Are we sleep-walking out of Europe ?

Unlikely an outcome as it may seem, I'm fairly confident that if the Lib Dems had been returned as the largest party and could govern either with an absolute majority or in coalition with the SNP etc, given the overall LD stance, such a seismic shift would have been taken as conferring the authority to effectively kick Brexit into the long grass by one means or another.  Contrary to UKIP rhetoric, I very much doubt there would have been mass uprisings as a result.   As an aside I'm not a LD voter, but the likes of Nick Clegg and Vince Cable are political colossi compared to the shower leading both main parties now.  

I know that the two votes aren't directly comparable, but given that Remainers accounted for 48% of the referendum vote and the Tories are now  in power on 42% of the GE vote, it suggests to me that the Remainer camp had the power  to stop Brexit through the ballot box simply by voting LibDem en masse.  Had they so chosen and given that the leave vote was effectively split between  Labour and the Conservatives, the fact that the LD vote actually decreased, suggests to me that Brexit is not quite the all-important issue that internet passions suggest.  In short, Remainers were gifted an open goal to kill Brexit back in June, but  for some reason, chose not to take it.    

I am no expert on UK politics and voting, far from it, however the strong impression I get is that the vast majority of the voting public choose a party to support on more than one policy, even if that may be the single biggest thing the UK has had to contend with since, perhaps, WW2, but more particularly I am led to believe from assessments over many general elections that people wanting change tend to vote only for the opposing party they think can succeed, and so a party with a very small presence tends not to get their vote, regardless of policies, which is why a third party has to slowly grow large before it has a realistic chance of a big enough swing to bring them to power.

Norton posted:

What I really don't understand about those in the remain camp (I'm not one of them) is this.

In effect, you were given your second referendum on Brexit just a few months ago. I think this is patronising in the extreme. There was never a second referendum, no matter how you dress it up. I think there should be a second referendum, once the gov has sorted out what it consideres to be the best deal or no deal. If Parliament wasn't able to make the initial decision without a referrendum I don't consider it any more able to make the final decision. That would be true democracy.  In the General Election, one party stood unambiguously on a pro-EU stop Brexit ticket.  Admittedly it's not a very exciting party and was poorly led at the time; but on the other hand it's not an extremist party, wasn't likely to start wars, ruin the economy or create mass poverty etc,  it's well established, was in government only  a few years ago and  it's a party you could  have swallowed your pride and voted for without too much embarrassment, given the bigger picture as you see it.  But by and large  you didn't. I didn't swallow my pride, but I did vote for the Lib Dem candidate, so you'll forgive me for continuing to voice my disgust at the pathetic "We won, get over it" braying of the ignorant and selfish Brexiteers on this forum and elsewhere (*)

So, If you really think Brexit  is the most important issue facing the UK ( I agree with you) and you think so with the same passion that you reserve for criticising leave voters on internet forums, why didn't you simply put all other considerations aside and vote Lib Dem?  Maybe you did, but it's clear that when given the choice of voting for a party that, if in power, would have  have stopped Brexit dead in its tracks, most remainers  chose not to ( 48% voted  remain, 7.4% voted LD) .   In practical terms  that makes most Remainers de facto  Brexiteers  from my perspective....As Eloise has said, the election was about much,much more than Brexit.

 (*) I am not refering to all Brexiteers, just the ignorant and selfish ones !

 

 

"As Eloise has said, the election was about much,much more than Brexit."

What exactly then ? Get to your point.

pj

allhifi posted:

"As Eloise has said, the election was about much,much more than Brexit."

What exactly then ? Get to your point.

pj

I think the point is just that: a general election selecting a party to lead tne country is about much more than Any single topic, so the result can't be used to say that it was a second referendum on Brexit, as had been suggested.

allhifi posted:

"As Eloise has said, the election was about much,much more than Brexit."

What exactly then ? Get to your point.

pj

Was the 2015 Canadian Federal Election solely about the cult of Justin Trudeau, or did people take into account the policies and social attitudes of his and the other parties along with other factors?

Brexit sent a clear message to the EU: Revise/Tweak to suit the needs of individual nations.

Iit was a bold, confident move. Don't think for amoment other nations do not have similar concerns/objections -straddling-the-fence as well. And mostly if not entirely on non economic trade considerations.

Having a united trade organizatoin is one thing, but once you start (foolishly) imposing immigration policies and other non-economic criteria into the mix (that this entire EU thing appears to demand), there will be some seroius, and rightful backlash. 

pj

allhifi posted:

Brexit sent a clear message to the EU: Revise/Tweak to suit the needs of individual nations.

Iit was a bold, confident move. Don't think for amoment other nations do not have similar concerns/objections -straddling-the-fence as well. And mostly if not entirely on non economic trade considerations.

Having a united trade organizatoin is one thing, but once you start (foolishly) imposing immigration policies and other non-economic criteria into the mix (that this entire EU thing appears to demand), there will be some seroius, and rightful backlash. 

pj

You mean sort of like the Anglophones vs. the Francophones and the Bloc Québécois in Federal Canada?

allhifi posted:

"As Eloise has said, the election was about much,much more than Brexit."

What exactly then ? Get to your point.

pj

People didn't vote in the election "for" or "against" Brexit. Most of the Electorate vote for "their" traditional party.

The "floating" voters, voted for the party they thought would deliver defence, law & order, education, NHS services, lower/higher taxation, social benefits, the best outcome regarding the EU, environmental prospects, strong economy......get the idea ? The election was not a referendum re-run.

There was a significant swing away from the TM led gov who were/are clearly in disaray and had to resort to bribing the DUP in order to scrape together a miniscule majority.

The Tory (and Labour) claims (and Norton's) that in voting for them  c.80% of the electorate POSITIVELY voted FOR Brexit is disingeuous in the extreme. People didn't.

Huge posted:

allhifi posted:

"As Eloise has said, the election was about much,much more than Brexit."

What exactly then ? Get to your point.

pj

Was the 2015 Canadian Federal Election solely about the cult of Justin Trudeau, or did people take into account the policies and social attitudes of his and the other parties along with other factors?

RE: I'll ask again: 

"As Eloise has said, the election was about much,much more than Brexit."

What exactly then ? Get to your point.

(2015, Justa-boy Trudeau, Canada, UK, Brexit, policies, attitudes, parties ?)

Stop playing games and state your answer unambiguosly regarding your nation (in case you forgot would be the UK). And, in case you forgot the question, it is (and remains):

"As Eloise has said, the election was about much,much more than Brexit."

What was it about then ?

pj

I 

allhifi posted:

Huge posted:

allhifi posted:

"As Eloise has said, the election was about much,much more than Brexit."

What exactly then ? Get to your point.

pj

Was the 2015 Canadian Federal Election solely about the cult of Justin Trudeau, or did people take into account the policies and social attitudes of his and the other parties along with other factors?

RE: I'll ask again: 

"As Eloise has said, the election was about much,much more than Brexit."

What exactly then ? Get to your point.

(2015, Justa-boy Trudeau, Canada, UK, Brexit, policies, attitudes, parties ?)

Stop playing games and state your answer unambiguosly regarding your nation (in case you forgot would be the UK). And, in case you forgot the question, it is (and remains):

"As Eloise has said, the election was about much,much more than Brexit."

What was it about then ?

pj

 

I answered when you first asked the question, i.e. About the point of making that statement.

And others have answered regarding what the election selections were about.

what is there you don't understand?

The key poit is that the election was self-evidently not a second Brexit referendum, which was the assertion that led to these posts about the election.

I don't think it is reasonable to suggest that the last general election offered another vote on Brexit. The two main parties both made clear that they would respect the result of the referendum result. And if I remember it correctly, the Lib Dems didn't campaign on the platform of 'we think the result of the referendum was wrong  - vote for us and we'll ensure the UK stays in the EU'. Rather, the LD's suggested that the electorate should be given the chance to have another referendum when the details of the exit package was known.    

Don Atkinson posted:

allhifi posted:

"As Eloise has said, the election was about much,much more than Brexit."

What exactly then ? Get to your point.

pj

People didn't vote in the election "for" or "against" Brexit. Most of the Electorate vote for "their" traditional party.

The "floating" voters, voted for the party they thought would deliver defence, law & order, education, NHS services, lower/higher taxation, social benefits, the best outcome regarding the EU, environmental prospects, strong economy......get the idea ? The election was not a referendum re-run.

There was a significant swing away from the TM led gov who were/are clearly in disaray and had to resort to bribing the DUP in order to scrape together a miniscule majority.

The Tory (and Labour) claims (and Norton's) that in voting for them  c.80% of the electorate POSITIVELY voted FOR Brexit is disingeuous in the extreme. People didn't.

I'll confidently say this: If we had  one-tenth (1/10) the passionate, intelligent interest and sensibility of all the great folk in the geopgraphical island(s) known as the United Kingdom (I think it's still called that, no?) , this country (Canada) would be much stronger, desirable nation.

Forget the foolish rhetoric about friendly Canada, everyone loves the other kubaya crap, it ain't like that. Yet, in this infant country, there is no real political consensus (actually there is it's just buried -for now)  on behalf of change-inspiring voters.

It's a fractured nation (far from collective security) that has not built upon the strengths (and sensibilities) that the founding European settlers and early immigrants desperately but proudly built. Oh no, screw that solid work ethic and proud history, let's invite every thing and anybody while singing kumbaya (in French & English of course) for the world to hear as past proud citizens descendants are pushed out of the way to make room for visible minorities and all other freaked-out groups/peoples so as to remain "balanced". **** selecting he best candidate, we have quotas to fulfil and abide by -as the most genuinely fake smile is presented to the world. 

What a joke.

pj

allhifi posted:

Huge posted:

allhifi posted:

"As Eloise has said, the election was about much,much more than Brexit."

What exactly then ? Get to your point.

pj

Was the 2015 Canadian Federal Election solely about the cult of Justin Trudeau, or did people take into account the policies and social attitudes of his and the other parties along with other factors?

RE: I'll ask again: 

"As Eloise has said, the election was about much,much more than Brexit."

What exactly then ? Get to your point.

(2015, Justa-boy Trudeau, Canada, UK, Brexit, policies, attitudes, parties ?)

Stop playing games and state your answer unambiguosly regarding your nation (in case you forgot would be the UK). And, in case you forgot the question, it is (and remains):

"As Eloise has said, the election was about much,much more than Brexit."

What was it about then ?

pj

 

Firstly, the point was that it was a national election for the government for the next five years.  National elections are not about ONE issue, they're about the attitude of the electorate and the approach of the parties for the next five years.  They also involve entrenched political positions that span generations not just one single issue.  If you understood British politics at all you'd understand this.  By not understanding this you've shown that you're not in a position to question anyone about this, particularly not to do so aggressively.  Ask nicely and you may get an explanation, but accusative questioning will get you nowhere as it just offends people who could answer.

The second is that to imply otherwise, is as insulting to the British electorate, as it is to suggest that the only thing to which ANYONE in Canada paid any political or economic attention in 2015, was to vote for or against Trudeau (and it didn't matter which other party you voted for).

The final point is that I note you didn't like the implication of my question about the Canadian election (and rightly so), yet you were prepare to continue to cast similar aspersions about the British Electorate and our election.  Get your own house in order first.

Huge posted:

allhifi posted:

Huge posted:

allhifi posted:

"As Eloise has said, the election was about much,much more than Brexit."

What exactly then ? Get to your point.

pj

Was the 2015 Canadian Federal Election solely about the cult of Justin Trudeau, or did people take into account the policies and social attitudes of his and the other parties along with other factors?

RE: I'll ask again: 

"As Eloise has said, the election was about much,much more than Brexit."

What exactly then ? Get to your point.

(2015, Justa-boy Trudeau, Canada, UK, Brexit, policies, attitudes, parties ?)

Stop playing games and state your answer unambiguosly regarding your nation (in case you forgot would be the UK). And, in case you forgot the question, it is (and remains):

"As Eloise has said, the election was about much,much more than Brexit."

What was it about then ?

pj

 

Firstly, the point was that it was a national election for the government for the next five years.  National elections are not about ONE issue, they're about the attitude of the electorate and the approach of the parties for the next five years.  They also involve entrenched political positions that span generations not just one single issue.  If you understood British politics at all you'd understand this.  By not understanding this you've shown that you're not in a position to question anyone about this, particularly not to do so aggressively.  Ask nicely and you may get an explanation, but accusative questioning will get you nowhere as it just offends people who could answer.

The second is that to imply otherwise, is as insulting to the British electorate, as it is to suggest that the only thing to which ANYONE in Canada paid any political or economic attention in 2015, was to vote for or against Trudeau (and it didn't matter which other party you voted for).

The final point is that I note you didn't like the implication of my question about the Canadian election (and rightly so), yet you were prepare to continue to cast similar aspersions about the British Electorate and our election.  Get your own house in order first.

Perfect. I (and all readers) now know.

Cheers,

P.S. I'd honestly rather be rubbing my nuts in eargasmic delight listening to gerat music on my great hi-fi (or talking about it - rather than degress into poltical BS. 

Good God, for the Love of Music Man ! (Kumbaya indeed my friends. lol)

Innocent Bystander posted:

I 

allhifi posted:

Huge posted:

allhifi posted:

"As Eloise has said, the election was about much,much more than Brexit."

What exactly then ? Get to your point.

pj

Was the 2015 Canadian Federal Election solely about the cult of Justin Trudeau, or did people take into account the policies and social attitudes of his and the other parties along with other factors?

RE: I'll ask again: 

"As Eloise has said, the election was about much,much more than Brexit."

What exactly then ? Get to your point.

(2015, Justa-boy Trudeau, Canada, UK, Brexit, policies, attitudes, parties ?)

Stop playing games and state your answer unambiguosly regarding your nation (in case you forgot would be the UK). And, in case you forgot the question, it is (and remains):

"As Eloise has said, the election was about much,much more than Brexit."

What was it about then ?

pj

 

I answered when you first asked the question, i.e. About the point of making that statement.

And others have answered regarding what the election selections were about.

what is there you don't understand?

The key poit is that the election was self-evidently not a second Brexit referendum, which was the assertion that led to these posts about the election.

Let's rewind (I promise this my last remark) 

You said: "There's more to ..." AND I asked "What exactly"?

And your first answer was about Canada, Trudeau etc., etc.? And then to say:

" I answered when you first asked the question, i.e. About the point of making that statement."

For goodness sakes, just say it. Plain. Point-form, if you must. You did finally answer -painfully long, but answered. Thank you.

pj

allhifi posted:

Innocent Bystander posted:

I 

allhifi posted:

Huge posted:

allhifi posted:

"As Eloise has said, the election was about much,much more than Brexit."

What exactly then ? Get to your point.

pj

Was the 2015 Canadian Federal Election solely about the cult of Justin Trudeau, or did people take into account the policies and social attitudes of his and the other parties along with other factors?

RE: I'll ask again: 

"As Eloise has said, the election was about much,much more than Brexit."

What exactly then ? Get to your point.

(2015, Justa-boy Trudeau, Canada, UK, Brexit, policies, attitudes, parties ?)

Stop playing games and state your answer unambiguosly regarding your nation (in case you forgot would be the UK). And, in case you forgot the question, it is (and remains):

"As Eloise has said, the election was about much,much more than Brexit."

What was it about then ?

pj

 

I answered when you first asked the question, i.e. About the point of making that statement.

And others have answered regarding what the election selections were about.

what is there you don't understand?

The key poit is that the election was self-evidently not a second Brexit referendum, which was the assertion that led to these posts about the election.

Let's rewind (I promise this my last remark) 

You said: "There's more to ..." AND I asked "What exactly"?

And your first answer was about Canada, Trudeau etc., etc.? And then to say:

" I answered when you first asked the question, i.e. About the point of making that statement."

For goodness sakes, just say it. Plain. Point-form, if you must. You did finally answer -painfully long, but answered. Thank you.

pj

Err...

You're conflating my own, Eloise's and IB's posts.

No wonder you're confused!

I'm desperate to contribute positively to this mesmerising thread.

But the subject is either way to complex or I'm way to stupid.  I am out of my depth so will sit, read, enjoy and be better informed.

Sorry.

s.

allhifi posted:

Don Atkinson posted:

allhifi posted:

"As Eloise has said, the election was about much,much more than Brexit."

What exactly then ? Get to your point.

pj

People didn't vote in the election "for" or "against" Brexit. Most of the Electorate vote for "their" traditional party.

The "floating" voters, voted for the party they thought would deliver defence, law & order, education, NHS services, lower/higher taxation, social benefits, the best outcome regarding the EU, environmental prospects, strong economy......get the idea ? The election was not a referendum re-run.

There was a significant swing away from the TM led gov who were/are clearly in disaray and had to resort to bribing the DUP in order to scrape together a miniscule majority.

The Tory (and Labour) claims (and Norton's) that in voting for them  c.80% of the electorate POSITIVELY voted FOR Brexit is disingeuous in the extreme. People didn't.

I'll confidently say this: If we had  one-tenth (1/10) the passionate, intelligent interest and sensibility of all the great folk in the geopgraphical island(s) known as the United Kingdom (I think it's still called that, no?) , this country (Canada) would be much stronger, desirable nation.

Forget the foolish rhetoric about friendly Canada, everyone loves the other kubaya crap, it ain't like that. Yet, in this infant country, there is no real political consensus (actually there is it's just buried -for now)  on behalf of change-inspiring voters.

It's a fractured nation (far from collective security) that has not built upon the strengths (and sensibilities) that the founding European settlers and early immigrants desperately but proudly built. Oh no, screw that solid work ethic and proud history, let's invite every thing and anybody while singing kumbaya (in French & English of course) for the world to hear as past proud citizens descendants are pushed out of the way to make room for visible minorities and all other freaked-out groups/peoples so as to remain "balanced". **** selecting he best candidate, we have quotas to fulfil and abide by -as the most genuinely fake smile is presented to the world. 

What a joke.

pj

My wife lives in Canada for about 4 months every year and I probably spend about two months a year. We live in Vernon.

Over the past 20 years we have noticed an increasing (year on year) amount of East Asian imigration into Vancouver and a corresponding migration of European decendants east to the Okanagan. The new arrivals in Vancouver are certainly making their presence felt. Even to the point of holding local community meetings exclusively in Mandarin and denying the presence of translators in those meetings.

IMHO you need to take steps now, to decide which way you want the country to develop in future.

Don Atkinson posted:

allhifi posted:

"As Eloise has said, the election was about much,much more than Brexit."

What exactly then ? Get to your p

The Tory (and Labour) claims (and Norton's) that in voting for them  c.80% of the electorate POSITIVELY voted FOR Brexit is disingeuous in the extreme. People didn't.

I claimed no such thing, but rather observed that: 1. despite all the heat generated by angry remain voters in forums such as this, 2. Brexit wasn't actually an important enough issue to get them to change their voting behaviour, despite the existence of an unambiguously pro-EU moderate party to vote for.  The fact you suggested that there were more important matters in determining voting at this General Election and then went on to dish out the usual ad hominem insults to those of us who voted leave, amply illustrates both parts of my observation.

allhifi posted:

Innocent Bystander posted:

I 

allhifi posted:

Huge posted:

allhifi posted:

"As Eloise has said, the election was about much,much more than Brexit."

What exactly then ? Get to your point.

pj

Was the 2015 Canadian Federal Election solely about the cult of Justin Trudeau, or did people take into account the policies and social attitudes of his and the other parties along with other factors?

RE: I'll ask again: 

"As Eloise has said, the election was about much,much more than Brexit."

What exactly then ? Get to your point.

(2015, Justa-boy Trudeau, Canada, UK, Brexit, policies, attitudes, parties ?)

Stop playing games and state your answer unambiguosly regarding your nation (in case you forgot would be the UK). And, in case you forgot the question, it is (and remains):

"As Eloise has said, the election was about much,much more than Brexit."

What was it about then ?

pj

 

I answered when you first asked the question, i.e. About the point of making that statement.

And others have answered regarding what the election selections were about.

what is there you don't understand?

The key poit is that the election was self-evidently not a second Brexit referendum, which was the assertion that led to these posts about the election.

Let's rewind (I promise this my last remark) 

You said: "There's more to ..." AND I asked "What exactly"?

And your first answer was about Canada, Trudeau etc., etc.? And then to say:

" I answered when you first asked the question, i.e. About the point of making that statement."

For goodness sakes, just say it. Plain. Point-form, if you must. You did finally answer -painfully long, but answered. Thank you.

pj

It is somewhat disingenuous of you to accuse me of taking a painfully long time to answer something when there really was nothing needing explaining, and which nevertheless was explained to you over and over again by several people including me - especially when you erroneously attribute statements to me that were made by another person.

Unfortunately you are rather displaying a tendency not to read and at least try to understand things that others have taken pains to write here, this pattern being common to another recent thread. No one minds if there is something you don't understand and you ask for expalation perhaps in a simpler or less technical fashion, but others do rather expect you to take notice of explanations they offer. 

Please go back and review all that has been said on this, from the first assertion to the effect that the UK general election earlier this year was effectively a re-run of last year's Brexit referendum, made by Norton about 8 hours ago. 

Norton posted:

Don Atkinson posted:

allhifi posted:

"As Eloise has said, the election was about much,much more than Brexit."

What exactly then ? Get to your p

The Tory (and Labour) claims (and Norton's) that in voting for them  c.80% of the electorate POSITIVELY voted FOR Brexit is disingeuous in the extreme. People didn't.

I claimed no such thing, but rather observed that: 1. despite all the heat generated by angry remain voters in forums such as this, 2. Brexit wasn't actually an important enough issue to get them to change their voting behaviour, despite the existence of an unambiguously pro-EU moderate party to vote for.  The fact you suggested that there were more important matters in determining voting at this General Election and then went on to dish out the usual ad hominem insults to those of us who voted leave, amply illustrates both parts of my observation.

Nope Norton, You did make your point clear ie that in voting for the two main parties, both of whom stated they would proceed with Brexit, people were positively endorsing Brexit. Your post cannot be interpreted or re-interpreted any other way. You might have changed your mind, but that's a different matter.

As for ad hominem insults, they were only directed at those brexiteers who are ignorant and selfish. I had not presumed to include yourself in that group. If you are telling me that my presumption was wrong, so be it, I apologise for my incorrect presumption !

Huge posted:

OscillateWildly posted:

Huge posted:

Yes, but we can then choose to follow EU legislation (because there isn't another viable choice) rather than having to (because we're compelled to by EU legislation).

See how that's completely different?

We can choose to have higher standards, and the EU producers can choose to comply or sell elsewhere.

We can do that and price ourselves out of the international markets; the EU countries then will choose to sell elsewhere - fortress Britain just isn't that important to Europe.  When that happens we'll either have to fall in line or see our economy stagnate.

(Or are you suggesting that our own internal economy is strong enough on our own with little or no international trade.)

Because higher standards automatically mean prohibitive costs.

Posturing is performed by nations and people of all colours, including the UK and the other members of the EU. The UK represents around 20% of Germany's world trade surplus, a country which has one of the worst population age problems - worse than the UK's. The call to come to Germany wasn't out of the kindness of its heart. Both countries know they have an interest in a deal. The UK is also top or second world trade surplus provider for Spain, Italy, France, Poland and others.

Cheers,

OW   

Some good news today, and we can all go back to saying * if * we leave the EU  

"The president of the European Council has suggested the UK could still decide to reverse Brexit.

Donald Tusk said negotiations could end in "no Brexit" if the British government wanted to."

I am a bit uncertain as to the current "options", given the BBC news at 6:00pm today.

1. ^{Presumably we could just leave right now. No payment, No trade agreement. We just hand in the membership card and let the future look after itself eg NI Border, status of EU citizens in the UK and vice-versa, future trade agreement if anybody can be bothered etc etc}
2. ^{Barnier and Junkers seem to suggest the UK should agree to hand over c. £100bn to pay for a round of drinks that we owe and then leave without any trade agreement in place, just the vague possibility of some sort of deal in perhaps three or more years time.....if it suits the EU}
3. ^{Donald Tusk seems to think the UK could just abandon Brexit and remain part of the EU.}

Personally i'm in favour of option 3. But I doubt if Boris, Redwood or Rees-mogg would play along !

Or have I missed something ?