The benefits of Brexit - the future of the United Kingdom

Discussion in 'World News, Current Events & Politics' started by emigre, May 26, 2018.

  1. barronwaffles

    barronwaffles GBAtemp Fan

    Member
    6
    May 15, 2014
    Syria
    If you think the (still growing) appeal of populism is based on what you consider rational rather than emotional talking points, then I've got a boat to sell you.
     
  2. notimp

    notimp GBAtemp Addict

    Member
    10
    Sep 18, 2007
    My argument: If you'd want to sovereign to really care, you don't put a Manfred Weber in that position.

    But yes that interpretation is a little out there - and doesnt rely purely on facts. I guess it was all just bad luck, and maybe not as dependable political connections for Manfred Weber then.. ;) Regardless. It doesnt matter. The outcome is the same.

    Trust in the democratic function of all election processes in the EU will take a dip, but then people mostly don't care - and want 'a clear direction' more than that. Based on some polls, based on feeling. The outrage, that Manfred Weber didn't get elected in a "first try to do it that way" - was slim to none. Again - lets look at this from a political analyst stance for a while. ;)
     
    Last edited by notimp, Jul 17, 2019
  3. supersonicwaffle

    supersonicwaffle GBAtemp Regular

    Member
    4
    Oct 15, 2018
    Germany
    Technically you're correct, because of course you are, since not doing it that way is quite literally impossible but you're still ignoring the fact that Jean-Claude Juncker has been EVP's lead candidate in 2014. This system was put in place for a reason.

    — Posts automatically merged - Please don't double post! —

    My argument - you are in no position to tell the sovereign what it cares about other than your vote.
     
  4. notimp

    notimp GBAtemp Addict

    Member
    10
    Sep 18, 2007
    Noted. I'll keep it in mind. We'll see if it matters. :)
     
  5. KingVamp

    KingVamp Haaah-hahahaha!

    Member
    13
    Sep 13, 2009
    United States
    Netherworld
    Sorry, but what's going on with Brexit? How is Brexit being affected right now?
     
    IncredulousP likes this.
  6. Youkai

    Youkai Demon

    Member
    7
    Jul 1, 2004
    Germany
    Germany , NRW
    Nothing is going on at all ... the EU gave them more time, they are wasting it doing nothing.
    Next time the EU will give them more time again and they will waste it again ...
    Never ending Cirlce even though the EU will say "last time" every single time over and over again.
     
  7. leon315

    leon315 POWERLIFTER

    Member
    9
    Nov 27, 2013
    Italy
    the situation of UK is ridiculous, Brexit nowdays is highly impossible at this point and UK with May-xit is literally headless XD hahahahaha

    My British friends, just stay with us italian, spanish and greek, and deal those black afrikan muslim refugees who land monthly on Italy.
     
    Last edited by leon315, Jul 17, 2019
  8. FAST6191

    FAST6191 Techromancer

    pip Reporter
    23
    Nov 21, 2005
    United Kingdom
    After the UK prime minster caused what little of a team there was from the UK to quit or be fired she got utterly trounced when she tried to sell her resulting deal and quit herself. The EU offered a further extension to the deadline. Her party is now deciding upon a new leader/prime minister, which will determine the new direction taken as the various candidates being voted on by said party members have different approaches (the most likely winner/new PM having a somewhat dubious plan, or at least a couple of the key concepts of their plan, though as a general rule it favours the harder approach to the issue). Whatever the result of that might be there are still some massive hurdles to overcome with regards to the Irish border, getting parliament to agree to things, balancing some internal politics and other things, and not a lot of time to do it in -- the new deadline being October the 31st also coincides with a fairly serious budget assessment/creation for the new 7 years for the EU and the UK still being in then would not just be a few MEPs that get to be there but the UK having to factor into that so the EU extending beyond that is deemed unlikely.

    The EU is also having a bit of an internal shakeup/new people coming in, what effects this will have on the matter remains to be seen -- the EU is in a fairly good position at this point and the shuffling is unlikely to change focus radically. That said to the casual observer the processes underpinning said shuffle would serve to reinforce one of the UK leaving the EU campaign notions of the EU being a not so democratic body (just don't pay too much attention to how the new UK PM is being selected, it does follow established rules though).

    https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCSMqateX8OA2s1wsOR2EgJA/videos?disable_polymer=1 goes into a bit more depth if you wanted it.
     
    KingVamp likes this.
  9. shamzie

    shamzie Oh David de Gea <3

    Member
    6
    Mar 19, 2014
    Manchester
    Von der Leyen's incompetence and clear fanaticism for a United States of Europe with EU army, foreign and immigration policies has seen her appointed as President of 500m people, with NO democratic mandate. The EU is a corrupt, totalitarian disgrace, as is its new leader.

    Hard brexit (aka brexit people voted for) more likely than ever.
     
    Last edited by shamzie, Jul 17, 2019
  10. FAST6191

    FAST6191 Techromancer

    pip Reporter
    23
    Nov 21, 2005
    United Kingdom
    Did the people vote for hard brexit? I don't recall an especially concrete vision of what was to come during the campaign, much in the way of consultation after the event before the article 50 thing was triggered, or in the subsequent years. This is also without considering the other essentially half of the population (which voted against) care to do.
     
  11. shamzie

    shamzie Oh David de Gea <3

    Member
    6
    Mar 19, 2014
    Manchester
    I believe so for many reasons. People were told a vote to leave meant leaving the customs union and single market. This was repeated many many times, I believe it was also in the leaflet but not only this David Cameron said it on live TV, I can find it if needed. For these reasons alone It's safe to say people voted for a clean exit, Its only after vote leave won the rhetoric around "people didnt know what they voted for" started appearing.
     
  12. FAST6191

    FAST6191 Techromancer

    pip Reporter
    23
    Nov 21, 2005
    United Kingdom
    The messages, even if we ignore nonsense on buses, were decidedly mixed and different between leaders of the campaign at the time. Though looking around the times the customs union was mentioned "probably mean leaving" would be it so maybe you have that one.

    It is also somewhat amusing said leaflet gets brought up as a positive -- the expense and the taxpayer burden of it, and the rather washy nature of it among those that were vying for the UK to change its position within the EU and if we are thinking the same thing ( https://assets.publishing.service.g...ean-union-is-the-best-decision-for-the-uk.pdf ) then gov headed page titled "Why the Government believes that voting to remain in the European Union is the best decision for the UK.". It does also mention the Canada deal in the same page it details the leaving the market thing, and contemplates the nature of the eventual deal in it (as opposed to saying we will aim for).

    What a shambles it all was and continues to be.
     
  13. shamzie

    shamzie Oh David de Gea <3

    Member
    6
    Mar 19, 2014
    Manchester
    It wasn't brought up as a positive, it was brought up because it was government position and government said they'd implement the decision. I mentioned David Cameron specifically because he was the PM and he was the leader of the country. The leader said many many times a vote to leave meant hard brexit, It's just after leave won people are trying to muddy the waters. By people I obviously mean those whose interests are to remain.
     
  14. notimp

    notimp GBAtemp Addict

    Member
    10
    Sep 18, 2007
    UvdL is not a fanatic she is anything but. In fact, she sometimes leaves the impression, that one should check if she's still breathing.. ;)

    The way the president of the EC is elected hasnt changed since the UK entered or left the EU.

    Deciding on a top candidate, that people should vote on, as a EU fraction, and then showing him around in most EU states during election - but not his competition for the job wouldnt have been much more democratic.

    That the President of the Commission isnt directly politically elected isnt that much of an issue either. Its equivalent to maybe our version of the Queen. (Not entirely similar - more in public perception.)


    The issue with the european comission having an initiative right on coming up with law proposals, and the EU parliament not having that - again is a separate issue. That is a proper/real issue in terms of democratic representation, but again - its organized that way, otherwise the EU would have a leadership/direction issue. This comes from there being very different national interests being subsumed within the EU. So it would be possible to get floating majorities for contrary positions, which would then leave the EU not able to act moreso than its an issue already.

    Please remember, that the UK formally didn't exit the EU, because it was so horrible, and anti-democratic (what now the remaining 27 member states are all undemocratic and to dumb to see it?), but because of the super fun super savings and the better financial perspective Britain will apparently have over the next 20 years, and the non existing imigration crisis scare - of course.

    British prime ministers REGULARLY boasted, that they were able to get undemocratic, special deals, that were more beneficial for the UK than for the rest of the EU.

    Remember?

    No?

    This is an instance, where someone found his moral outrage, after they left. So its worth nothing. Disgruntled former member. Ignore.


    Also, that we now have to spend more on military spendings - literally is the result of a refusal of out Nato member states US and UK to provide support as per usual over the past decades. So you took that an invented the "war mongering intents of that fanatic Ursula" out of that.

    Bravo?
     
    Last edited by notimp, Jul 17, 2019
  15. Taleweaver

    Taleweaver Storywriter

    Member
    13
    Dec 23, 2009
    Belgium
    Belgium
    She in the position for two days. A bit early for a slander campaign, no?
     
  16. notimp

    notimp GBAtemp Addict

    Member
    10
    Sep 18, 2007
    British fraction in the EP cheered a little, then boo'ed a little then was silent. throughout the 'here I am speech from UvdL.

    UvdL signalled, that there is limitless time for discussions with the UK, if there is a proper reason. And that the UK will always be partners and friends. So nothing new.
     
    Last edited by notimp, Jul 18, 2019
  17. supersonicwaffle

    supersonicwaffle GBAtemp Regular

    Member
    4
    Oct 15, 2018
    Germany
    So we just ignore her previous body of work? Like I said earlier it seems like she is fleeing the national politics stage in Germany because she's been involved in multiple scandals which are still under investigation by the parliament.
     
    shamzie likes this.
  18. Taleweaver

    Taleweaver Storywriter

    Member
    13
    Dec 23, 2009
    Belgium
    Belgium
    I'll probably sound like the devil's advocate, but...yes, indeed. I've briefly looked into those scandals you mentioned. As you said: the investigation is still ongoing. She won't be holding her current position long if she's found to be guilty of that, but until then I see no reason for assuming guilt.



    But okay...for sake of the argument: let's say that she IS guilty of personally purposefully awarding lucrative contracts to outside consultants (and NOT, as I currently assume, " a mixture of negligence, corner-cutting and mistakes by individuals overwhelmed by their work.", which is her own defence on the matter).

    If that were the case...then that would still be way too early to accuse her of "incompetence and fanaticism", as @shamzie put it. The former doesn't apply because it's a different job and the latter doesn't showcase in the scandal.
     
    supersonicwaffle likes this.
  19. supersonicwaffle

    supersonicwaffle GBAtemp Regular

    Member
    4
    Oct 15, 2018
    Germany
    Oh critizing the assertion of fanaticism is fine. But you make the case for incompetence yourself, even going as far as stating that incompetence is her defense strategy.
    That alone BTW, doesn't even imply guilt in a legal sense.

    So the reversal in the following paragraph is a bit of mental gymnastics on your part.

    Even while playing devil's advocate you still arrive at she's either guilty of fraud or incompetent but argue at the same time that it's too early to accuse her of either.
     
    Last edited by supersonicwaffle, Jul 18, 2019
  20. Taleweaver

    Taleweaver Storywriter

    Member
    13
    Dec 23, 2009
    Belgium
    Belgium
    Yes. More specifically "by individuals overwhelmed by their work.". I don't assume she's speaking of herself there, though it's covert enough not to downright blame her employees. Employees she won't bring to her new department.

    So I really don't arrive at your conclusion. If you're leading others (and what politician isn't?), it's perfectly possible that people under you screw up or are up to no good. It doesn't relieve you of your responsibilities, but whether or not she is guilty is really what the investigation is to point out.
     
Loading...