Stunned

[intexasatthe moment]

London Mix

"That's what Leave has always said" that's interesting ,do you have more detail ? Who said?

[miga]

Jeremy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> heartblock Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > drinking Cavalo Nero while poking around Mr.

> HB's bloody vegetarian sausages

>

> Cavolo Nero is a type of cabbage.

And very nice it is too. My grandma used to make it with pigs' legs, the bitterness of the leaves and the piggy fat made fine companions.

Perhaps heartblock meant Nero d'Avola.

[Otta]

One of the most depressing things about this is that EVERYONE is going to end up disappointed. Those that voted remain are already gutted and trying to think of ways they can reverse democracy, and those that voted leave are going to end up with something VERY different to what they dreamt of.

A few rich people will remain rich, the rest of us a screwed.

[LondonMix]

They said so repeatedly. Here is one example in old press articles before the vote on that specific element.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/eu-referendum-vote-leave-leaders-reveal-post-brexit-roadmap-7083816.html

"In Brussels, informal negotiations with the EU could begin immediately after the vote, they said, and only after these ?preliminary discussions? would it be necessary to activate Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union ? the mechanism by which a member state formerly negotiates its exit from the bloc. "

In this they've also stated (as they always have) that they anticipate everything being wrapped up by 2020. They know there is no way to negotiate a new trade agreement in 2 years.

The EU in response repeatedly said (pre- Brexit vote) that Article 50 would trigger conversations on what to do with each others citizens etc but not trade. Only after the UK was out of Europe would the EU begin trade negotiations with the UK as they did not want the UK using the future of their citizens as a bargaining chip in trade discussions. They warned a new trade deal was at a minimum 7 years away (assuming 5 years for trade only negotiations) and that there was no guarantee that would be enough time.

Details like this of course got lost in the horrific rhetoric surrounding immigration but its been clear for weeks this would be the main stand-off post Brexit if David Cameron didn't trigger Article 50 immediately as he promised he would if the Leave campaign won.

intexasatthe moment Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> London Mix

>

> "That's what Leave has always said" that's

> interesting ,do you have more detail ? Who said?

[Otta]

At least we can take some solace in Mail and Sun readers finally realizing they've been sold a massive load of shite by their chosen "news"papers.

http://indy100.independent.co.uk/article/the-mail-has-explained-what-brexit-means-and-its-readers-seem-shocked--Z1772TI4aNW

http://indy100.independent.co.uk/article/the-sun-has-also-got-around-to-telling-its-readers-what-brexit-will-mean-and-they-are-not-happy--WySvafrAVZ

[intexasatthe moment]

Excellent .Thanks LM .I knew you'd have chapter and verse ,saves me googling .

[WorkingMummy]

Otta Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> One of the most depressing things about this is

> that EVERYONE is going to end up disappointed.

> Those that voted remain are already gutted and

> trying to think of ways they can reverse

> democracy, and those that voted leave are going to

> end up with something VERY different to what they

> dreamt of.

>

> A few rich people will remain rich, the rest of us

> a screwed.

It isn't a reverse of democracy to treat as merely advisory, an advisory referendum, which posed a simple black and white choice on a very complicated and poorly understood question, with enormous ramifications. Especially when the question split the country almost 50/50. Especially when the question demonstrated massive divisions between different demographics (young/old, regions, etc). Especially when some of the most profoundly affected members of our society were excluded from the vote (16/17 year olds, EU citizens who have lived here for decades). Especially as people are only now finally waking up to the fact that remain was not a position based on fear, but on reality. Especially as people only began to think through clearly what the consequences of their advice to their government would be (if actually acted upon) after their votes were cast and they confronted the reality they were always warned about.

That is how policy formation works. You have an idea, you think about it, maybe take a show of hands (usually in cabinet, not usually in the street), and then you sit down to do it. And when you sit down to do it, sometimes the reality of the situation forces you to change your idea. Happens every day.

John Major came out of retirement to speak live to the nation about what would happen if Brexit actually happened. He told us all, you are being lied to. So did Nick Clegg, many others.

The voting public had the right to ignore that very wise advice which came from - you know - people who actually know how the hell free trade, economics, social policy, our relationships with the EU, actually work. They were perfectly free to ignore those warnings and vote out for whatever very sensible or completely idiotic reason they like.

But ultimately it is the government that is there to govern. It is not there to do as we say. We got to ignore John Major. Now the government (whenever it is formed, however long it takes to actually talk through deals with eu etc etc) gets to make its decision and it may in the end ignore us. Thank god.

[Otta]

But how many leavers, in the face of reality, are asking for a rerun?

16-18 year olds have never voted in a UK vote, only in Scotland.

You accepted the question when you ticked your box thinking you'd win.

I'm a strong remainer, but this is all clutching at straws.

You are right that this is not a legally binding referendum, and I hope the government choose to never pull the trigger. But calls for a second referendum are no better than "best 2 out of 3" from a losing side.

[WorkingMummy]

Otta, I totally agree. Second referendum would be wrong.

My current hope is that a leave campaigner does become PM and slowly slowly has to reconcile the people HE hoodwinked to the position that, actually, it was a mistake, not really doable. Soz!

I also hope the EU sticks to its guns and to what it always said: you can't divorce us and remarry us at the same time.

Because that makes Brexit impossible. It calls the bluff on all the people, in Westminster and in the street, who said - who were actually deluded and detached enough to imagine - we could "take control" of an entire bloody continent, and 27 different legal systems other than our own, in one fell swoop.

[Loz]

.

[WorkingMummy]

And Otta, no one "accepted the question" by ticking one of the only two boxes presented.

And, no, I didn't think remain would win. I exhausted myself campaigning (even though I thought the whole exercise nuts) and had too much first hand experience of the irrational steadfastness of core leavers, and the confusion of people genuinely open to listen and wanting to make an informed choice.

A big part of the problem was the issue is something - please don't think I am being patronising - but it is an issue you need a law degree, Whitehall experience and a strong grasp of economics OR at least one of those and access to experts in the other two fields to understand. I have practiced public law for 20 years, often appear against the government in court and occasionally advise the government on statutory interpretation. And I didn't know how article 50 worked without revisiting the Lisbon treaty (you know, reading it) and checking a couple of commentaries. This is why we have a government. Because policy decisions like this are hard and messy to understand and even more tricky wisely to form. The idea it could be decided by "ordinary decent people" in a straw poll is just...nuts.

I am bracing myself for accusations of being a middle class wanker. But I say as I find. Am never going to put out to popular vote a decision whether I need life saving surgery any time soon either. I'm happy to leave decision making to people who actually know what is involved.

People were done a great disservice by being led to believe this issue was black/white, or no big deal. Or that it all came done to whether you felt European or not (the number of times I shouted at my radio when bbc journalists spouted that crap line.)

[Otta]

WorkingMummy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Otta, I totally agree. Second referendum would be

> wrong.

>

> My current hope is that a leave campaigner does

> become PM and slowly slowly has to reconcile the

> people HE hoodwinked to the position that,

> actually, it was a mistake, not really doable.

> Soz!

>

> I also hope the EU sticks to its guns and to what

> it always said: you can't divorce us and remarry

> us at the same time.

>

> Because that makes Brexit impossible. It calls the

> bluff on all the people, in Westminster and in the

> street, who said - who were actually deluded and

> detached enough to imagine - we could "take

> control" of an entire bloody continent, and 27

> different legal systems other than our own, in one

> fell swoop.

Agree with all that.

And I am certain the EU will stick to it's guns!

[Loz]

I know Nick Clegg isn't exactly the toast of the town, but he made some spookily accurate predictions on the eve of the vote...

https://inews.co.uk/opinion/comment/will-wake-vote-leave/

Actually, we could do with someone with Clegg's pragmatism right now.

[robbin]

Jeremy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> heartblock Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > drinking Cavalo Nero while poking around Mr.

> HB's bloody vegetarian sausages

>

> Cavolo Nero is a type of cabbage.

My favourite post of the entire Brexit debate thread. Genius! Speaks volumes too!

[red devil]

Otta Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> You are right that this is not a legally binding

> referendum, and I hope the government choose to

> never pull the trigger. But calls for a second

> referendum are no better than "best 2 out of 3"

> from a losing side.

I'm a strong Remainer and not in favour of a second referendum either, but I wasn't in favour of a referendum in the first place. You can't seriously govern a country with X-factor style votes like this. The bigger picture needs to be looked at. People have had plenty of opportunity to vote to leave the EU by voting UKIP, but they haven't because their economic policy as a whole doesn't add up. Put the economics to one side, ignore the consequences, add a few sexy soundbites like ?350m a week to the NHS, and suddenly leaving the EU will look like a good thing to a lot of people.

So what happens next? There doesn't appear to be a plan in place by the Leave campaign. Cameron has played a blinder by saying he intends to resign. He's obviously not going to press the Article 50 button, and what Tory wants to be responsible for the break-up of the Union, which will happen if we leave. Instead that will now be left to his successor, all in all a poisoned chalice.

As the referendum was only 'advisory', rather than anything legally binding, it might therefore have to be passed in Parliament first, although i believe that's not legally binding either. As there's a strong majority of pro-EU MPs across all parties, it wouldn't get approved. That's obviously not going to go down well with the Brexiters. I think the sensible and fairest thing to do is therefore have a general election, especially as the Tories will have a new leader. I've never felt it's right that when a PM resigns mid-term that someone else should take over. Instead of the EU being a single, simplistic issue of remain or leave, let's look at it properly in the context of politics as a whole. If an anti-EU party wins an election, then fair enough, they will have been elected on a proper mandate and hopefully have a clear plan to leave the EU.

Whatever happens, it's clear we have a very divided country, which isn't good. Whoever wins, the other side's issues have to be addressed and not simply ignored.

If there's anything good to come out of this sorry mess it's that people are re-engaging with politics again. It was a vacuum of indifference and political apathy that brought about this mess in the first place...

[aerie]

red devil Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I saw a couple of old biddys being interviewed on

> the news last night, when asked why they voted to

> leave, they replied along the lines of...

>

> ''We're old enough to remember the old days, we

> don't like being bossed about''

>

> Perhaps the next referendum should be whether or

> not we introduce euthanasia...

this is truly wicked, but made me laugh - there is a questionable moral validity to older older people not voting as a referendum of this nature decides the future and theirs will by definition be short. However this is a democracy, and as yet there is no upper age limit, or even Logan's Zimmer Run.

[LondonMix]

I do think the basic premise of the Leave Campaign that they could get a negotiated exit covering everything including trade before actually leaving the block was arrogant. Maybe they will, but its a huge gamble. I'm not sure it will pay off.

This whole situation is so depressing. People in my office have ended friendships over this vote. I have friends that are not speaking to their parents. The stories of members of our community being verbally abused with xenophobic taunts breaks my god damn heart.

The economic fall-out is one thing but this has opened up divisions in this country that will take a long time to heal. The country is tearing itself apart.

[Loz]

red devil Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> So what happens next? There doesn't appear to be a plan in place by the Leave campaign. Cameron has

> played a blinder by saying he intends to resign. He's obviously not going to press the Article 50

> button, and what Tory wants to be responsible for the break-up of the Union, which will happen if we

> leave. Instead that will now be left to his successor, all in all a poisoned chalice.

We need a statesman/stateswoman to stand up and say, "we have plunged this country into financial chaos for no good reason. I have gathered together (more than half) of the MPs across all parties and we are putting a motion together to parliament to ignore this referendum result and bring stability back to the markets and the pound."

This won't happen.

[nxjen]

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I know Nick Clegg isn't exactly the toast of the

> town, but he made some spookily accurate

> predictions on the eve of the vote...

>

> https://inews.co.uk/opinion/comment/will-wake-vote

> -leave/

>

> Actually, we could do with someone with Clegg's

> pragmatism right now.

Agreed. And this whole miscalculation by Cameron has made me realise what a beneficial check Clegg provided during Cameron's first term.

[????]

I have personally heard of a reasonable number of Exit voters who BITTERLY regret what they've done, I'm not sure whether to include Louisa in this (cynical smiley thing). I've not heard any Remain voters say that - all anecdotal of course and not sure if it would change the result but some people are coming to terms with what they've done now.

[Sue]

aerie Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> red devil Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > I saw a couple of old biddys being interviewed

> on

> > the news last night, when asked why they voted

> to

> > leave, they replied along the lines of...

> >

> > ''We're old enough to remember the old days, we

> > don't like being bossed about''

> >

> > Perhaps the next referendum should be whether

> or

> > not we introduce euthanasia...

>

>

> this is truly wicked, but made me laugh - there is

> a questionable moral validity to older older

> people not voting as a referendum of this nature

> decides the future and theirs will by definition

> be short. However this is a democracy, and as yet

> there is no upper age limit, or even Logan's

> Zimmer Run.

There are a lot of rather stupid people about, and just because two of those stupid people happened to be "old biddys" (how patronising) does not mean that all older people are stupid.

[WorkingMummy]

Agree absolutely. With Lou, Loz and nxjen.

Nick Clegg was crucified for selling out on tuition fees. When all he did was compromise with the god awful situation he was in, being in a national-interest coalition with an austerity party, and restrain the worst of Tory excesses.

Makes him a good politician, not a bad one.

[LadyNorwood]

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> red devil Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

>

> > So what happens next? There doesn't appear to be

> a plan in place by the Leave campaign. Cameron

> has

> > played a blinder by saying he intends to resign.

> He's obviously not going to press the Article 50

> > button, and what Tory wants to be responsible

> for the break-up of the Union, which will happen

> if we

> > leave. Instead that will now be left to his

> successor, all in all a poisoned chalice.

>

> We need a statesman/stateswoman to stand up and

> say, "we have plunged this country into financial

> chaos for no good reason. I have gathered

> together (more than half) of the MPs across all

> parties and we are putting a motion together to

> parliament to ignore this referendum result and

> bring stability back to the markets and the

> pound."

>

> This won't happen.

Can you imagine what would transpire if this did happen? It may (or may not) bring market stability, I think it may very well cause more turbulence as the UK may be perceived to be a loose cannon. But I imagine that some of the 17+m people (some may regret voting Leave, but not all) who voted Leave would feel very aggrieved indeed and may very well inflame tensions even more...

[DulwichFox]

Every day you get a little bit older and a little bit wiser

Fox

[JohnL]

LadyNorwood Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Loz Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > red devil Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> >

> > > So what happens next? There doesn't appear to

> be

> > a plan in place by the Leave campaign. Cameron

> > has

> > > played a blinder by saying he intends to

> resign.

> > He's obviously not going to press the Article

> 50

> > > button, and what Tory wants to be

> responsible

> > for the break-up of the Union, which will

> happen

> > if we

> > > leave. Instead that will now be left to his

> > successor, all in all a poisoned chalice.

> >

> > We need a statesman/stateswoman to stand up and

> > say, "we have plunged this country into

> financial

> > chaos for no good reason. I have gathered

> > together (more than half) of the MPs across all

> > parties and we are putting a motion together to

> > parliament to ignore this referendum result and

> > bring stability back to the markets and the

> > pound."

> >

> > This won't happen.

>

>

> Can you imagine what would transpire if this did

> happen? It may (or may not) bring market

> stability, I think it may very well cause more

> turbulence as the UK may be perceived to be a

> loose cannon. But I imagine that some of the 17+m

> people (some may regret voting Leave, but not all)

> who voted Leave would feel very aggrieved indeed

> and may very well inflame tensions even more...

So how do you reverse a referendum - we had one in 1975

so one option is wait 40 years.

But if the government introduces legislation in the house

of commons a subsequent government can overrule it, but we

have somnething here which cannot be changed by anybody.

I would say referendums are inherently anti democratic as

they break the rule that a new government is sovereign.