Brexit Penny Dropping?

[quilp]

What did you think was going to happen..? 

[La Colombe]

Interesting Brexit show going on on BBC2 right now. Unfortunately presented by the Johnson cheerleader Kuenssberg. But even she seems to have opened her eyes. 

[code99]

11 hours ago, La Colombe said:

Interesting Brexit show going on on BBC2 right now. Unfortunately presented by the Johnson cheerleader Kuenssberg. But even she seems to have opened her eyes. 

I agree.

The programme reminded me of what complete bunch of nincompoops the Tories can be. Machiavellian Steve Baker came across as a psycho who (for his own safety) should be locked up in lunatic asylum. Not only was ‘posh’ Dave Cameron pathetically complacent about the Referendum, his nemeses the two main Brexit clowns Johnson and Gove were totally clueless about what the consequences of Leave winning would be. They simply did not expect the Leave vote to win and consequently they woke up to their unexpected and pyrrhic victory without any plans about what to do next. Hence chaos ensued. Their mess will take years to clean up. Barring some global catastrophic event or some astonishing good fortune for ‘Brexit Britain’, given the age profile of Remainers versus Brexiteers, I predict that there will be another Brexit referendum within a decade, and the ‘Rejoin’ vote will win.    

[P.K.]

11 hours ago, La Colombe said:

Interesting Brexit show going on on BBC2 right now. Unfortunately presented by the Johnson cheerleader Kuenssberg. But even she seems to have opened her eyes. 

It was quite interesting to hear from not just the politicians. However all the politicos seemed to be giving the impression that they were just spectators rather than debating and voting on the issues. Presumably not wanting to be found culpable for the clusterf~ck they voted for...

I was left with the impression that Andrew Marr would have made a much better job of it. I'll still be watching the next two episodes though.

[La Colombe]

Patrick Howse on Kuenssberg here from last year. Worth a read. She played her part in creating the chaos. 

[La Colombe]

In fact she reminds me of Matty in The House of Cards. 

[P.K.]

[P.K.]

On 9/11/2023 at 6:00 PM, The Voice of Reason said:

Look,  you and I can keep on playing Brexit ping pong with our chosen newspaper articles as our paddles/bats but it gets a bit tiresome don’t you think?

This little snippet from the current G20 was in this Telegraph piece:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/09/09/g20-new-delhi-2023-india-sunak-biden-live-latest-update/

You have paid access. Did the Telegraph follow up on it at all?

[code99]

Being the national broadcaster means that the BBC need to be politically neutral - in order to be seen as being neutral the BBC has to walk a tightrope between lots of conflicting political forces. Unfortunately, they are frequently damned for over-interrogating some politicians and under-interrogating others i.e., they are damned by one side if they ‘do’ and dammed by the other side if they ‘don’t’ (much of the criticism they get is highly political). In the book/ show ‘House of Cards’, fictional character Mattie gets killed for prying too much…that story-line was not entirely unrealistic. Today, in many places around the world professional journalists lose their lives for exposing corrupt governments and corrupt government officials, etc. Mercifully, this does not happen in the UK/IOM (as far as we know), but our journalists are being silenced by other means, including social media intimidation. Paul Moulton’s gaging order also comes to mind.    

[La Colombe]

Whoah. Really? Amazing. 

[The Voice of Reason]

On 10/24/2023 at 11:49 AM, La Colombe said:

Whoah. Really? Amazing. 

By the same logic the Remain option should then have required a 60% “ supermajority “ for the UK to remain in the EU. 
 

You can’t weight the odds in favour of one particular option.

Although a bigger majority (for either option) would have been more definitive, 50% +1 is sufficient.

Imagine if you had the Irish referendum and 58% voted  for NI to leave the UK and join the Republic and that was deemed not a sufficient majority for that to be enacted.

I am sure that would be quietly accepted and no trouble would ensue ( not)

[La Colombe]

27 minutes ago, The Voice of Reason said:

By the same logic the Remain option should then have required a 60% “ supermajority “ for the UK to remain in the EU. 

Indeed. Which is probably what the Brexit Hard Man is now hedging against now that everyone is questioning the wisdom of his project. 

[John Wright]

2 hours ago, The Voice of Reason said:

By the same logic the Remain option should then have required a 60% “ supermajority “ for the UK to remain in the EU. 

There’s no logic, rhyme, nor reason,  to that.

Membership was the status quo ante.

Status quo ante always is the default position, unless the vote to the contrary wins, whether that’s by 50%+1 or a supermajority.

So if it was a referendum with a super majority requirement that wasn’t met, what do you do? You can’t leave, and by your “logic” you can’t stay.

Your position makes no sense, rhyme, nor reason.

[manxman1980]

1 hour ago, The Voice of Reason said:

By the same logic the Remain option should then have required a 60% “ supermajority “ for the UK to remain in the EU. 

How would that work then?  In the Brexit referendum neither side hit 60% so are you suggesting an ongoing referendum until one side reached the magical 60%?

It makes sense that on a vote for a monumental change that a supermajority should apply.  If that is not reached then the status quo remains.

Let's assume another referendum took place on rejoining the EU.  Don't you think that Steve Baker, Nigel Farage et al would prefer the need for a supermajority? 

[The Voice of Reason]

17 minutes ago, John Wright said:

There’s no logic to that.

Membership was the status quo ante.

Status quo ante always is the default position, unless the vote to the contrary wins, whether that’s by 50%+1 or a supermajority.

So if it was a referendum with a super majority requirement that wasn’t met, what do you do? You can’t leave, and by your “logic” you can’t stay.

Your position makes no sense or reason.

My position is that the majority vote ( by whatever margin) should prevail.

Makes perfect sense and reason.