Brexit Poll 1/2/16

[Mario149]

Thought I'd put this up in case we don't have a poll for it yet. Can do more in the future to see if people change their minds as a result of DC's negotiations and for against/campaigning etc

[Mario149]

PH was down over lunch, thought this poll may have crashed it

[Mario149]

Intersting to note that so far the longer the poll is up, the Leave %tage is dropping (60% right now, down from 75% or so a couple of hours ago). The pro-Leave camp seem to check NP&E for new threads more often than the Stay camp!

[Mario149]

v8250 said:

Instead we see large regional conclaves of Pakistan, of Syria, of Muslim conclaves where the migrants want all the benefits of the UK but have no intent of becoming British...or French, or Swedish, or German.

These people can be excluded from the UK already, EU can't force us to take any of them, so how would leaving help this particular problem?

[Mario149]

Digga said:

Mario149 said:

These people can be excluded from the UK already, EU can't force us to take any of them, so how would leaving help this particular problem?

The EU's borders are demonstrably leaky. Once they are into any of these laxly policed EU nations, they seem perfectly at liberty to go wherever they please, which generally seems to mean the UK, Sweden and Germany for various reasons.

Okay, but if they get to France, they can still camp at the Calais border like they do now and try and get in whether we're in the EU or not

[Mario149]

Esseesse said:

They can if they make these people 'European' legally.

Do we have numbers for how many have been made European?

[Mario149]

s2art said:

Delusional. Its NATO not the EEC/EU that has ensured peace in Europe.

Point of order: To be fair, NATO protected Europe from the soviet threat, but in terms of stopping European countries having a pop at each other, or anyone having a pop at anyone of that matter, trade is the best way to prevent war. If you and your neighbour are making a st tonne of money trading, you're not going to start shooting at each other l normally. So if the EU can be shown to have have strengthened trade between euro countries that have historically been trying to invade each other for the last few hundred years, then it's helped ensure peace.

Whether Germany have as a result managed to "conquer" Europe without firing a shot now is of course a different debate

[Mario149]

PRTVR said:

Mario149 said:

s2art said:

Delusional. Its NATO not the EEC/EU that has ensured peace in Europe.

Point of order: To be fair, NATO protected Europe from the soviet threat, but in terms of stopping European countries having a pop at each other, or anyone having a pop at anyone of that matter, trade is the best way to prevent war. If you and your neighbour are making a st tonne of money trading, you're not going to start shooting at each other l normally. So if the EU can be shown to have have strengthened trade between euro countries that have historically been trying to invade each other for the last few hundred years, then it's helped ensure peace.

Whether Germany have as a result managed to "conquer" Europe without firing a shot now is of course a different debate

at the last bit.

But I have to disagree about the first, do you not think working militarily together against a common enemy reduced the chance of war? Along with knowledge of the capabilities of your partners who had large troop numbers stationed on your soil, a Large stick is an effective deterrent.

I think NATO helped as well, but the Sov threat basically disappeared in 1990 and it's only in the last year or so we've had a bolshy Russia near Europe again. Now, I'm not saying that without the EU we'd have had ze Chermans bulldozing, Paris-bound, over the Rhine, but given Europe's history of almost constant significant-to-massive warfare amongst parts of itself for the last 200 years, the last quarter of a century of EU members not shooting at each other is pretty good I think. To the point where nowadays I don't think any of us could conceive of member states initiating an armed conflict with each other, which was certainly not the case in the relatively recent past, which in a sense shows how well the EU has worked on that front and shows an oft ignored intangible benefit of the EU, but unfortunately something we'll never be able to prove.

Now, I'm also not saying that if the UK leaves everyone will start having a pop at each other, so this isn't really a Brexit consideration unless you believe Brexit would cause the EU to collapse - but if the EU continues running for another 50 years, even if in a flawed way like now, and peace is kept, it will have probably in of itself prevented 1 or more armed conflicts if history is anything to go by. Now that I think is admirable. So I can see why there are calls for integration to be maintained/strengthened and membership expanded. If "pulling in" a new country means that you're effectively guaranteeing it won't go to war with any other member country or a close neighbour, and you keep expanding....well you can see where it's going. Pie in the sky? Maybe, but what if it isn't?

And that's coming from someone who is definitely not a happy clappy world peace type!

Edited by Mario149 on Friday 5th February 09:44

[Mario149]

Scuffers said:

so, how do you figure the Crimea and Ukrainian situations?

do you not think that these were the direct result of EU stirring and expansionism?

I think they're a result of Russian nationalism and so would most educated Russians who aren't part of their corrupt power system. In no possible way shape or form is the EU a military threat to Russia. To suggest that those actions are a result of the EU is frankly being an apologist for Russia which to all intents and purposes is a fascist dictatorship.

[Mario149]

PRTVR said:

Mario149 said:

Scuffers said:

so, how do you figure the Crimea and Ukrainian situations?

do you not think that these were the direct result of EU stirring and expansionism?

I think they're a result of Russian nationalism and so would most educated Russians who aren't part of their corrupt power system. In no possible way shape or form is the EU a military threat to Russia. To suggest that those actions are a result of the EU is frankly being an apologist for Russia which to all intents and purposes is a fascist dictatorship.

I don't think anybody has any illusions about Russia, but to ignore their loss of their buffer states and ongoing encroachment of their remaining sphere of influence and not think they will feel threatened is naive, the EU by political has nurtured the expansion, it appears to want to keep on expanding, as any empire does, what would we feel if states started to switch to Russian control? What if west Germany had switched to the Russians, would the west have felt threatened?

Careful there, you can use that sort of logic to justify half of the middle east / Islamic problems now. Russia didn't lose a buffer state, the EU didn't take Ukraine by force. The old corrupt gov there was busy pedaling East when the majority of people clearly wanted to go West. When the citizens complained the gov didn't like this and started shooting them thereby creating a popular revolution. Rather than Russia trying to persuade the people and new lot in charge that they were a better choice, they instead annexed 10% of the country by invading with anonymous special forces, then fomented a civil war in the next nearest part of the country they could get to. Charming.

[Mario149]

sealtt said:

Leaving the EU is a huge risk event - which is to say, it has the potential to create a LOT of change, which can be positive but can also be very damaging. If most people are honest, and ignore the sensationalised news stories for a moment, this country is actually a pretty decent place to live. Why risk changing that? And if you really hate it so much, rather than voting to leave, you could make use of the open borders and move down to Spain for a different pace of life and a nice tan.

Edited by sealtt on Sunday 21st February 09:32

This^^, a lot. Honestly, listening to people in here sometimes makes you think everything must be falling apart around us. I look out the window and half expect to see decaying buildings, German secret police patrolling, signs printed in French and English, fat Greeks bullying old ladies for their money and middle eastern looking vagrants camping on every street corner with eleventy eight grubby children in tow.

Life is good, business is good when I look outside nothing is imploding anywhere. I'm happy. Must be horrible to spend everyday thinking that everything is a bit crap, you have no control over it and there's a whole load of boogy men across the water who are doing their level best to shaft you.

Frankly, I think we'll prob do all right in or out. I'm still erring on the side of In as I like the idea of a united Europe. And if the UK somehow does does go tits up, at least if we've stayed In I know I can cash in and foxtrot oscar with my family to somewhere sunny on the Mediterranean to live a simpler, cheaper (and arguably better, we're all slaves to a system) life without having to sort a visa

Edited by Mario149 on Sunday 21st February 10:16

[Mario149]

NoNeed said:

It isn't unknown at all, indeed we have only been a part of it as a political union for 20 years and we did very well before that.

Which would be a good argument if it was possible to jump in a time machine and reset things. "It was fine quite a while ago so it'll be fine in the future" is not a valid argument. Things change.

[Mario149]

NoNeed said:

I think Europe could be brilliant if we all had the same rules to follow, a common welfare system, common housing policy a common business stratagy as this would remove the need for mass migration and ensure we all play by the same rules, but other nations completely ignore or use clever tricks to circumvent EU rules while we are stupid enough to follow.

Your preaching to someone who thinks that a federal Europe is a good idea, so I agree with you. Ref the rest of your post, we're in already and know what we've got good and bad, so it's up to you to persuade us to leave, not the other way round

[Mario149]

NoNeed said:

Yes and 70+% of the rules that decide that change are coming from people we don't even know let alone voted for.


The EU as it is is stupid, I would like a better one but unfortunately that isn't on offer.

It is on offer, it's a federal system. The irony is that most people don't want that either. If we stayed in, and pushed wholeheartedly for a federal system, we would have the proper Europe. Many people want a proper Europe, without having a proper Europe.

[Mario149]

NoNeed said:

And what held us back while china flew ahead? EU rules? Maybe the fact that we can't have our own trade deals anymore?

Er, no.

[Mario149]

NoNeed said:

Mario149 said:

Er, no.

What then?

Seriously? Shed loads of cheap labour meaning they could outcompete almost everybody else.

[Mario149]

NoNeed said:

Mario149 said:

It is on offer, it's a federal system. The irony is that most people don't want that either. If we stayed in, and pushed wholeheartedly for a federal system, we would have the proper Europe. Many people want a proper Europe, without having a proper Europe.

I don't see a proper federal europe on offer unless my definition of federal is wrong, which may well be the case.

I want a europe where we all have the same rules and goals, where there are not any opt outs or vetos nor rukes and policies that favour one over another.

I just don't like the EU Ibsee at the moment where weaker nations are bullied by stronger ones.

Sorry, to clarify, when I said on offer I mean that is what we could try to make the EU become, not that it was actually on offer now. A federal Europe is the ultimate goal for the EU. But until we set up a model something like in the USA and each country (state) gets on board with becoming fully part of a bigger entity more important than them we'll always be stuck in an awkward half way house.

[Mario149]

Anyone else noticed that the poll initially showed ~70% voting to leave for the first week it was up but is now showing ~50%

[Mario149]

turbobloke said:

Mario149 said:

Anyone else noticed that the poll initially showed ~70% voting to leave for the first week it was up but is now showing ~50%

Yes it was certainly well above 50% though if we add in 'leaning towards leave' it's still over 70%.

Adding the "leaners" I think it's gone from about ~80% after a week to 72%. Leave Leaners have increased a bit it seems and Leave Absolutes have dropped a bit more

[Mario149]

gottans said:

What exactly does leave mean? Does it mean leave the EU and be part of the EEA (European Economic Area) or be a completely separate country like the US or India, etc.

No-one knows yet....