|
Post by pooshooter on Sept 20, 2017 13:00:28 GMT
Has your opinion changed?
|
|
|
Post by Pete Burrett on Sept 20, 2017 13:39:08 GMT
Before the referendum, I was leaning heavily towards 'remain', and ended up voting that way, mainly because most of the 'leave' arguments involved thinly disguised xenophobia and reliance on nationalistic slogans, vague ideas like 'taking back control' and outright lies (£350 million per week anyone?). There were lies and bluster on the 'remain' side too, but on balance remaining seemed the most logical and intellectually rigorous course of action.
I'm now totally happy with the way I voted. Several of the prominent 'leave' politicians, like Boris, have proved themselves taciturn in the extreme. We have a variety of government departments failing between them to come up with a coherent strategy, mainly because most now seem to accept that a 'soft Brexit' wherein we retain some of the benefits of EU membership is the best way forward. The original referendum question now seems to have been far too simplistic: it should never have been 'in' or 'out'.
There was/is a lot wrong with the EU and the way it operates, but perhaps trying to change it from within would have been a better prospect?
|
|
|
Post by horse on Sept 20, 2017 13:52:59 GMT
I'm more for Brexit now. Listening to Junker outline his plan for a fully federal Europe the other day pretty much settled it for me.
|
|
|
Post by essexyellows on Sept 20, 2017 14:26:38 GMT
I'm more for Brexit now. Listening to Junker outline his plan for a fully federal Europe the other day pretty much settled it for me. Likewise. You can not make "one size fit all". Leave them too their vanity project and see which country/countries they put under their yolk next.
|
|
|
Post by essexyellows on Sept 20, 2017 14:31:39 GMT
There was/is a lot wrong with the EU and the way it operates, but perhaps trying to change it from within would have been a better prospect? As the EU expands to other, generally poorer, nations do you really think they would have accepted any format of change? The whole idea is driven by those that create wealth sharing/giving their wealth to those less well off. It is a giant benefit system and if too many are taking out of the pot the pressure on those paying in is increased. Come back to this thread in 20 years and see how its panned out.
|
|
|
Post by dannyc on Sept 20, 2017 16:15:58 GMT
Before the referendum, I was leaning heavily towards 'remain', and ended up voting that way, mainly because most of the 'leave' arguments involved thinly disguised xenophobia and reliance on nationalistic slogans, vague ideas like 'taking back control' and outright lies (£350 million per week anyone?). There were lies and bluster on the 'remain' side too, but on balance remaining seemed the most logical and intellectually rigorous course of action. I'm now totally happy with the way I voted. Several of the prominent 'leave' politicians, like Boris, have proved themselves taciturn in the extreme. We have a variety of government departments failing between them to come up with a coherent strategy, mainly because most now seem to accept that a 'soft Brexit' wherein we retain some of the benefits of EU membership is the best way forward. The original referendum question now seems to have been far too simplistic: it should never have been 'in' or 'out'. There was/is a lot wrong with the EU and the way it operates, but perhaps trying to change it from within would have been a better prospect? that's one of the reasons i voted leave the eu will never change its to arrogant and self centered to do so can you possibly ever see it change ?
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on Sept 20, 2017 16:19:38 GMT
Is it to early to start a 3rd referendum thread? Just in case the second doesn't go the way some people like either 😉
|
|
|
Post by bashamwonderland on Sept 20, 2017 16:53:02 GMT
I voted Leave because I was told we'd have a World War III, that there would be job losses of 500,000, and that we would now be deep into a recession if we regained independence.
I just feel as though I've been let down. None of the above has happened and I'm thoroughly disappointed. I don't think we'll be invaded by at least 2020 at this rate. Wish I could go back and vote Remain.
|
|
|
Post by SteMerritt on Sept 20, 2017 19:17:14 GMT
I voted Leave because I was told we'd have a World War III, that there would be job losses of 500,000, and that we would now be deep into a recession if we regained independence. I just feel as though I've been let down. None of the above has happened and I'm thoroughly disappointed. I don't think we'll be invaded by at least 2020 at this rate. Wish I could go back and vote Remain. Dont rule out WWIII just yet, have you not been watching the news...
|
|
|
Post by ZeroTheHero on Sept 20, 2017 19:59:22 GMT
I voted Leave because I was told we'd have a World War III, that there would be job losses of 500,000, and that we would now be deep into a recession if we regained independence. I just feel as though I've been let down. None of the above has happened and I'm thoroughly disappointed. I don't think we'll be invaded by at least 2020 at this rate. Wish I could go back and vote Remain. We haven't left yet, give it time...
|
|
|
Post by m on Sept 20, 2017 20:53:00 GMT
I voted Leave because I was told we'd have a World War III, that there would be job losses of 500,000, and that we would now be deep into a recession if we regained independence. I just feel as though I've been let down. None of the above has happened and I'm thoroughly disappointed. I don't think we'll be invaded by at least 2020 at this rate. Wish I could go back and vote Remain. Some lawyers have got richer. Sattire appears to have taken a beating.
|
|
|
Post by Gary Baldi on Sept 20, 2017 21:08:28 GMT
I can't wait to spend the 350 billion pounds a day on the blessed VHS that George Johnson promise we'd get. Who would vote for BetaMax?
|
|
|
Post by ioualways on Sept 20, 2017 21:10:26 GMT
I'm more for Brexit now. Listening to Junker outline his plan for a fully federal Europe the other day pretty much settled it for me. Likewise. You can not make "one size fit all". Leave them too their vanity project and see which country/countries they put under their yolk next. I don't know...that's one hell of a large-sized egg for even more countries to be under the yolk.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 20, 2017 21:54:16 GMT
Has to be out. I was thinking today it wouldn't be long before a poll was organized
|
|
|
Post by winchesterox on Sept 21, 2017 2:57:25 GMT
Don't think anyone imagined Brexit would end up being quite such a muddle. Sure, there was talk of economic doom but nobody seemed to predict the gargantuan difficulties in the leaving process itself, something which can retrospectively reinforce the remain viewpoint but also something which can potentially damage UK prospects.
I assumed that the first referendum would definitely result in staying in, due to the 'better the devil you know' principle and the fact that people were doing OK really and didn't fancy contemplating a change to their pretty decent lifestyles. However it seems that most of the voters were not doing so well and felt that life could be better outside of the EU. But how many knew it would be such a pickle to cancel membership and leave?
|
|
|
Post by oufcgav on Sept 21, 2017 6:24:12 GMT
Don't think anyone imagined Brexit would end up being quite such a muddle. Sure, there was talk of economic doom but nobody seemed to predict the gargantuan difficulties in the leaving process itself, something which can retrospectively reinforce the remain viewpoint but also something which can potentially damage UK prospects. I assumed that the first referendum would definitely result in staying in, due to the 'better the devil you know' principle and the fact that people were doing OK really and didn't fancy contemplating a change to their pretty decent lifestyles. However it seems that most of the voters were not doing so well and felt that life could be better outside of the EU. But how many knew it would be such a pickle to cancel membership and leave? Wel, the experts, who the public were told not to listen to, or who were ignored by the press because they didn't fit their narrative did....
|
|
|
Post by cj on Sept 21, 2017 7:40:22 GMT
We joined the common market in the first place which may have been a good idea at the time, but what the EU has become and Juncker's vision of a federal superstate is not what i want to be part of. I still think we will be better off leaving the EU despite the BBC attempts to portray Brexit as a disaster and many MP's putting their own constituents wishes ahead of the country's.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 21, 2017 7:41:28 GMT
The experts all seemed to have a vested interest. Here's a thought if everybody changed their minds the result would still be 52-48 out
|
|
|
Post by Pete Burrett on Sept 21, 2017 7:54:13 GMT
Don't think anyone imagined Brexit would end up being quite such a muddle. Sure, there was talk of economic doom but nobody seemed to predict the gargantuan difficulties in the leaving process itself, something which can retrospectively reinforce the remain viewpoint but also something which can potentially damage UK prospects. I assumed that the first referendum would definitely result in staying in, due to the 'better the devil you know' principle and the fact that people were doing OK really and didn't fancy contemplating a change to their pretty decent lifestyles. However it seems that most of the voters were not doing so well and felt that life could be better outside of the EU. But how many knew it would be such a pickle to cancel membership and leave? Wel, the experts, who the public were told not to listen to, or who were ignored by the press because they didn't fit their narrative did.... Well ignoring experts seems to be the 'in thing' of late. For instance, apparently climate change is a fantasy dreamt up by those wishing to destabilise the American economy.
|
|
|
Post by winchesterox on Sept 21, 2017 9:30:48 GMT
I do confess that I occasionally ignore some of the football experts on this forum.
|
|
|
Post by winchesterox on Sept 21, 2017 12:01:26 GMT
|
|
|
Post by bashamwonderland on Sept 21, 2017 12:05:22 GMT
Don't think anyone imagined Brexit would end up being quite such a muddle. Sure, there was talk of economic doom but nobody seemed to predict the gargantuan difficulties in the leaving process itself, something which can retrospectively reinforce the remain viewpoint but also something which can potentially damage UK prospects. I assumed that the first referendum would definitely result in staying in, due to the 'better the devil you know' principle and the fact that people were doing OK really and didn't fancy contemplating a change to their pretty decent lifestyles. However it seems that most of the voters were not doing so well and felt that life could be better outside of the EU. But how many knew it would be such a pickle to cancel membership and leave? What? I don't know who you talk to but I haven't met anybody who is surprised by the fact that we might take 2 years or longer to negotiate a divorce after 40 years of such entanglement. In fact, nobody said it would be easy, nor were we told that we would be out just 1 year and a few months after the vote. Also, i think a lot of 'the voters' who voted Leave were, and still are doing quite well for themselves. James Dyson, for example, is doing very well.
|
|
|
Post by Gary Baldi on Sept 21, 2017 12:08:41 GMT
Wel, the experts, who the public were told not to listen to, or who were ignored by the press because they didn't fit their narrative did.... Well ignoring experts seems to be the 'in thing' of late. For instance, apparently climate change is a fantasy dreamt up by those wishing to destabilise the American economy. I did laugh at the people that blamed Trump for the hurricanes. He maybe many things good and bad, but even he can't control the weather. Or the ones that saw the hurricanes as punishment for Florida voting for Trump. To be fair, some economic experts prediction of immediate economic doom were wide of the mark. Such that both sides can say they were right on believing experts or not.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Cannell on Sept 21, 2017 12:10:20 GMT
Also, i think a lot of 'the voters' who voted Leave were, and still are doing quite well for themselves. James Dyson, for example, is doing very well. I'm not accusing you of anything, but if you think James Dyson is "a lot of the voters" you're mistaken.
|
|
|
Post by bashamwonderland on Sept 21, 2017 12:12:31 GMT
Also, i think a lot of 'the voters' who voted Leave were, and still are doing quite well for themselves. James Dyson, for example, is doing very well. I'm not accusing you of anything, but if you think James Dyson is "a lot of the voters" you're mistaken. He most certainly isn't. I'm just unsure as to how the previous poster came to the conclusion that Leave voters weren't doing well, in some way or another (I presume economically).
|
|
|
Post by cj on Sept 21, 2017 12:34:18 GMT
Perhaps James Dyson is as important as lots of voters and gets a block vote accordingly?
|
|
|
Post by Pete Burrett on Sept 21, 2017 12:50:06 GMT
I'm not accusing you of anything, but if you think James Dyson is "a lot of the voters" you're mistaken. He most certainly isn't. I'm just unsure as to how the previous poster came to the conclusion that Leave voters weren't doing well, in some way or another (I presume economically). The previous poster you refer to said: However it seems that most of the voters were not doing so well and felt that life could be better outside of the EU.
I read that to mean that he thought the reason some voted 'leave' was because they believed it would improve their economic circumstances. There was a lot of nonsense talked by both 'sides' during the debate, and that's still continuing. I remember a prolific poster on here declaring that fears of leaving would damage the stock market had been disproved because the FTSE was up ten points. This was two days after the vote. I also remember confident predictions from remainers that foreign investment would, en masse, run abroad, before BMW agreed to invest in the Cowley Mini plant. We'll never know how leaving has affected us. In 20 years time the whole issue will be confused by a million different factors, many of which cannot be directly connected to our withdrawal from the EU. We're leaving, so let's just get on with it. PS Trump did cause Hurricane Irma. FACT.
|
|
|
Post by Yellow River on Sept 21, 2017 13:23:32 GMT
If I remember correctly the Prime Minster at the time David Cameron said it was a simple leave or remain vote and that there would be no second referendum, this was made very clear. The public voted on those terms.
It was a high turn out, 72%? We're a democratic country. The clear result of the vote was to leave. It should stand.
|
|
|
Post by winchesterox on Sept 21, 2017 13:39:08 GMT
Don't think anyone imagined Brexit would end up being quite such a muddle. Sure, there was talk of economic doom but nobody seemed to predict the gargantuan difficulties in the leaving process itself, something which can retrospectively reinforce the remain viewpoint but also something which can potentially damage UK prospects. I assumed that the first referendum would definitely result in staying in, due to the 'better the devil you know' principle and the fact that people were doing OK really and didn't fancy contemplating a change to their pretty decent lifestyles. However it seems that most of the voters were not doing so well and felt that life could be better outside of the EU. But how many knew it would be such a pickle to cancel membership and leave? What? I don't know who you talk to but I haven't met anybody who is surprised by the fact that we might take 2 years or longer to negotiate a divorce after 40 years of such entanglement. In fact, nobody said it would be easy, nor were we told that we would be out just 1 year and a few months after the vote. Also, i think a lot of 'the voters' who voted Leave were, and still are doing quite well for themselves. James Dyson, for example, is doing very well. A little more clarity needed. I think most understood that the process would take time (40 year disentangling and so on), it just seems to be beset by an excessive amount of confusion. "Should we pay a big divorce bill, should we not? Who decides? Cannot go further with any negotiations until the divorce bill is settled. Let's take a breather from the discussions and have more thinking time." I am suggesting that that's the type of muddleness which people were not really aware of. Happy to be corrected though. On the point about 'not doing so well', you need to note the follow on message, i.e. 'life could be better....' Perhaps I should have written, 'not doing as well as they might be'? Does that help? Edit - just noticed that Pete replied on this too.
|
|
|
Post by cj on Sept 21, 2017 13:46:11 GMT
If I remember correctly the Prime Minster at the time David Cameron said it was a simple leave or remain vote and that there would be no second referendum, this was made very clear. The public voted on those terms. It was a high turn out, 72%? We're a democratic country. The clear result of the vote was to leave. It should stand. And the 28% who didn't vote wasted exercising their democratric vote...
|
|