Originally posted by @Flahute
Interesting view point on why Article 50 hasn’t yet been invoked.
I’ve seen that and yes it’s interesting.
But if it’s the case, europe will still be looking at a crisis in confidence and what will the reaction to another failed referendum against europe be?
Originally posted by @saintbletch
Seems to link to a general feed and not the specific article you mentioned.
worked Ok for me.
Just let it load and it will take you to it eventually.
Originally posted by @Chertsey-Saint
Originally posted by @Sotonist
Originally posted by @Chertsey-Saint
In what way? You can’t attribute his quotes to the Leave campaign.
which quotes are we improperly attributing to the official leave campaign now?
Any of his quotes.
ha, yes I agree on that, but I was trying to understand if anything specific has actually been attributed to the official campaign in this context and what that quote may be.
Got it now. Didn’t realise it was a comment from a ‘reader’. For others…
Teebs’ comment on The Guadian website…
If Boris Johnson looked downbeat yesterday, that is because he realises that he has lost.
Perhaps many Brexiters do not realise it yet, but they have actually lost, and it is all down to one man: David Cameron.
With one fell swoop yesterday at 9:15 am, Cameron effectively annulled the referendum result, and simultaneously destroyed the political careers of Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and leading Brexiters who cost him so much anguish, not to mention his premiership.
How?
Throughout the campaign, Cameron had repeatedly said that a vote for leave would lead to triggering Article 50 straight away. Whether implicitly or explicitly, the image was clear: he would be giving that notice under Article 50 the morning after a vote to leave. Whether that was scaremongering or not is a bit moot now but, in the midst of the sentimental nautical references of his speech yesterday, he quietly abandoned that position and handed the responsibility over to his successor.
And as the day wore on, the enormity of that step started to sink in: the markets, Sterling, Scotland, the Irish border, the Gibraltar border, the frontier at Calais, the need to continue compliance with all EU regulations for a free market, re-issuing passports, Brits abroad, EU citizens in Britain, the mountain of legistlation to be torn up and rewritten … the list grew and grew.
The referendum result is not binding. It is advisory. Parliament is not bound to commit itself in that same direction.
The Conservative party election that Cameron triggered will now have one question looming over it: will you, if elected as party leader, trigger the notice under Article 50?
Who will want to have the responsibility of all those ramifications and consequences on his/her head and shoulders?
Boris Johnson knew this yesterday, when he emerged subdued from his home and was even more subdued at the press conference. He has been out-maneouvered and check-mated.
If he runs for leadership of the party, and then fails to follow through on triggering Article 50, then he is finished. If he does not run and effectively abandons the field, then he is finished. If he runs, wins and pulls the UK out of the EU, then it will all be over - Scotland will break away, there will be upheaval in Ireland, a recession … broken trade agreements. Then he is also finished. Boris Johnson knows all of this. When he acts like the dumb blond it is just that: an act.
The Brexit leaders now have a result that they cannot use. For them, leadership of the Tory party has become a poison chalice.
When Boris Johnson said there was no need to trigger Article 50 straight away, what he really meant to say was “never”. When Michael Gove went on and on about “informal negotiations” … why? why not the formal ones straight away? … he also meant not triggering the formal departure. They both know what a formal demarche would mean: an irreversible step that neither of them is prepared to take.
All that remains is for someone to have the guts to stand up and say that Brexit is unachievable in reality without an enormous amount of pain and destruction, that cannot be borne. And David Cameron has put the onus of making that statement on the heads of the people who led the Brexit campaign.
^^^^^^^^ Great article I thought
And for me. It links to a comment on an article in the Guardian. It says much the same as I’d been thinking, also expressed by Andrew Rawnsley in today’s Observer - Cameron has effectively passed responsibility over to the leave campaign leaders, so it’s down to them to take the next steps.
Rawnsley’s article is here - one quick quote from it:
As the old saying goes: they broke it, now the Brexiters own it. Which may explain why, as mournful as David Cameron was in defeat, Boris Johnson and Michael Gove looked even grimmer in victory.
Thanks,Bletch.
That Bojo & Gove are back-tracking on invoking Article 50 I think shows that they hadn’t planned for every eventuality - which is inexcusable in anyone with aims to by Prime Minister.
The prospect that they have most probably fucked up their careers is something that I can bear with upmost fortitude.
Originally posted by @Fowllyd
And for me. It links to a comment on an article in the Guardian. It says much the same as I’d been thinking, also expressed by Andrew Rawnsley in today’s Observer - Cameron has effectively passed responsibility over to the leave campaign leaders, so it’s down to them to take the next steps.
Except the leave campaigners can’t be guaranteed the leadership. Cameron guaranteed to invoke article 50 and has reneged.
Which is why I said ‘pretty much all bunkum’, as that takes into account the bits I agree with.
I never said it was going to be easy to stay in the single market, but we will be in it. The rest of Europe, and especially Germany, needs us in it. What was said above was written with the assumption we wouldn’t be in it.
I think Farage should be ignored. Frankly if you’ve got 2 brain cells to rub together you know he should have been ignored.
I was arguing the points of the article, nothing wider than that. If you want to debate wider issues then fair enough, we can do that, but not under the premise that the above article made those points.
Potentially yes, bit I think it also works the other way where some remainers may have voted Remain only because he wanted to Leave. Probably not as many mind.
I’m not necessarily talking just on this forum either, just generally.
God he’s a frog faced fuckwit though.
My other holds family live in Cornwall, although the Cornish voted overwhelmingly to leave they apparently are rather cross that that means they will lose their EU subsidies.
what the fuck is wrong with the campaigns that were run that they didn’t try and sensibly lay out the arguments for and against.
This is why I hate competitive politics. It’s all about ‘winning’ and ‘power’ tell whatever lies you want in order to achieve both. The idea of a referendum is to let the people make a choice on an issue to complex or large to be made by the elected body of the time. If there is no independent source of unbiased information how can the objective be fulfilled? Instead we had that bollocks about 350mil for the NHS which was debunked in about 30 seconds but remained in the bus for the whole campaign.
Apologies, sounding like a broken record.
How did it escape the attention of anyone interested in the matter that Farage had been ostracised by the Leave campaign from the start?
Originally posted by @Sussexsaint
My other holds family live in Cornwall, although the Cornish voted overwhelmingly to leave they apparently are rather cross that that means they will lose their EU subsidies.
They were assured the subsidies would be maintained (anyone’s guess by whom) and they are understandably anxious in the uncertainty of power vacuum to confirm that assurance.
Well, Shirty, I believe I’m right in saying that close on 4M people tried to elect his party in 2015.
That’s close to 4m of your peers that you dismiss as not having the minimum brains cells for a brain cell rubbing exercise.
I’d say (just a view, no science or stats to back it up), that many more than the close-to 4m UKIP voters think/thought Farage is a “good bloke”, who “tells it like it is” and who “speaks for the common man”.
So, that’s got to hurt.
Not your suggestion that they aren’t clever, I’m sure they don’t visit sotonians.com in any numbers, but knowing that close to 4m people’s views don’t count in our parliamentary democracy.
Perhaps, as I predicted it might, all that negative frustration was positively poured into the leave vote?
You might be technically accurate to say that he wasn’t part of the offical Leave campaign.
But to not recognise the impact his comments had during the campaign, comes across as either naive or disingenuous.
4m may be a conservative number. Think of the people who would have voted for UKIP had their two horse race selection been a safe winner without their vote or had there been a credible UKIP candidate in their constituency.
Originally posted by @saintbletch
You might be technically accurate to say that he wasn’t part of the offical Leave campaign.
But to not recognise the impact his comments had during the campaign, comes across as either naive or disingenuous.
Indeed, the point I was making on page 5 - which Chertsey clearly knew…
I still think that now what will happen is that we will realise that we cannot afford to be out of the free trade agreement as negotiations with other nations outside the EU would take longer than we have to leave the EU.
then what will happen is we have to leave our borders open to remain in the free trade agreement and we will end up little different to how we are at the moment but with no vote at all on how things are shaped.
One of the leave campaigns parts was that we would have Turkey join and they would all come to Britain but it was our Veto that stopped them joining and that will be removed if we have the same status as Norway and then our boarders will still be open and what the leave campaign said is now more likely to happen
