Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Growing in size Britain’s weirdest voting group: The Kippers w
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Growing in size Britain’s weirdest voting group: The Kippers who now think leaving the EU is wrong
Over the last few months, as those who follow the site will know, I have been writing posts and tweets about the YouGov Brexit tracker which come which comes out two or three times a month. The actual question is “In hindsight do you think Britain was right or wrong to vote to leave the EU?”
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Betting PostF1: a long but hopefully interesting article which looks not only at the qualifying/race ahead but also how teams and drivers currently appear to be stacking up. Contains literally two tips:
http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2017/03/australia-pre-qualifying-2017.html
Perhaps old Wittgenstein can help you:
Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent.
CD13 Posts: 3,550
11:20AM edited 11:21AM
Mr Meeks,
My belief (although being only on the periphery of things in European meetings) was that 28 separate countries equals 28 different opinions. Gangs had to be formed and a system of swapsie ruled. We'll vote for this if you vote for us on other things.
Now this is seen was seen as a diplomatic and negotiating coup. It wasn't - it was schoolyard politics and often equally childish. The only way to run a European community which wants a finger in not just trade deals, but all political ideas was to unite as one country. That was and is the aim, and makes political sense. That's why politicians like it.
The tricky bit was the opinion of the voters in Europe. Hence the softly, softly catchee monkey scheme. You start with trade deals to entice, then you add the other political obligations when you can.
Some voters have no problem with this, but I've always found it dishonest. But it's seen as progressive and hence time is on their side.
The EU may cone clean when we leave, but it's a risky tactic. I suspect they'll eventually amalgamate and it will seem to have been a natural progression - which to some extent is true.
I firmly believe the sharp rise in UKIP votes in 2015 and sharp fall in Lib Dem votes was because a lot of ex-Lib Dem "none of the above" voters became UKIP "none of the above" voters. It's not the sole cause of the rise of UKIP or fall of the Lib Dems of course - the collapse of the BNP also helped UKIP, while many Lib Dems went blue or red instead.
I strongly suspect more 2015 UKIP voters were 2010 Lib Dems than 2010 BNP voters.
Patrick said:
» show previous quotes
I agree Malc. You go if you want to. I'm not anti Sindy.
I know Patrick , but nasty Theresa will not even let us decide. She makes EU look like pussy cats, who would hav ethought she had Mugabe thinking before they crowned her. She will be doing an Erdogan shortly and making herself leader for life.
DETERMINED to lay the foundations of an ever-closer union among the peoples of
Europe,
RESOLVED to ensure the economic and social progress of their countries by common
action to eliminate the barriers which divide Europe
As it was originally mooted as an informal meeting of Leavers on A50 day, isn't it fair to say that staunch remainers might have taken an invitation as a troll?
In any case, Mortimer didn't exactly do it on the sly, he posted on here that he was booking an area in a pub and asked everyone on here if they fancied it
PS: asking as Scotland is a UKIP free zone, apart from a few nutters who don't have any policies.
- People realising that they were wrong when faced with the reality of what leaving the EU means.
- People realising that leaving the EU will not destroy it, so think it's better to stay in and continue to undermine it from the inside, like Farage has done over the years.
Meanwhile the SNP should get busy sorting Scotland out - keep up the current shite state of things and the SNP political fortress is going to crumble. And without SNP dominance the chances you'll get to leave the UK are zilch.
I hope his ban can be lifted swiftly.
In response to @AlistairMeeks, who said this:
"I did not dismiss the concerns.
I did, however, note that they are almost invariably expressed by people who make it abundantly clear that they are not genuine concerns, given their complete indifference to related problems, and who if any attempt had in fact been made to address a democratic deficit at an EU level would have been the very first to wet themselves in outrage at the purported assembly of a European superstate.
........ The limitation comes from the bad faith. If any attempt had been made by those objectives to suggest improvements rather than demolition of the entire structure, I'd have had more sympathy."
This is a fair point. It is a point which is covered in some depth and detail in Larry Siedentop's book - Democracy in Europe - written when the proposed EU Constitution was being prepared.
It seems to me that there were three options to "cure" the democratic deficit: (1) make the EU a unitary state with the EU Parliament as the effective legislature for that state; (2) having a proper Federal structure - similar to the US model; or (3) continue keeping the nation states as the primary political unit with the EU being a mechanism for effective collaboration between member states.
The real issue has been that Britain has wanted (3) whereas other states and the EU Commission itself have wanted either (1) or (2) or an unhappy mishmash of the two, sometimes with a bit of (3) added in. That has proved an untenable fudge.
Personally, I have my doubts about whether you can effectively create a (1) by fiat from above let alone trying to create political structures through the back door of economics. But while I'm prepared to accept that some want the destruction of the EU and that this shows an element of bad faith, you should accept that some of those who say that they don't want (1) or don't think it right for Britain do so not because they want to destroy the EU but because they feel that (3) is a better way to go for all the countries concerned, not least because an effective and socially cohesive demos is more likely to succeed in a relatively smaller area, such as in a nation state rather than in something as large as a Continent.
If the EU wanted a Continental model, it had one in the US. But what has been striking about the EU's political development is how determinedly it has turned its back on learning anything from the US model.
"Come clean? You don't think the preamble to the Treaty of Rome gives it away?"
How many voters have read the Treaty of Rome?
How many times was this fact emphasised in 1975?
I'd guess the first was restricted to politicians and political nerds, the second was close to zero (I remember it well).
A bit like having a birthday party without the birthday boy... Or a wedding without the bride !
And there were many countries that did not have coherent demos when they were formed, and it only developed over time. I think the US would be one example of that, as was the United Kingdom itself.
Many states without coherent demos lasted some time before breaking up: Yugoslavia or the Austro-Hungarian Empire for example.
labour partyunite union...https://order-order.com/2017/03/24/pro-len-unite-insider-sending-anti-semitic-tweets-to-gerard-coyne/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I2jUYryRYII
The National Front (FN) leader called for closer French-Russian ties at a meeting in Russia's lower house of parliament, the Duma.
It is just possible, for example, that some UKIPers are very anti-immigration from the countries highlighted so relentlessly by the Leave side during the campaign. Now they realise that remaining in the EU does not mean a surge of migrants from Turkey and the Middle East.
However, I believe that this change in the landscape in some areas could contribute to Theresa May’s caution on a GE this year. In the first place she has always said a GE before 2020 is ruled out but looking at the landscape now the conservatives would make gains across England, Wales and a small number in Scotland but there is a big risk that in London and the South West a good number of seats could return to the Lib Dems.
She is about to commence the most complex negotiations we have ever had and I believe her small majority of 17 will keep party discipline better than a larger majority, and in any case she can count on an extra 9 votes from the DUP and UKIP in most circumstances. Of course outside influences could change matters, including the problem with the battle bus expenses, but it is good politics just now to show a steady hand at the tiller.
As we progress over the next two years the arguments will change and those who want to remain in the EU will need to think about making a case for re-joining the EU which to all intents and purposes is unlikely for at least a decade if not longer.
Juncker’s ramblings are irrelevant as he will soon be taken out of the equation as the negotiations revert to National Leaders and the interests of their own economies. Does anyone seriously think that TM will even consider dealing with Juncker’s, indeed he should have gone long ago as he is very much a reason for where we are today.
There have been some good noises coming from Barnier and others that a deal will happen and my firm belief is that TM will strike a deal that satisfies most but not the extreme Brexiteers.
It is interesting that the EU is seeking information from the UK re the laptop ban as they do not have the intelligence data. The US and UK have the best intelligence in the World and it is informative how much the EU seem to want to share the information and this must be part of our negotiations
Burly body-building enthusiast Khalid Masood, 52, was born in Dartford in Kent on Christmas Day 1964. His mother Janet Ajao gave birth when she was just 17 years old and brought him up as Adrian Russell Ajao.
I never saw it as a formal PB meet, just a gathering for those who read the blog. Official PB Meets invariably get their own thread. So banning is a considerable over-reaction in my opinion. In a couple of years time - when readers actually meet to celebrate LEAVING - I'd suggest any such gathering will have to be arranged under a front organisation: perhaps a meeting of "Those Who Own a Comb" *wink*..... pulling said comb out of your top pocket half an inch will be sufficient to gain admittance.....
Clue: They're socialists. They'll fuck up your country all the faster the more power you give 'em.
He is no doing an 8 stretch.
Described by police as a 'frenzied attack'
http://presicote.factoviz.com/index/more/id/qoo_lew_1
All other crimes not capital committed by any person or persons in the fleet, which are not mentioned in this act, or for which no punishment is hereby directed to be inflicted, shall be punished by the laws and customs in such cases used at sea.
From the stuff I read you seem to be describing England and the Tories, apart from substituting socialists with right wing dictators.
One should also add those who used to support UKIP and now no longer do.
The EU will give you a vote if you scream loudly enough - but not until they decide. Otherwise you can't weigh the alternatives. Which is fair.
Meanwhile Westminster should get busy sorting the UK out - keep up the current shite state of things and the UK is going to crumble.
https://twitter.com/callum_mccaig/status/842378134632710144
https://www.justgiving.com/crowdfunding/Keith-palmer
Knock yourselves out with that one, lawyers....
The EU is rather de haut en bas in its political approach. The US is not. I prefer the latter and I think the EU would have done better if over the last 60 years it had put the people first rather than give - on occasion - the impression that it sees the people as a tiresome nuisance to be herded, chivvied and on occasion deceived into doing what the politicians think best for them, regardless of their own wishes.
And that Sturgeon was transparently playing silly buggers by wanting one in the middle of the negotiations for the UK to leave the EU?
You have form from the previous thread for not being able to put fairly straightforward statistics into their proper context. Perhaps the words "logical" in your name and "facts" in your picture thingy are a bit over-optimistic?
https://mobile.twitter.com/IpsosMORI/status/845243597385580544
It's much better written than the EU constitution. But fine words don't necessarily produce fine results.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/24/ukips-biggest-donor-david-camerons-former-strategist-plot-oust/
*isn't at all.
If there are fewer people identifying themselves as UKIP (and there are) then it makes sense that there would be fewer supporting their main policy - doesn't it?
The EU is of course unique but it should learn and should have learned from relevant parallels, while developing its own course too.
https://mobile.twitter.com/patrick_kidd/status/845214309642878976
The fact that UKIP often seems unclear, or changing, on its policies probably facilitates this.
Not that the scale of punishments were necessarily set because of the kindness of their Lordship's hearts but because the navy needed every man it could get its hands on and needed them working as effective teams. You can't flog a man to fight for you, but you can have a system of service justice that included flogging that was accepted by the whole crew. As with the case of midshipmen our view of Naval Justice has been much clouded by Victorian sentimentality.
Which brings me back to the the proper punishment for offences. I have over the years met several PB denizens for drinkies and sometimes a meal. Indeed I am planning to do so again in May. It never occurred to me that I should send Mr. Smithson an email informing him of the fact. Perhaps I too should be banned.
Wow.
Fantastic evening last night really enjoyed meeting all of you, finally.
Great nibbles I though the wagyu steak was done to perfection and whoever thought of the Petrus '61 was inspired.
Hope to do it all again soon.
The US is one such model. It is probably one of the most successful models for a political structure encompassing a Continent in the Western world and it is, IMO, pretty bloody silly and arrogant of people like Giscard d'Estaing to loftily disdain the idea of learning anything from the US model. The EU has French political structure in its DNA and, frankly, French political structures have hardly been a success over the years, let alone over the two centuries since the US was founded.
The US model does not need to be copied in toto. But the reason the EU Constitution got into such a mess - remember, it was rejected by both the Dutch and the French - should perhaps have given the EU Poo-Bahs pause for some serious thought and reflection on these topics.
There wasn't - or not enough - and that is one reason why, 60 years after it was founded - its second largest member has decided to leave. Whatever the many successes of the EU over those 60 years, this is one very very significant failure and it would be good for the rest of the EU and its member states if someone somewhere in that organization had a bit of self-reflection on why that happened and what it might mean for them and how they are conducting themselves.
Frankly, however, I think it is a stupid basis on which to judge the US constitution. Could any document have defused such a fundamental difference? Highly unlikely.