndall think they are in control of it, but they aren't.
There are some fucking serious headbangers on this site...Plato, Watford, Casino, Sean Fear...people who couldn't compromise in a lifetime. They appear reasonable, but they aren't.They are ideologically driven nutters who couldn't care less if the UK goes to shyte provided their version of dark politics prevails.....
And then there are other posters, many other posters, who are seemingly attracted by this Brexit, nihilistic nonsense...... in the last few days Cameron needs to appeal to these
You're starting to talk like an EU official. Britain has never embraced political radicalism and it won't now I suspect - even in a world that is heading that way. We are an island which helps keep tensions to a minimum - people are grumpy not about to put on the jackboots. And we are an ageing society.
But Frank, you are playing with fire. Post Brexit there will be a an economic shock. The immigrants that Brexit Britain doesn't like...black and Muslim....they won't go away. And with an economic shock, we are in a much worse position to protect vital public services....the NHS. And global capital will invest outside the UK...so the UK will diminish further, and our public services will diminish further. We'll have inflation, and falling employment and investment. And who'll be to blame in this culture of lowest common politics?
I wish project fear was sufficiently fearful.
You still haven't told us whether the Polish, Irish, and French fans fighting, clearly, tonight, bring shame on their host countries and expose the horror of nationalism and mean they should exit Europe, leaving, um, Luxembourg?
Sean- I think you have kind of laid yourself open to this one. Those nihilistic fuckwits, whether Polish, Italian, or whatever will all be nihilistic Brexiters, or Itexiters, or Irlexiters. The politics of division, hatred and despair are just all too easy to galvanise people who are stupid,mean, poorly educated, racist, spiteful. Populism works. Tried and tested, over and over again.
But, and I am not manipulating you (maybe a bit) I know you are vacillating. In this world there are some horrible mean people, people who dive to the bottom because they are mean spirited....in their DNA....as much as you bluster I don't think you are one.
@RichardTyndall - for me the Norway option is by far the best Brexit outcome. I'd just be very surprised if most Leavers felt the same way, given that it means ongoing contributions and continued high levels of immigration.
The problem with Brexit is you let that populist, nationalist genie out of the bottle. The likes of Richard Tyndall think they are in control of it, but they aren't.
There are some fucking serious headbangers on this site...Plato, Watford, Casino, Sean Fear...people who couldn't compromise in a lifetime. They appear reasonable, but they aren't.They are ideologically driven nutters who couldn't care less if the UK goes to shyte provided their version of dark politics prevails.....
And then there are other posters, many other posters, who are seemingly attracted by this Brexit, nihilistic nonsense...... in the last few days Cameron needs to appeal to these
You make it sound like populism and nationalism (which to me seems to be code for racism and xenophobia) went away. They didn't. The Liberal project only succeeded in removing the debate from the public sphere.
But that debate never actually ended. It just wasn't on the BBC and much of the mainstream media. The underlying prejudices and fears lingered within people and the Liberal project never took a moment to address those prejudices and fears.
I cannot agree with you more on this. But what do you do? How long can you spend trying to persuade people who are set in their own, narrow views.
BTW I am not a democrat. I really do believe that anyone who is sufficiently racist, narrow minded, thick, simplistic, stupid, ill educated and ill informed (BTW Brexit...those are the people who support you)....they should be disenfranchised.......
Then we can all vote Brexit.
You see it is symptomatic of the left - and Remain, that they call people with whom they disagree nasty names and try and shut them up (and then hope they'll vote for them!). The right (and Brexit) try and argue their cause.
It is built on a fatally flawed foundation, a conceit that it is possible to subsume more than two dozen distinct nations into one political entity.
This just comes back to the British aversion to federalism combined with a lack of vision about the EU. The addition of a common European layer of political institutions does not mean that the core expression of democratic politics will cease to be at the national level. We are not building an exact copy of the USA, but something unique that will allow us to make our continent work better and be less prone to conflict.
I think you're right. The British are averse to federalism, which is why we agreed to join an economic community rather than a political one. Now we have a chance to review that decision in the light of the last 30+ years of increasing federalism and come to a decision about whether we share the vision of our neighbours. Although there's much to criticise Cameron for at the moment we should at least be grateful for the opportunity to express our democratic will - regardless of the outcome.
This site doesn't have a "like" function, but that's how I want to respond to this comment. Spot on.
Thanks. I think there is a cultural dimension here as well. My German colleagues genuinely can't understand 'sovereignty' as a concept. They start from an assumption that pooled control represents strength and that independence is necessarily weak, which is not how we understand history in this country.
There seem to be a lot of parallels between this Referendum and the General Election,
In 2015 the underlying fundamentals said that there was a strong chance of a Tory majority which was never reflected in the polls. When you consider the fundamentals of the EU Referendum, they say that Leave has to win while the polls just don't seem to be indicating the strength of the Leave side. Comparing to the Scottish Referendum, it was generally thought there was a hardcore on either side, with about 25% for Independence no matter what and 35% for Union no matter what. in the end this was the actual difference in the result, a 10% margin for No.
Now with the EU Referendum, there is clearly a side which will vote Leave regardless of the arguments, it could be the UKIP vote of 18% but is likely higher with some Tory and Labour voters being hardcore Leavers. But where is the comparative hardcore Remain vote? Some of the Lib Dems who currently poll 5%. Or Greens currently polling similar numbers. There just does not seem to be an identifiable and substantial number of Remain no matter what voters.
If this is true, then Leave starts out with a huge lead, with between 20% and 30% who will always vote Leave and cannot be persuaded. This means Remain needs to get something in the region of 70% of all other voters to vote Remain or they lose. These are the underlying fundamentals of this Referendum and why I just cannot see any other result than Leave.
"But where is the comparative hardcore Remain vote?"
The hardcore Remain vote is very real, and it will turn up and vote in the EU Referendum. But like the Indy Ref in Scotland, it has remained largely silent on social media despite all the noise from engaged supporters of both sides of the campaign. Although we did at least mention and discuss one strong element of the hardcore No vote during the Indy Ref, the large number of very important risk averse female voters. I certainly think that as one of this group, the Remain camp would do well to carry on with appealing to them as Amber Rudd did very effectively in the last ITV debate.
@RichardTyndall - for me the Norway option is by far the best Brexit outcome. I'd just be very surprised if most Leavers felt the same way, given that it means ongoing contributions and continued high levels of immigration.
The problem with Brexit is you let that populist, nationalist genie out of the bottle. The likes of Richard Tyndall think they are in control of it, but they aren't.
There are some fucking serious headbangers on this site...Plato, Watford, Casino, Sean Fear...people who couldn't compromise in a lifetime. They appear reasonable, but they aren't.They are ideologically driven nutters who couldn't care less if the UK goes to shyte provided their version of dark politics prevails.....
And then there are other posters, many other posters, who are seemingly attracted by this Brexit, nihilistic nonsense...... in the last few days Cameron needs to appeal to these
You make it sound like populism and nationalism (which to me seems to be code for racism and xenophobia) went away. They didn't. The Liberal project only succeeded in removing the debate from the public sphere.
But that debate never actually ended. It just wasn't on the BBC and much of the mainstream media. The underlying prejudices and fears lingered within people and the Liberal project never took a moment to address those prejudices and fears.
I cannot agree with you more on this. But what do you do? How long can you spend trying to persuade people who are set in their own, narrow views.
BTW I am not a democrat. I really do believe that anyone who is sufficiently racist, narrow minded, thick, simplistic, stupid, ill educated and ill informed (BTW Brexit...those are the people who support you)....they should be disenfranchised.......
Yep. No wonder you support the EU with an attitude like that. Basically anyone you disagree with should not be allowed to vote. Next you'll be suggesting they should be transported East or just gassed.
@RichardTyndall - for me the Norway option is by far the best Brexit outcome. I'd just be very surprised if most Leavers felt the same way, given that it means ongoing contributions and continued high levels of immigration.
It doesn't mean high levels of migration.
We charge £5K PA for the NHS (above tax) and no benefits at all for a start.
Then we could make employers using non UK staff pay extra still to fund training. Makes low skilled immigration uneconomic.
That only makes sense if you believe that people will stop coming if they can't access the NHS or get benefits and that businesses in areas of low unemployment should be prevented from growing.
Well, no, when the cross the border, they either have insurance or they don't cross.
Areas of low unemployment are also generally full and have a housing shortage so if the businesses want to grow they need to find another way or location.
Brilliant! So visas for all and the state telling businesses in London and other low unemployment areas how they should grow, or not. Thus, not the Norway option at all. Which was my original point.
So if there are no barristas available for a new coffee shop in London at £10 per hour we have to let someone in who then can't afford rent within travel distance of work so has to be subsidised?
That's the sort of growth we have, Is that the sort you think is desirable?
It is also the Norway option.
Nope, we don't have to let anyone in. We can let the business - paying well above the minimum wage - wither and die, and we can reduce competition, make coffee more expensive for everyone, reduce government tax take and provide fewer opportunities, while doing nothing to solve the issues facing the true unemployment blackspots where there are very few EU immigrants. You are not a genuine Tory who believes in free enterprise and a smaller state, are you? I thought Brexit was supposed to set business free.
No, I am a genuine Tory, just not a 19th century Liberal.
If the price of coffee rises because the genuine non subsidised cost of staff rises, the economy doesn't shrink.
It does mean that employers have to look harder for employees including moving jobs to them. That is very one nation Tory.
@RichardTyndall - for me the Norway option is by far the best Brexit outcome. I'd just be very surprised if most Leavers felt the same way, given that it means ongoing contributions and continued high levels of immigration.
The problem with Brexit is you let that populist, nationalist genie out of the bottle. The likes of Richard Tyndall think they are in control of it, but they aren't.
There are some fucking serious headbangers on this site...Plato, Watford, Casino, Sean Fear...people who couldn't compromise in a lifetime. They appear reasonable, but they aren't.They are ideologically driven nutters who couldn't care less if the UK goes to shyte provided their version of dark politics prevails.....
And then there are other posters, many other posters, who are seemingly attracted by this Brexit, nihilistic nonsense...... in the last few days Cameron needs to appeal to these
The problem I, as I would hope not a nutter, have with such predictions, is if the nation is in such a state that Brexit would unleash such hell, then counter intuitively we have bigger problems than Brexit and it hardly matters which option we pick!
Turks might visit the UK without visas. They're coming for us. The Turks. Yes, if that's how the conversation is going we clearly have huge problems.
In which case what is the solution? The problem, as ever, appears to be not that we have the wrong sort of system or government (though this may also be so), but the wrong sort of people.
The Turks don't bother me, but it does most people it seems, and clearly the EU knows it. If it cannot convince people it is not a problem, if it cannot convince people of its own worth, cannot justify its own existence to the people, then what bloody good is it? What good is a system if it is utterly convinced of its own goodness but unable to communicate that convincingly to its people?
Though in fairness despite rising skepticism it is still mostly us who are not convinced. At present. Less incompetence and arrogance and the EU would not be in this mess now, as people like me, who don't care about immigration and can get on board with some form of dream of a united europe, would not have switched.
The assumption is these million or so Turks - among the wealthiest in their country - will visit us visa free and give up everything they have at home to break our laws and live here illegally. For no other reason than they are Turks. It's racism, I'm afraid. We either pander to it or we don't.
Just because people believe that and are wrong does not mean they are wrong to be concerned about the EU for other reasons. Should I not vote the way I think is best because other people voting the same way are doing so for stupid, even racist, reasons and we should not pander to them? There will be some who say the reasons I am voting are stupid. A lot of people vote for stupid reasons. How are we to judge how many are voting for stupid reasons?
I still don't see a solution. I'd personally prefer to see a campaign for leave based purely around ideas of taking back control in a generic sense but the main area most people want control is immigration, even remainers, so unfortunately that's where the focus is.
Immigration talk always gets ugly. But leaving that issue aside, is the EU still something we want to be a part of in its current form and direction of travel. I say no, you may reasonably say yes. Whichever side wins, the people you don't want to pander to will think the same things and demand action.
It is built on a fatally flawed foundation, a conceit that it is possible to subsume more than two dozen distinct nations into one political entity.
This just comes back to the British aversion to federalism combined with a lack of vision about the EU. The addition of a common European layer of political institutions does not mean that the core expression of democratic politics will cease to be at the national level. We are not building an exact copy of the USA, but something unique that will allow us to make our continent work better and be less prone to conflict.
I think you're right. The British are averse to federalism, which is why we agreed to join an economic community rather than a political one. Now we have a chance to review that decision in the light of the last 30+ years of increasing federalism and come to a decision about whether we share the vision of our neighbours. Although there's much to criticise Cameron for at the moment we should at least be grateful for the opportunity to express our democratic will - regardless of the outcome.
This site doesn't have a "like" function, but that's how I want to respond to this comment. Spot on.
Thanks. I think there is a cultural dimension here as well. My German colleagues genuinely can't understand 'sovereignty' as a concept. They start from an assumption that pooled control represents strength and that independence is necessarily weak, which is not how we understand history in this country.
In a way it's surprising that Germany's post WW2 guilt was never channelled into a movement to undo the original German unification. Perhaps if the Soviets hadn't been in control of the East it would have done (and the Western powers might have been minded to enforce such a solution).
@RichardTyndall - for me the Norway option is by far the best Brexit outcome. I'd just be very surprised if most Leavers felt the same way, given that it means ongoing contributions and continued high levels of immigration.
The problem with Brexit is you let that populist, nationalist genie out of the bottle. The likes of Richard Tyndall think they are in control of it, but they aren't.
There are some fucking serious headbangers on this site...Plato, Watford, Casino, Sean Fear...people who couldn't compromise in a lifetime. They appear reasonable, but they aren't.They are ideologically driven nutters who couldn't care less if the UK goes to shyte provided their version of dark politics prevails.....
And then there are other posters, many other posters, who are seemingly attracted by this Brexit, nihilistic nonsense...... in the last few days Cameron needs to appeal to these
The problem I, as I would hope not a nutter, have with such predictions, is if the nation is in such a state that Brexit would unleash such hell, then counter intuitively we have bigger problems than Brexit and it hardly matters which option we pick!
Turks might visit the UK without visas. They're coming for us. The Turks. Yes, if that's how the conversation is going we clearly have huge problems.
It is a matter of perceptions.
Completely agree. And pretending this is about letting one million Turks settle in the UK will lead to people perceiving one million Turks are about to settle in the UK. Just as saying Turkey is set to join the EU will lead people to perceive Turkey is on the verge of joining the EU.
@RichardTyndall - for me the Norway option is by far the best Brexit outcome. I'd just be very surprised if most Leavers felt the same way, given that it means ongoing contributions and continued high levels of immigration.
The problem with Brexit is you let that populist, nationalist genie out of the bottle. The likes of Richard Tyndall think they are in control of it, but they aren't.
There are some fucking serious headbangers on this site...Plato, Watford, Casino, Sean Fear...people who couldn't compromise in a lifetime. They appear reasonable, but they aren't.They are ideologically driven nutters who couldn't care less if the UK goes to shyte provided their version of dark politics prevails.....
And then there are other posters, many other posters, who are seemingly attracted by this Brexit, nihilistic nonsense...... in the last few days Cameron needs to appeal to these
The problem I, as I would hope not a nutter, have with such predictions, is if the nation is in such a state that Brexit would unleash such hell, then counter intuitively we have bigger problems than Brexit and it hardly matters which option we pick!
Turks might visit the UK without visas. They're coming for us. The Turks. Yes, if that's how the conversation is going we clearly have huge problems.
In which case what is the solution? The problem, as ever, appears to be not that we have the wrong sort of system or government (though this may also be so), but the wrong sort of people.
The Turks don't bother me, but it does most people it seems, and clearly the EU knows it. If is it? What good is a system if it is utterly convinced of its own goodness but unable to communicate that convincingly to its people?
Though in fairness despite rising skepticism it is still mostly us who are not convinced. At present. Less incompetence and arrogance and the EU would not be in this mess now, as people like me, who don't care about immigration and can get on board with some form of dream of a united europe, would not have switched.
The assumption is these million or so Turks - among the wealthiest in their country - will visit us visa free and give up everything they have at home to break our laws and live here illegally. For no other reason than they are Turks. It's racism, I'm afraid. We either pander to it or we don't.
Just because people believe that and are wrong does not mean they are wrong to be concerned about the EU for other reasons. Should I not vote the way I think is best because other people voting the same way are doing so for stupid, even racist, reasons and we should not pander to them? There will be some who say the reasons I am voting are stupid. A lot of people vote for stupid reasons. How are we to judge how many are voting for stupid reasons?
I still don't see a solution. I'd personally prefer to see a campaign for leave based purely around ideas of taking back control in a generic sense but the main area most people want control is immigration, even remainers, so unfortunately that's where the focus is.
Immigration talk always gets ugly. But leaving that issue aside, is the EU still something we want to be a part of in its current form and direction of travel. I say no, you may reasonably say yes. Whichever side wins, the people you don't want to pander to will think the same things and demand action.
You should be free to think whatever you think and to act accordingly, so long as you do it peacefully. I'll call out racism when I see it (though I am not accusing you of that in any way, shape or form).
There seem to be a lot of parallels between this Referendum and the General Election,
In 2015 the underlying fundamentals said that there was a strong chance of a Tory majority which was never reflected in the polls. When you consider the fundamentals of the EU Referendum, they say that Leave has to win while the polls just don't seem to be indicating the strength of the Leave side. Comparing to the Scottish Referendum, it was generally thought there was a hardcore on either side, with about 25% for Independence no matter what and 35% for Union no matter what. in the end this was the actual difference in the result, a 10% margin for No.
Now with the EU Referendum, there is clearly a side which will vote Leave regardless of the arguments, it could be the UKIP vote of 18% but is likely higher with some Tory and Labour voters being hardcore Leavers. But where is the comparative hardcore Remain vote? Some of the Lib Dems who currently poll 5%. Or Greens currently polling similar numbers. There just does not seem to be an identifiable and substantial number of Remain no matter what voters.
If this is true, then Leave starts out with a huge lead, with between 20% and 30% who will always vote Leave and cannot be persuaded. This means Remain needs to get something in the region of 70% of all other voters to vote Remain or they lose. These are the underlying fundamentals of this Referendum and why I just cannot see any other result than Leave.
"But where is the comparative hardcore Remain vote?"
The hardcore Remain vote is very real, and it will turn up and vote in the EU Referendum. But like the Indy Ref in Scotland, it has remained largely silent on social media despite all the noise from engaged supporters of both sides of the campaign. Although we did at least mention and discuss one strong element of the hardcore No vote during the Indy Ref, the large number of very important risk averse female voters. I certainly think that as one of this group, the Remain camp would do well to carry on with appealing to them as Amber Rudd did very effectively in the last ITV debate.
Isn't this referendum a little different to SINDY though? In that there is no "status quo" or "risk averse" option?
REMAIN has real risk's associated with it (implosion of the euro, further loss of sovereignty, etc...) And what's more most polls reveal that a majority of people aren't satisfied with our relationship with the EU in it's current form so they want change.
I've said it before, Cameron needed to get some real reforms to bring back to the British people who could then have voted for change while being able to stick with the devil they know.
If he'd had a real package of reforms to sell he wouldn't have had to ferry in Obama to threaten us at the outset of the campaign and then generally go even more negative from there....
From the very start Cameron had played this all wrong, I'm sorry to say.
@RichardTyndall - for me the Norway option is by far the best Brexit outcome. I'd just be very surprised if most Leavers felt the same way, given that it means ongoing contributions and continued high levels of immigration.
The problem with Brexit is you let that populist, nationalist genie out of the bottle. The likes of Richard Tyndall think they are in control of it, but they aren't.
There are some fucking serious headbangers on this site...Plato, Watford, Casino, Sean Fear...people who couldn't compromise in a lifetime. They appear reasonable, but they aren't.They are ideologically driven nutters who couldn't care less if the UK goes to shyte provided their version of dark politics prevails.....
And then there are other posters, many other posters, who are seemingly attracted by this Brexit, nihilistic nonsense...... in the last few days Cameron needs to appeal to these
The problem I, as I would hope not a nutter, have with such predictions, is if the nation is in such a state that Brexit would unleash such hell, then counter intuitively we have bigger problems than Brexit and it hardly matters which option we pick!
Turks might visit the UK without visas. They're coming for us. The Turks. Yes, if that's how the conversation is going we clearly have huge problems.
It is a matter of perceptions.
Completely agree. And pretending this is about letting one million Turks settle in the UK will lead to people perceiving one million Turks are about to settle in the UK. Just as saying Turkey is set to join the EU will lead people to perceive Turkey is on the verge of joining the EU.
One of the problems here is the governments obviously duplicitous attitude, for example that visa free travel for Turks would not be to the UK but just to the Schengen area. Now this.
You can see how trust in the government has gone since the referendum campaign, and this just feeds into that narrative.
@RichardTyndall - for me the Norway option is by far the best Brexit outcome. I'd just be very surprised if most Leavers felt the same way, given that it means ongoing contributions and continued high levels of immigration.
The problem with Brexit is you let that populist, nationalist genie out of the bottle. The likes of Richard Tyndall think they are in control of it, but they aren't.
There are some fucking serious headbangers on this site...Plato, Watford, Casino, Sean Fear...people who couldn't compromise in a lifetime. They appear reasonable, but they aren't.They are ideologically driven nutters who couldn't care less if the UK goes to shyte provided their version of dark politics prevails.....
And then there are other posters, many other posters, who are seemingly attracted by this Brexit, nihilistic nonsense...... in the last few days Cameron needs to appeal to these
You're starting to talk like an EU official. Britain has never embraced political radicalism and it won't now I suspect - even in a world that is heading that way. We are an island which helps keep tensions to a minimum - people are grumpy not about to put on the jackboots. And we are an ageing society.
I keep hearing this ageing society stuff but is it potentially bollocks? Everyone I know is spewing out kids at the rate of knots and we're at 350,000 net immigration rate, and have been thereabouts for years.
@RichardTyndall - for me the Norway option is by far the best Brexit outcome. I'd just be very surprised if most Leavers felt the same way, given that it means ongoing contributions and continued high levels of immigration.
The thing is I really am a democrat (unlike Tyson by his own confession). And I look at the numbers and realise that if Leave win then we are looking at probably at least 70% of the voters (Remain plus nearly half of Leave) who would go for the Norway option. That is Democracy. It is the same thing that got us the referendum in the first place and hopefully will win it for us.
We don't just turn around to the 45% plus who voted for Remain and say "sorry you don't get a say anymore". They get to help choose what comes next as well.
There seem to be a lot of parallels between this Referendum and the General Election,
In 2015 the underlying fundamentals said that there was a strong chance of a Tory majority which was never reflected in the polls. When you consider the fundamentals of the EU Referendum, they say that Leave has to win while the polls just don't seem to be indicating the strength of the Leave side. Comparing to the Scottish Referendum, it was generally thought there was a hardcore on either side, with about 25% for Independence no matter what and 35% for Union no matter what. in the end this was the actual difference in the result, a 10% margin for No.
Now with the EU Referendum, there is clearly a side which will vote Leave regardless of the arguments, it could be the UKIP vote of 18% but is likely higher with some Tory and Labour voters being hardcore Leavers. But where is the comparative hardcore Remain vote? Some of the Lib Dems who currently poll 5%. Or Greens currently polling similar numbers. There just does not seem to be an identifiable and substantial number of Remain no matter what voters.
If this is true, then Leave starts out with a huge lead, with between 20% and 30% who will always vote Leave and cannot be persuaded. This means Remain needs to get something in the region of 70% of all other voters to vote Remain or they lose. These are the underlying fundamentals of this Referendum and why I just cannot see any other result than Leave.
"But where is the comparative hardcore Remain vote?"
The hardcore Remain vote is very real, and it will turn up and vote in the EU Referendum. But like the Indy Ref in Scotland, it has remained largely silent on social media despite all the noise from engaged supporters of both sides of the campaign. Although we did at least mention and discuss one strong element of the hardcore No vote during the Indy Ref, the large number of very important risk averse female voters. I certainly think that as one of this group, the Remain camp would do well to carry on with appealing to them as Amber Rudd did very effectively in the last ITV debate.
I think maybe you're not understanding what I'm saying. I understand there will be demographics which are more incline to vote Remain than Leave and your "risk averse female" is a very good example. But there are demographic groups who will also be more inclined to vote Leave such as elderly males. But both those groups can be persuaded one way or the other even if they are more inclined to vote in a specific way. That's not what I'm on about.
What I am talking about is those core groups which exist beyond demographics. "I hate the EU" and "I hate darkies" are not demographic groups. What I want to know is where is the Remain hardcore, those who, beyond demographic probability, will vote Remain and vote Remain no matter what else happens. I don't see that group existing in any sort of number.
As I said in my post. The end result in Scotland was that No won by almost exactly the hypothesised difference between the two core groups. 10%. The electorate which were open to consider the options split down the middle. That was good for No in Scotland which had 10pts more hardcore. Remain does not have that core group.
@RichardTyndall - for me the Norway option is by far the best Brexit outcome. I'd just be very surprised if most Leavers felt the same way, given that it means ongoing contributions and continued high levels of immigration.
It doesn't mean high levels of migration.
We charge £5K PA for the NHS (above tax) and no benefits at all for a start.
Then we could make employers using non UK staff pay extra still to fund training. Makes low skilled immigration uneconomic.
That only makes sense if you believe that people will stop coming if they can't access the NHS or get benefits and that businesses in areas of low unemployment should be prevented from growing.
Well, no, when the cross the border, they either have insurance or they don't cross.
Areas of low unemployment are also generally full and have a housing shortage so if the businesses want to grow they need to find another way or location.
Brilliant! So visas for all and the state telling businesses in London and other low unemployment areas how they should grow, or not. Thus, not the Norway option at all. Which was my original point.
So if there are no barristas available for a new coffee shop in London at £10 per hour we have to let someone in who then can't afford rent within travel distance of work so has to be subsidised?
That's the sort of growth we have, Is that the sort you think is desirable?
It is also the Norway option.
Nope, we don't have to let anyone in. We can let the business - paying well above the minimum wage - wither and die, and we can reduce competition, make coffee more expensive for everyone, reduce government tax take and provide fewer opportunities, while doing nothing to solve the issues facing the true unemployment blackspots where there are very few EU immigrants. You are not a genuine Tory who believes in free enterprise and a smaller state, are you? I thought Brexit was supposed to set business free.
No, I am a genuine Tory, just not a 19th century Liberal.
If the price of coffee rises because the genuine non subsidised cost of staff rises, the economy doesn't shrink.
It does mean that employers have to look harder for employees including moving jobs to them. That is very one nation Tory.
Got it. So if I can find a Brit to do it for £10 an hour I have a business. If I can only find a Pole I don't. Then I lose my income and my chance to grow, the government loses tax money and absolutely nobody gains. I just love this One Nation Toryism :-D
Sanity will return on June 24th - the most uncompromising will vanish when proved wrong, leaving only the correct and the wrong who are able to accept with an amount of grace being wrong (I, for one, was pretty blunt in mocking those who thought Tories would be most seats even).
@RichardTyndall - for me the Norway option is by far the best Brexit outcome. I'd just be very surprised if most Leavers felt the same way, given that it means ongoing contributions and continued high levels of immigration.
The problem with Brexit is you let that populist, nationalist genie out of the bottle. The likes of Richard Tyndall think they are in control of it, but they aren't.
There are some fucking serious headbangers on this site...Plato, Watford, Casino, Sean Fear...people who couldn't compromise in a lifetime. They appear reasonable, but they aren't.They are ideologically driven nutters who couldn't care less if the UK goes to shyte provided their version of dark politics prevails.....
And then there are other posters, many other posters, who are seemingly attracted by this Brexit, nihilistic nonsense...... in the last few days Cameron needs to appeal to these
You make it sound like populism and nationalism (which to me seems to be code for racism and xenophobia) went away. They didn't. The Liberal project only succeeded in removing the debate from the public sphere.
But that debate never actually ended. It just wasn't on the BBC and much of the mainstream media. The underlying prejudices and fears lingered within people and the Liberal project never took a moment to address those prejudices and fears.
I cannot agree with you more on this. But what do you do? How long can you spend trying to persuade people who are set in their own, narrow views.
BTW I am not a democrat. I really do believe that anyone who is sufficiently racist, narrow minded, thick, simplistic, stupid, ill educated and ill informed (BTW Brexit...those are the people who support you)....they should be disenfranchised.......
An...er...extreme position. But honest. The problem, aside from the obvious, would be how to identify such people while ensuring the 'right' people are not caught up. All those criteria are very general and open to interpretation. You would soon find it applied to yourself.
To quote an MP for Dorset:
It is of dangerous consequence to make a law under general terms, and leave it to after ages to interpret your meaning
That was in 1656. For 'make a law' read 'restrict voting rights'.
@RichardTyndall - for me the Norway option is by far the best Brexit outcome. I'd just be very surprised if most Leavers felt the same way, given that it means ongoing contributions and continued high levels of immigration.
The thing is I really am a democrat (unlike Tyson by his own confession). And I look at the numbers and realise that if Leave win then we are looking at probably at least 70% of the voters (Remain plus nearly half of Leave) who would go for the Norway option. That is Democracy. It is the same thing that got us the referendum in the first place and hopefully will win it for us.
We don't just turn around to the 45% plus who voted for Remain and say "sorry you don't get a say anymore". They get to help choose what comes next as well.
How do you work out that half of Leave voters want the Norway option? I would estimate that for around 90%+ of Leave voters, immigration is one of the main driving factors.
What I am talking about is those core groups which exist beyond demographics. "I hate the EU" and "I hate darkies" are not demographic groups. What I want to know is where is the Remain hardcore, those who, beyond demographic probability, will vote Remain and vote Remain no matter what else happens. I don't see that group existing in any sort of number.
Naturalised citizens who see a British passport as an asset that gives them personal freedom will not vote to give up the right to settle elsewhere in Europe, even if they don't plan to use it. The same applies to a large number of native Brits.
@RichardTyndall - for me the Norway option is by far the best Brexit outcome. I'd just be very surprised if most Leavers felt the same way, given that it means ongoing contributions and continued high levels of immigration.
The problem with Brexit is you let that populist, nationalist genie out of the bottle. The likes of Richard Tyndall think they are in control of it, but they aren't.
There are some fucking serious headbangers on this site...Plato, Watford, Casino, Sean Fear...people who couldn't compromise in a lifetime. They appear reasonable, but they aren't.They are ideologically driven nutters who couldn't care less if the UK goes to shyte provided their version of dark politics prevails.....
And then there are other posters, many other posters, who are seemingly attracted by this Brexit, nihilistic nonsense...... in the last few days Cameron needs to appeal to these
You make it sound like populism and nationalism (which to me seems to be code for racism and xenophobia) went away. They didn't. The Liberal project only succeeded in removing the debate from the public sphere.
But that debate never actually ended. It just wasn't on the BBC and much of the mainstream media. The underlying prejudices and fears lingered within people and the Liberal project never took a moment to address those prejudices and fears.
I cannot agree with you more on this. But what do you do? How long can you spend trying to persuade people who are set in their own, narrow views.
BTW I am not a democrat. I really do believe that anyone who is sufficiently racist, narrow minded, thick, simplistic, stupid, ill educated and ill informed (BTW Brexit...those are the people who support you)....they should be disenfranchised.......
Yep. No wonder you support the EU with an attitude like that. Basically anyone you disagree with should not be allowed to vote. Next you'll be suggesting they should be transported East or just gassed.
You are one F*cked Up loser.
I am a strange sort of fucked up loser. I am entirely self made, and haven't worked for many years (and still entrenched in my forties).
Comments
It's a great aspiration.
However it lacks a little credibility.
https://twitter.com/GissiSim/status/741744745211408384
Boris Johnson was embroiled in an extraordinary row last night after he admitted discussing the possibility of a leadership challenge against David Cameron with a fellow Tory MP.
Mr Johnson, the clear favourite to be the next Tory leader, met Alec Shelbrooke in his Commons office and speculated about the number of Tory MPs prepared to back a no-confidence vote in the Prime Minister.
According to one version of the encounter, Boris said: 'Are there 50 names?' – a reference to the number of renegade MPs required to trigger a contest.
The former London Mayor last night confirmed that he met Mr Shelbrooke in his office and held a conversation about how many Tory MPs backed a coup – but insisted he had talked about 'how vital it was to keep the party together under Dave's leadership'.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3637035/Boris-Tory-MP-secret-talks-PM-s-fate-Yes-says-Johnson-did-discuss-MPs-backed-Cameron-coup-loyal.html
Areas of low unemployment are also generally full and have a housing shortage so if the businesses want to grow they need to find another way or location.
If the EU does not want to shift course, which it doesn't and why would it, then better for them and us to part than to remain in acting bitter. There's some talk of Germany and others liking us in as a counterweight to some other sides, but clearly it is not a big concern or else more would have been offered. If without us as a counterweight they don't like things, well, that would perhaps indicate they have deep problems with the whole thing too.
They want us to Remain on their terms. That is not unreasonable. We only want in on our terms. That is not unreasonable either. And the two positions appear irreconcilable for about 45-50% of Britons.
When there is such fundamental disagreement, a split becomes the best option even if it involves some hardship. It will only defer trouble unless the fundamental issues are addressed, of which there is precisely zero chance.
Doomed to fail...
On this my dear friend we are in total agreement!
He was having a go at Farage for querying immigration numbers as his family came over in the 17th century so were immigrants. I don't think that went down well.
Still, what have the lions ever done for us?
Russian fans invading the England fan sections and beating people up.
Remain have gone down a rabbit warren, obsessing about Boris. In any case, he's much more popular than DC and has proven electoral appeal.
We might just beat them.
Personally I've stayed away from all the immigration stuff because I'm quite relaxed about it (I'm Brexit for good old fashioned sovereignty which I've been consistent about since I started posting here ten years ago)
But that debate never actually ended. It just wasn't on the BBC and much of the mainstream media. The underlying prejudices and fears lingered within people and the Liberal project never took a moment to address those prejudices and fears.
He would have had a cardiac to be on the receiving end of that tirade of abuse.
I am probably best known on here for my posts in support of Jeremy Corbyn during the Labour leadership campaign last summer. I haven't necessarily agreed with everything he's done since winning that race in September, but I still think compared to the alternatives he was the right choice - and he was excellent on The Last Leg yesterday.
I strongly support LEAVE. My reasons have nothing to do with immigration and only a little to do with sovereignty. Rather, it's because the EU (not Europe) is doomed to fail, and the sooner it fails the better.
It is built on a fatally flawed foundation, a conceit that it is possible to subsume more than two dozen distinct nations into one political entity. It is fundamentally incompatible with democracy, and the backlash that is growing not just in the UK but across the continent has been inevitable for some time. The longer the charade that political union is feasible goes on, the worse the endgame will be.
My view is unpopular among those with whom I share many of my other political beliefs, but it is what it is.
But Frank, you are playing with fire. Post Brexit there will be a an economic shock. The immigrants that Brexit Britain doesn't like...black and Muslim....they won't go away. And with an economic shock, we are in a much worse position to protect vital public services....the NHS. And global capital will invest outside the UK...so the UK will diminish further, and our public services will diminish further. We'll have inflation, and falling employment and investment. And who'll be to blame in this culture of lowest common politics?
I wish project fear was sufficiently fearful.
Because the minions with accounts tagged with that are tweeting that a British fan has been killed after being pushed in front of a train.
Pretty sick spoof.
The Turks don't bother me, but it does most people it seems, and clearly the EU knows it. If it cannot convince people it is not a problem, if it cannot convince people of its own worth, cannot justify its own existence to the people, then what bloody good is it? What good is a system if it is utterly convinced of its own goodness but unable to communicate that convincingly to its people?
Though in fairness despite rising skepticism it is still mostly us who are not convinced. At present. Less incompetence and arrogance and the EU would not be in this mess now, as people like me, who don't care about immigration and can get on board with some form of dream of a united europe, would not have switched.
group hug and sing the national anthem.
That's the sort of growth we have, Is that the sort you think is desirable?
It is also the Norway option.
BTW I am not a democrat. I really do believe that anyone who is sufficiently racist, narrow minded, thick, simplistic, stupid, ill educated and ill informed (BTW Brexit...those are the people who support you)....they should be disenfranchised.......
Also, we never heard about JackW's condition (TSE was going to mail him a few nights ago) I do hope he's alright.
https://twitter.com/rodbishop15/status/741762508793516035
"UEFA is launching an investigation into violence at the end of England's first Euro 2016 match against Russia which finished 1-1"
"Marseille city like a battlefield."
"Alexander Shprygin, head of the All-Russian Fans' Union, a body with backing from the Russian government told AP that Russian supporters were involved.
"The reason (for the fighting) was that the English are drinking a lot and are behaving badly," he said."
http://news.sky.com/story/1710452/euro-2016-one-critical-after-marseille-clashes
Probably better to call it off whoever is doing it......
.....and right on Q SKY just starting Nick loves film The football factory.
https://twitter.com/ESPNFC/status/741756412011937792
You would have loved communist Russia or indeed China today.
But, and I am not manipulating you (maybe a bit) I know you are vacillating. In this world there are some horrible mean people, people who dive to the bottom because they are mean spirited....in their DNA....as much as you bluster I don't think you are one.
You see it is symptomatic of the left - and Remain, that they call people with whom they disagree nasty names and try and shut them up (and then hope they'll vote for them!). The right (and Brexit) try and argue their cause.
https://twitter.com/JulianKingFCO/status/741758721882247168
The hardcore Remain vote is very real, and it will turn up and vote in the EU Referendum. But like the Indy Ref in Scotland, it has remained largely silent on social media despite all the noise from engaged supporters of both sides of the campaign. Although we did at least mention and discuss one strong element of the hardcore No vote during the Indy Ref, the large number of very important risk averse female voters. I certainly think that as one of this group, the Remain camp would do well to carry on with appealing to them as Amber Rudd did very effectively in the last ITV debate.
You are one F*cked Up loser.
If the price of coffee rises because the genuine non subsidised cost of staff rises, the economy doesn't shrink.
It does mean that employers have to look harder for employees including moving jobs to them. That is very one nation Tory.
I still don't see a solution. I'd personally prefer to see a campaign for leave based purely around ideas of taking back control in a generic sense but the main area most people want control is immigration, even remainers, so unfortunately that's where the focus is.
Immigration talk always gets ugly. But leaving that issue aside, is the EU still something we want to be a part of in its current form and direction of travel. I say no, you may reasonably say yes. Whichever side wins, the people you don't want to pander to will think the same things and demand action.
https://twitter.com/TraceyEmin/status/740188006519349249
REMAIN has real risk's associated with it (implosion of the euro, further loss of sovereignty, etc...) And what's more most polls reveal that a majority of people aren't satisfied with our relationship with the EU in it's current form so they want change.
I've said it before, Cameron needed to get some real reforms to bring back to the British people who could then have voted for change while being able to stick with the devil they know.
If he'd had a real package of reforms to sell he wouldn't have had to ferry in Obama to threaten us at the outset of the campaign and then generally go even more negative from there....
From the very start Cameron had played this all wrong, I'm sorry to say.
You can see how trust in the government has gone since the referendum campaign, and this just feeds into that narrative.
We don't just turn around to the 45% plus who voted for Remain and say "sorry you don't get a say anymore". They get to help choose what comes next as well.
What I am talking about is those core groups which exist beyond demographics. "I hate the EU" and "I hate darkies" are not demographic groups. What I want to know is where is the Remain hardcore, those who, beyond demographic probability, will vote Remain and vote Remain no matter what else happens. I don't see that group existing in any sort of number.
As I said in my post. The end result in Scotland was that No won by almost exactly the hypothesised difference between the two core groups. 10%. The electorate which were open to consider the options split down the middle. That was good for No in Scotland which had 10pts more hardcore. Remain does not have that core group.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/archives/news/234280/england-fans-will-have-no-chance-hitler-loving-moscow-football-hooligans-vow-to-wage-war-on-brit-fans-in-euro-2016/
To quote an MP for Dorset:
It is of dangerous consequence to make a law under general terms, and leave it to after ages to interpret your meaning
That was in 1656. For 'make a law' read 'restrict voting rights'.