If we vote for Brexit what happens

michaels

MataNui wrote: »

BOBQ, 1975 was not a vote on the EU. It was a vote on something entirely different from what the EU is now.

We dont get a say. When was the last time a UK party spelt out its plans for the EU in its manifesto? Did John Major campaign on the basis that if elected he would sign the maastricht treaty? Did Tony Blair get elected on the basis he would have our rebate cut? We elect our governments in total isolation and ignorance to what they will do in the EU. That isnt the EUs fault but it is part of the problem.

You seem to be suggesting that the fact our elected representatives (who never make their position on the EU known BEFORE we elect them) deciding on ratifying EU treaties is somehow better than the system they have in place in other member states where the people decide directly. Its NOT the same. Same goes for new members. Its NOT the same. Any elected UK government will rubber stamp the next set of new members because its what the EU wants. Are you suggesting that the UK people would do the same? If there is a high likelihood that the people and the government differ on something of such importance then yes. 100 million is a bloody good use of tax payers money.

I seem to remember Labour promised a vote if there were a Lisbon Treaty so they sensibly renamed it as an accord.....

CLAPTON

Moby wrote: »

I see you are still trolling away with your distorted view of reality. As I've said to you many times......... repeating the same nonsense time and time again ad nauseum kills any discusion full stop!

Back to the topic in hand...........I reckon the Brexiteers have lost the economic debate and their one 'get out' is project fear over immigration. They will lose that as well because it is a negative message driven by the dog whistle politics of under the surface bigotry......those two Guardian links show this. Drawing parallels between the European Union project and the policies of Hitler is beyond the pale.....anyone who was sensible would see that and throwning up flak about Corbyn etc is the usual diversion you employ when you are cornered Clapton. You don't know the meaning of debate....to you this is all a virtual discussion....probably providing you with some meaning in your life. You need to get out more mate;)
By the way in case you didn't know policies are made by .....that's right..... people! You know this very well because you bang on about people you have a problem with don't you! So stop being a hypocrite.

totally incomprehensible ramblings

but I can fully understand and sympathise that you find it impossible to defend the current pretty revolting leadership of the Labour party.

michaels

Filo25 wrote: »

Good set of polls for the Remain camp in the last couple of days, although obviously helped hugely by a couple of phone polls coming out, which for reasons still not fully understood are far more favourable to Remain than Online, although even Yougov's online poll looks decentish for the Remain camp.

https://ig.ft.com/sites/brexit-polling/

Since the start of May I see 6 polls, 4 of which show Leave in the lead with possibly the gap opening up in the big ICM regualr poll.

However I am not sure what either camp would like to see in the polls - is it momentum or is having a lead a bad thing as it might lead to voter complacency or a good thing as it might demoralise the opposition?

I wonder if we could end of with the UK equivalent of hanging chads?!

Filo25

michaels wrote: »

https://ig.ft.com/sites/brexit-polling/

Since the start of May I see 6 polls, 4 of which show Leave in the lead with possibly the gap opening up in the big ICM regualr poll.

However I am not sure what either camp would like to see in the polls - is it momentum or is having a lead a bad thing as it might lead to voter complacency or a good thing as it might demoralise the opposition?

I wonder if we could end of with the UK equivalent of hanging chads?!

I think complacency is more of an issue for the Remain vote than the Brexit one, the Brexit vote appears to be the more motivated group to vote, plus it polls more strongly with older voters who are generally much more keen to vote than younger ones are anyway.

The turnout numbers will be interesting on this one, on the face of it there is an expectation that low turnout will favour Brexit, so I'm sure that is something that people will be keeping an eye on as the day of the referendum goes on.

Not sure if the 3 polls in questions are on there (at least one isn't as it only shows one Phone poll since the start of May)

Yougov (online) Remain 44 Leave 40
ORB- Telegraph (phone) Remain 55 Leave 40
Ipsos Mori - Standard (phone) Remain 55 Leave 37

Rinoa

Generali wrote: »

I follow this bloke quite closely:

http://ukpollingreport.co.uk

and he is fascinating (for me) on polling. It's not just about phone and online, it's about the different methodologies each company uses. Most companies are yet to update their polling methods fully to reflect the lessons learned from the last General Election.

Anyhoo, this post contains some parallel polling, polling using phones and interwebs:

http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/9687

I can't remember off-hand which way round it was but Anthony Wells (and michaels) came to the understanding that the polling that favoured Remain was more likely to be right.

The difference between online and phone polling is the "Mrs Doyle question" in an phone poll. On the interwebs if you tick 'Don't Know' or some such they leave you alone, on the phone if you say 'don't know' then they say, "Oh go on, [STRIKE]have a cup of tea[/STRIKE] you must know"

After the 2015 GE where the tories won a majority, there was considerable speculation people wouldn't admit in polls they supported the 'nasty' party. But they certainly voted tory in the polling booth.

With the constant bombardment from the governments 'project fear' campaign, where brexit is supposed to cost every family £4.600, factories will close, jobs will be lost and even war in europe is possible, voters will understandably shy away from admitting they favour brexit in a phone poll, whereas online with no human interaction, maybe they are happy to reveal their true intentions.

BobQ

MataNui wrote: »

BOBQ, 1975 was not a vote on the EU. It was a vote on something entirely different from what the EU is now.

Nothing can be a vote on what we have today apart from a vote today. It may be different in 2016 to 1975 but it is still the same institution and whether you like it or not there was a vote in 1975.

We dont get a say. When was the last time a UK party spelt out its plans for the EU in its manifesto?

Try reading the manifestos and you will find a policy. UKIP has consistently advocated Leaving and their manifestos have been clear, as were those of the NF, ENP, BNP in the past. You had the opportunity to vote for them or not. The main parties always discuss their EU policies.

We elect our governments in total isolation and ignorance to what they will do in the EU. That isnt the EUs fault but it is part of the problem.

I agree but you have to allow for the fact that UK has never favoured referendums as a way of deciding policies. We have always relied on elected Governments to make such decisions.

You seem to be suggesting that the fact our elected representatives (who never make their position on the EU known BEFORE we elect them) deciding on ratifying EU treaties is somehow better than the system they have in place in other member states where the people decide directly.

No what I was saying is that this was the way the UK did it until the Referendum on the voting system, not that it was better. Some countries have referendums some do not. Thatcher set out the 1987 Government's policy on the EU and Major approved the signing of the Maastrict Treaty.

If you are asking what I think however, I do not like referendums because they are so easily manipulated. I would rather people who are elected make the decision based on fact rather than have people vote on issues that many do not understand based on soundbites that pass for debate in the modern era.

Its NOT the same. Same goes for new members. Its NOT the same.

Never said it was the same only that in the past that is the way we have done it. This time (for whatever reasons) parties made promises at the last election to have a referendum and that has been honoured.

Any elected UK government will rubber stamp the next set of new members because its what the EU wants. Are you suggesting that the UK people would do the same? If there is a high likelihood that the people and the government differ on something of such importance then yes. 100 million is a bloody good use of tax payers money.

What is your evidence that rubber stamping happens?

I never said the UK would rubber stamp anything.

I do not mind spending 100m on it, but where do you stop? Should we have a referendum on every vote our Government makes in the Council of Ministers? Or at the UN? What are you expecting?

michaels wrote: »

I seem to remember Labour promised a vote if there were a Lisbon Treaty so they sensibly renamed it as an accord.....

People say he said this by taking his words out of context. What he actually said was on the assumption that it lead to constitutional change. He said: "No. If it's not a constitutional treaty, so that it alters the basic relationship between Europe and the member states, then there isn't the same case for a referendum."

And it was not, so he didn't call one. But I accept that if people want a referendum on every decision a Government makes they should have one.

BobQ

Rinoa wrote: »

With the constant bombardment from the governments 'project fear' campaign, where brexit is supposed to cost every family £4.600, factories will close, jobs will be lost and even war in europe is possible, voters will understandably shy away from admitting they favour brexit in a phone poll, whereas online with no human interaction, maybe they are happy to reveal their true intentions.

A good explanation of why decisions like this are too important to be left to the manipulations of those with the most money, most air time, most volunteers whatever.

gfplux

I posted this in another thread but it is equally relevant here.
A poster suggested the EU was shutting up so as not to rock the boat.
At the beginning of the EU with memory's so clear of the 2nd World war Propaganda had a very, very bad name, so I wrote...

The EU has "suffered" since it began because it has almost no Public Relations as such. The thoughts of a "Ministry for Information" or any propaganda has hobbled any attempts to spin the news coming out of "Brussels"
That has been left entirely to individual Governments. In the case of Britain we have often had Ministers who were not entirely behind any positive messages. In fact many have been or are hostile to any positive reinforcement.
Present company excepted over the last 50 years of marketing many can not see or understand any message unless packaged by a slick PR department.

The EU does not have to shut up as it never had a polished voice "on message" Only individual members speaking with their own Agenda.

CLAPTON

gfplux wrote: »

I posted this in another thread but it is equally relevant here.
A poster suggested the EU was shutting up so as not to rock the boat.
At the beginning of the EU with memory's so clear of the 2nd World war Propaganda had a very, very bad name, so I wrote...

The EU has "suffered" since it began because it has almost no Public Relations as such. The thoughts of a "Ministry for Information" or any propaganda has hobbled any attempts to spin the news coming out of "Brussels"
That has been left entirely to individual Governments. In the case of Britain we have often had Ministers who were not entirely behind any positive messages. In fact many have been or are hostile to any positive reinforcement.
Present company excepted over the last 50 years of marketing many can not see or understand any message unless packaged by a slick PR department.

The EU does not have to shut up as it never had a polished voice "on message" Only individual members speaking with their own Agenda.

Another load of absolute made-up nonsense by a EU fanatic.
Why not do some research into the EU propaganda budget and tell the truth. Not that I am suggesting that you are being untruthful as such : its simply fanatics and acolytes can't distinguish between between right and wrong.
Of course it could be that the EU message has been so successfully slickly packaged that, in your case, that you fail to see it for what it is.

mayonnaise

Brexit fears are putting off investors

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/05/19/brexit-fears-are-putting-off-investors-says-hargreaves-lansdown/

The sluggish results follow a bearish survey of fund managers this week that showed a major exodus from UK stocks ahead of the Brexit referendum.

I'm sure it will take just a few minutes for the usual suspect to chime in, telling us this is good news. Less investment into the UK economy, less jobs, quieter streets, less pollution.