Brexited | the worst threads live the longest

Do you think there will be a Deal or No Deal?

  • Total voters
    194
  • Poll closed .
devilish said:
I disagree. Why would the vote of those who want to leave with a deal be transferred to those who want to leave without a deal? As if someone who want to remove an ingrown toe nail would be more then happy to amputate a leg if his preferred option is not available to him.
Click to expand...
Look at all the referendums ever done in the UK.... It's always structured to get 50%+
It's either gonna be a choice of 2 options (dunno how you do that) or transferable vote

But there is no way they have referendum 1 showing a majority to leave and then end up with say 40% remain and 60% split over 2 versions of leave and then actually leave.
 
sun_tzu said:
I suspect as he won't even say how he would vote he's just going to avoid giving an opinion...

Straight forward honest politics indeed
Click to expand...
:lol:

He said he didn't know because he has no say on what the question in that referendum would be. Not even the fecking People's Vote cretins can decide on what they want it to be. Practice what you preach.
 
Paul the Wolf said:
This is more confirmation that there are some seriously thick stupid morons leading the Leave campaign like Davis, Fox, Raab but Farage is way ahead of them in terms of sheer stupidity. Add to that his xenophobia. How anyone could follow a pathetic moron like this is beyond belief.
Click to expand...
Quite incredible that after all that has gone on, they still believe shite like this. I can see the fallout from Brexit being one of those stupid civil wars that no sane outsider can comprehend.
 
vidic blood & sand said:
The EU isn't better off without us, and TM's deal is not an option, as it will be rejected by just about everyone.
Click to expand...

A federal European Union is easily formed with the UK out of the equation.

So I disagree. Whilst it is disruptive in the short term that the UK leaves it is better that they do so in the long term.
 
RW2 said:
A federal European Union is easily formed with the UK out of the equation.

So I disagree. Whilst it is disruptive in the short term that the UK leaves it is better that they do so in the long term.
Click to expand...

That's interesting that people here are now realising that the EU is evolving into a federation. There's been talk of an EU army recently. People here dismissed these things when I raised them during the run up to the referendum.
 
Pexbo said:
You haven't been following this closely enough mate. There are people who would literally choose to regress to a third world country if it meant we "control our borders" and "make our own laws".


Something I haven't seen discussed yet is how we're going to police our fishing waters. There's already an issue with French, Spanish and Dutch trawlers encroaching into British waters. The UK Government even sold a large portion of the UK fishing quotas to a Dutch company, something that wasn't forced by the EU in any way shape or form and is a perfect example of the UK blaming the EU for it's own greed and stupidity.

So what's going to happen when these huge trawlers come into our waters and scoop up all our fish? Which court are we going to take that to? We're probably going to have to spend an absolute fortune building a border force which protects our coastlines and fishing industry. Much cheaper and safer to be under the same arm of EU law.
Click to expand...

That is fair enough. That is why they can vote a no deal brexit
 
RW2 said:
A federal European Union is easily formed with the UK out of the equation.

So I disagree. Whilst it is disruptive in the short term that the UK leaves it is better that they do so in the long term.
Click to expand...
More easily... But still not easy....possibly in the longer term as they wouldn't have to overcome what would be strong UK objections

But a federal Europe would require more money and I'm not sure there is huge appetite for that at the moment politically ... Especially as the UK contributions will be stopping either very or quite soon depending how things go.

It would probably see financial rules more rigourously enforced ... Watch out for quitaly and grexit

Plus I'm not sure the appetite is there in some of the smaller countries if it means greater power to Germany and France (which I guess given they would be likley to pick up the bill they would want)

So in the short term I don't think it makes it any more likley... Medium to long term quite possibly
 
vidic blood & sand said:
That's interesting that people here are now realising that the EU is evolving into a federation. There's been talk of an EU army recently. People here dismissed these things when I raised them during the run up to the referendum.
Click to expand...

It's destiny.

EU cannot be a list of nations with a common economic policy in the 21st Century with dominant China in the East.
The United States can no longer be trusted and, indeed, even if it is it is time for Europe to move on.

If the UK doesn't want to join then so be it, but it would be a weak and powerless entity out of the EU and very much at the mercy of world events.
 
sun_tzu said:
Look at all the referendums ever done in the UK.... It's always structured to get 50%+
It's either gonna be a choice of 2 options (dunno how you do that) or transferable vote

But there is no way they have referendum 1 showing a majority to leave and then end up with say 40% remain and 60% split over 2 versions of leave and then actually leave.
Click to expand...

The only way it can work is for a preferential system to be set if the 50%+1 threshold isn't reached

Thus lets say remain get 41%, leave without a deal get 39% and TM's option get 20% then the system will investigate the second preference of those on 20% and add them to the tally.
 
sun_tzu said:
Plus I'm not sure the appetite is there in some of the smaller countries if it means greater power to Germany and France (which I guess given they would be likley to pick up the bill they would want)
Click to expand...

Smaller countries would have their security enhanced.

Do you see states like Maine or New Hampshire pushing to be released from the United States?

Nope. . . because there is strength in unity.
 
vidic blood & sand said:
I understand that it was an honest idea to give the electorate some feasible options, but the maths would obviously favour remain with your example. That's all.
Click to expand...

I came out with what i think its a fairer system. Please check it up
 
RW2 said:
A federal European Union is easily formed with the UK out of the equation.

So I disagree. Whilst it is disruptive in the short term that the UK leaves it is better that they do so in the long term.
Click to expand...

It wouldn't be easily formed, today and until the next elections France and Germany have federalists in power but in France for example it's not reflective of the majority among politicians or the population. I think that the first step is going to be with France and Germany tightening their links at higher pace than the rest of the EU, if that happens there is a chance for a federation otherwise it won't happen and it will take time anyway.
 
devilish said:
The only way it can work is for a preferential system to be set if the 50% threshold isn't reached

Thus lets say remain get 41%, leave without a deal get 39% and TM's option get 20% then the system will investigate the second preference of those on 20% and add them to the tally.
Click to expand...
Indeed that's what I suggested... Though I think more probable is only 2 options on the ballot to start with (but how you would arrive at that question would be a nightmare process of legal challenges and counter challenges)
 
JPRouve said:
It wouldn't be easily formed, today and until the next elections France and Germany have federalists in power but in France for example it's not reflective of the majority among politicians or the population. I think that the first step is going to be with France and Germany tightening their links at higher pace than the rest of the EU, if that happens there is a chance for a federation otherwise it won't happen and it will take time anyway.
Click to expand...

Of course it will take time, but it will happen.
 
RW2 said:
It's destiny.

EU cannot be a list of nations with a common economic policy in the 21st Century with dominant China in the East.
The United States can no longer be trusted and, indeed, even if it is it is time for Europe to move on.

If the UK doesn't want to join then so be it, but it would be a weak and powerless entity out of the EU and very much at the mercy of world events.
Click to expand...

It isn't 'destiny' and would never have happened had the UK voted to Remain, and still might not, unless the UK wanted it to.

We had a veto, if the EU decides to go down a different path without the UK then it doesn't follow that it would have happened anyway had the UK remained. Wanting to lose our voice in the EU has always been one of the most bizarre ambitions for the neo-imperialists who have cheerlead for Brexit.
 
A fully federal EU won't happen for a good while yet - maybe would if it was just the original Western Europe countries, but I can't see all member states agreeing to it at all, and while I'm pro-EU I'm not necessarily sure a fully federalised EU is a good thing.
 
NinjaFletch said:
It isn't 'destiny' and would never have happened had the UK voted to Remain and still might not, unless the UK wanted it to.
Click to expand...

It's a matter of opinion whether it is destiny or not..

"Unless the UK wanted it to". . . . The UK is leaving the European Union on March 29th, 2019. This is great news for federalists.

The world is changing rapidly.

Shame that the problem for the UK (well predominantly the English) is that they still can't get over the Second World War when everyone else has moved on.
 
NinjaFletch said:
It isn't 'destiny' and would never have happened had the UK voted to Remain, and still might not, unless the UK wanted it to.

We had a veto, if the EU decides to go down different path without the UK then it doesn't follow that it would have happened anyway had the UK remained. Wanting to lose our voice in the EU has always been one of the most bizarre ambitions for the neo-imperialists who have cheerlead for Brexit.
Click to expand...

That's actually not true. These particular things are treaty based which means that the countries that want it could simply sign it between while the others don't and leave, the veto is useless here.
 
Cheesy said:
A fully federal EU won't happen for a good while yet - maybe would if it was just the original Western Europe countries, but I can't see all member states agreeing to it at all, and while I'm pro-EU I'm not necessarily sure a fully federalised EU is a good thing.
Click to expand...

Biggest issues this week have not been the brexit deal but the calls from Macron and Merkel for a European army.

Things can move pretty rapidly once the UK is out.
 
Cheesy said:
A fully federal EU won't happen for a good while yet - maybe would if it was just the original Western Europe countries, but I can't see all member states agreeing to it at all, and while I'm pro-EU I'm not necessarily sure a fully federalised EU is a good thing.
Click to expand...

Agreed, if it happens it will most likely be between members and eventually spread to others.
 
RW2 said:
Biggest issues this week have not been the brexit deal but the calls from Macron and Merkel for a European army.

Things can move pretty rapidly once the UK is out.
Click to expand...

Macron and Merkel are leaders of two of the most pivotal founding EU members historically. They border each other and will likely be a lot more keen on the idea of a federal Europe than, say, more distant countries like Greece.
 
Cheesy said:
Macron and Merkel are leaders of two of the most pivotal founding EU members historically. They border each other and will likely be a lot more keen on the idea of a federal Europe than, say, more distant countries like Greece.
Click to expand...

If Greece don't like it they can leave. I cannot understand why Greece would be opposed (to a single European army) given they've got Turkey & Erdogan next door.
 
Massive Spanner said:
We sure would be opposed in Ireland.
Click to expand...

90% support EU membership in Ireland.
No other country in Europe os more pro-EU.

On Irish neutrality, the Irish were never neutral. Not neutral during WW2, not neutral during the Iraq war.
Ireland would never give up its EU membership, and if that means a referendum to allow for an EU army, then so be it.
 
RW2 said:
If Greece don't like it they can leave. I cannot understand why Greece would be opposed (to a single European army) given they've got Turkey & Erdogan next door.
Click to expand...

My point isn't whether or not it's a good idea - my point is that several countries are going to be opposed or fairly wary to it, and if it's going to pass you're going to need the approval of all countries involved. Trying to mesh together 20+ different sovereign nation states into one US-like entity in a single swoop, many of whom speak different main languages and have very different cultural backgrounds from each other, isn't going to happen, and if it does happen I don't think it'd be particularly smooth.
 
RW2 said:
90% support EU membership in Ireland.
No other country in Europe os more pro-EU.

On Irish neutrality, the Irish were never neutral. Not neutral during WW2, not neutral during the Iraq war.
Ireland would never give up its EU membership, and if that means a referendum to allow for an EU army, then so be it.
Click to expand...

There's a difference between supporting the EU in its current form and supporting giving up your sovereignty to become a regional state within a national EU.
 
JPRouve said:
That's actually not true. These particular things are treaty based which means that the countries that want it could simply sign it between while the others don't and leave, the veto is useless here.
Click to expand...

You're right on some areas, but a lot of the necessary things that would have to be put in place would come under one of the areas which requires unanimity in the council.

Whilst they're are mechanisms the EU could use to get round that (e.g. when Cameron vetoed a treaty in 2011) in this area I don't think there is any realistic prospect that could happen without it being seen as an infringement of that member states sovereignty and causing a crisis that makes Brexit pale in comparison.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.