Jump to content
Sturgeon's House
Sign in to follow this  
Donward

In Which Britain Tells Europe to "Stuff It"; Also David Cameron Takes His Football and Goes Home

Recommended Posts

screenshot.png

 

...maybe this needs a seperate topic

 

Scotland has made clear that it sees its future as part of the European Union, Scottish First Minister Nicola Sturgeon said on Friday, after it voted to remain while most of the United Kingdom voted to leave.

"The vote here makes clear that the people of Scotland see their future as part of the European Union," Sturgeon said in a statement.

"We await the final UK-wide result, but Scotland has spoken - and spoken decisively."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, before you OD on your own smug there, it seems to me that Nigel was saying two things:

 

1. He couldn't guarantee that the NHS would get the extra money.

 

2. If he had been running that ad campaign (he claims he wasn't), he would not have made that claim.

 

I have no opinion on Brexit, but it seems obvious to me that Brexit opponents are simply unable to believe that their enemies are anything but drooling, completely buffoonish troglodytes. If any of you think it's outrageous of me to point this out, please let me suggest that you stop doing it regardless of how you feel, as this is exactly the same attitude that the US gun control lobby has towards the NRA, and the NRA routinely kicks their ass.

 

The media is couching Farage's statements as him being caught in a lie, but a dimwitted stunt monkey could figure out that's horseshit. As on Brexit, I have no opinion of Farage and am kind of only vaguely aware of who the guy is, so for all I know he is probably a gigantic liar (he is in politics after all), but I'm also not an idiot and it's incredibly obvious that the media is lying to me about what he said. The media is saying "Farage is reneging on his promise" when what he actually said was "it was stupid of the campaign (that I didn't run) to promise that, nobody could guarantee that money would go to the NHS specifically".

 

Maybe, anti-Brexiters, you didn't get whomped tonight because the people of the UK are so goddamn stupid they got taken in by a shyster like Farage. Maybe you got whomped because people can smell your bullshit coming a mile away, and when they call you out on it, you dismiss them as illiterate morlocks. So, it may be past time for anti-Brexit folks to start taking their political adversaries seriously, is what I'm saying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FYI: I seriously didn't care about Brexit or not, but all the butthurt from both sides is hilarious.

 

I'm here for the laughs and dank memes.

 

I am just starting to get annoyed by all the messages I've gotten today from the losers flipping out. Although we're certainly in for lulzy times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everyone is talking about it here as well - mainly in a 'what will happen to us' sort of way.

 

I think the multiple years it will take for this thing to shake out should buffer things somewhat, so I'm not personally that invested.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be really hilarious for Britain to end up losing Scotland to the EU

This is imo the only thing I'd like to see.

 

England and Wales voted themselves out of the EU, which is fine. But Northern Ireland and Scotland clearly voted to remain in the EU. For me I'd be bullshit if they were pulled out of the EU because England really wanted it. To be honest, it won't amaze me if the IRA decided to fuck it and start the bombings again.

 

And Scotland, well... as a friend put it:

 

2018: Having invoked Article 50 UK leaves EU

2019: Scotland votes and leaves UK in an overwhelming vote

2021: France revives the Auld Alliance

2025: England is annexed by Scotland thanks to Scotland's innovative way of waging war known as "BLOW THEM BAGPIPES LADS TILL THEY CAN HEAR NO MORE"

  

I am just starting to get annoyed by all the messages I've gotten today from the losers flipping out. Although we're certainly in for lulzy times.

I would have liked to see NI, Scotland and Wales to have the same weight as England. The population of England is such that if they REALLY REALLY wanted out of the EU, but the others REALLY REALLY wanted to be in, the UK would be out simply because NI, Scotland and Wales combined cannot stand up to England population wise. Even now, if NI, Scotland and Wales voted 100% to remain in the EU they'd only win by ~300k votes. On a total amount of voters of ~33 million. Which would have "Remain" win by only 1%, if my math is correct.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've not been able to read too much on the topic, but from what I've heard when talking with or watching the pro-EU crowd, mty experience align with baby's. While I probably would end up still leaning towards the UK staying from what little I know, I don't like how a lot of people are going about talking about it. I have no bias either way on this issue since the closest tie I have with the UK is a HUDL 2 tablet from Tesco I imported from there because it was some pretty good bang per buck of what I needed.

By and large, people wanting to stay that I was exposed to treated it as a "common sense" issue. By this, I mean not only do they see the issue as something so abundantly simple and clear that any sane person would agree, but assume anyone who disagrees lacks common sense and treats that position as such. Common sense is not something I like to see used as a key argument in political debate, especially when your country is split damn near in half over the issue.

Maybe I'm just annoyed how instead of debate, I'm just seeing positions dismissed instead. I want to see facts and numbers smashing brexit every time if its such a stupid idea, not labelling dissenters as frothy, xenophobic nationalist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could someone give a brief rundown of what exactly the referendum did; i.e. how legally binding it is, and what the timeframe for separation is?  In addition I would like to know exactly what trade, banking and internal movement arrangements will be shaken up as a result of this.

 

It's hard for those of us on the left hand side of the pond to make sense of this without knowing exactly what's at stake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could someone give a brief rundown of what exactly the referendum did; i.e. how legally binding it is, and what the timeframe for separation is?  In addition I would like to know exactly what trade, banking and internal movement arrangements will be shaken up as a result of this.

 

It's hard for those of us on the left hand side of the pond to make sense of this without knowing exactly what's at stake.

Right now, nothing has really changed (except some economic things went down the drain due to speculation). The UK has to invoke Article 50, which basically means "I'm going to leave the EU, there is nothing you can do about it, we leave 2 years after Article 50 is invoked.". In those two years the EU and the UK have to get to an agreement on (afaik) things like trade between the EU and UK and shit like that. If they can't that's too bad, 2 years and they're out.

 

Right now the EU has called for the UK to invoke Article 50 immediately and not stall to have more time for making deals. The general tone with a lot of high level EU players is: "Good riddance and don't let the door hit you on the way out".

 

One of the things the UK will run into, is free movement of people. Right now they don't have that, even though they're in the EU. But countries outside the EU who have free trade with the EU also have free movement of people. As a screenshot earlier in this topic showed, immigration is one of the things Leave cares about (even though nothing will change). Not only that, but those "free trade but not EU" countries like Norway and Switzerland actually pay for that. They send the EU money and allow free movement of people and in return they can trade freely with the EU. They also have to follow EU law. That whole "paying the EU" thing was huge for the Leave camp as well:

ace04af5ba.png

 

So the general consensus is this:

If the UK wants positive (for them) trade laws with the EU, the have to allow free movement of people, pay, and follow EU laws.

 

All of which are reasons they want to leave.

 

And that's completely ignoring any subsidies the UK gets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not legally binding, but it would be politically suicidal to disregard it

My guess is that the best strategy now would be to wait out part of the two years, egg on things a bit and then push for a second referendum before the deadline in the hopes that people will get tired of the ructions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know if they're allowed to waffle on it after they initiate Article 50 proceedings, though. The EU would definitely not like that

Also, Spain wants Gibraltar under joint control

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36618796

and Sinn Fein is going to push for Irish reunification referendum

http://www.thejournal.ie/sinn-fein-brexit-irish-unity-2842816-Jun2016/?utm_source=facebook_short

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know if they're allowed to waffle on it after they initiate Article 50 proceedings, though. 

No. The EU top has already told them to hurry up and invoke Article 50 as soon as possible. They don't want the UK to negotiate before they actually invoke Article 50.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know if they're allowed to waffle on it after they initiate Article 50 proceedings, though. The EU would definitely not like that

Also, Spain wants Gibraltar under joint control

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36618796

and Sinn Fein is going to push for Irish reunification referendum

http://www.thejournal.ie/sinn-fein-brexit-irish-unity-2842816-Jun2016/?utm_source=facebook_short

I meant more along the lines of initiating and then spending the two years pointing out all the downsides in the hopes of swinging a second vote before the deadline.

Sort of a 'force them to eat the soup they cooked' approach.

 

More agile political minds than mine can think of other ways to walk back this thing, I'm sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...