Brexit Deal

[allandwf]

I think that people forget that not all voters listen to or pay any attention to what "facts" they are told. They make up their minds or will have already made up their minds based on previous voting history , call it prejudice or whatever, their upbringing, etc etc, etc. I know many that voted ,for what was a complete unknown, purely on the basis that they had become disillusioned with the same old guard and in this case better (possibly,) the devil you don't know. You could have told them any facts prior to the referendum and they would still have voted the same way, so I don't think that the argument about false facts really holds much weight.
The main problem was giving the population the vote in the first place, but they were given it, and they voted. That should really have been it.

 

[JonW]

I think that people forget that not all voters listen to or pay any attention to what "facts" they are told. They make up their minds or will have already made up their minds based on previous voting history , call it prejudice or whatever, their upbringing, etc etc, etc. I know many that voted ,for what was a complete unknown, purely on the basis that they had become disillusioned with the same old guard and in this case better (possibly,) the devil you don't know. You could have told them any facts prior to the referendum and they would still have voted the same way, so I don't think that the argument about false facts really holds much weight.
The main problem was giving the population the vote in the first place, but they were given it, and they voted. That should really have been it.

I get this, and recognise it may well be true.

However, given the reality is so different from what was presented, and given the fact that it’s ripping the country apart, why wouldn’t the sensible thing be to put it back to a 2nd vote.

This could give a compelling majority, and a clear mandate, to whoever is in charge to make the will of the people happen. It could also provide a genuine negotiating lever with the EU.

 

[Wattie]

Actually it does...

Much more extreme would be taking a decision based on one set of (false) facts, and ignoring the possibility that, given the changes in facts and the realisation that what had had been promised was not deliverable, that the majority view might be different.

I find it hilarious (and utterly ridiculous) that the idea of a second vote, based on the reality of what is on offer, is somehow undemocratic, or extreme...

Are these the same false facts that no-one disputed 3 years ago after the result and Mp’s vowed to uphold and implement.
What if everyone voting leave didn’t care about the facts and just voted emotionally to leave the Eu , cos they don’t like what’s its become or its future ambition?

So 17.4 million Eu dislikers.....all emotional voters.

What would be your excuse your for not leaving under those factless circumstances?

Further, last weeks Eu elections were held with May as PM. Voters knew that. Fact, indeed it complies 100% with your "given the changes in facts and the realisation that what had had been promised was not deliverable, that the majority view might be different"

She has now resigned (post election) so this fact may improve the Tory chances of a greater share of the vote.

Will we re run it again Jon?

 

[Needamaser]

.............put it back to a 2nd vote.

This could give a compelling majority, and a clear mandate, to whoever is in charge to make the will of the people happen

And if there is a narrow majority again one way or another then what? And at what point is it a decisive vote? This could go on for ever. Much like this thread. ;-)

 

[Wattie]

And if there is a narrow majority again one way or another then what? And at what point is it a decisive vote? This could go on for ever. Much like this thread. ;-)

I'm afraid you haven't quite understand the rules of this game Needamaser.

A narrow win for "Remain" next time would see them put an end to Brexit once and for all, dusted.- isn't that correct Remainers?

They are playing by a different rulebook. Democracy relies on losers respecting a majority vote. That hasn’t happened in this country on this issue- yet.

 

[Wattie]

Nighty night try not to get too burnt in the sun now make sure you’ve got your factor 200 my principled Aussi expat now where’s the ignore button as we don’t seem to be learning anything new here

Thank you for concerns re my health Masercoupe.

It’s winter here at the moment, in fact, today i saw the first migrating Humpback whale from the balcony- quite a site when they breach. Winter here means only a factor 50 is required.

Here’s a learning point.
Many are misinformed that the Gold Coast doesn’t get ice in winter but you can clearly see it in the image below.

G&T, lots of ice. Cheers.

 

[Wattie]

Adolf was a one trick pony with similar beliefs to Farage, the devil plays the best tunes and Wattie, surely you're more intelligent to see through his lies.

Remainers must be in floods of TEARS now.

“Tory Extremist And Remainer Stewart” reaches out.

Leadership hopeful Rory Stewart reaches out to Farage on Brexit

TORY leadership hopeful Rory Stewart has reached out to Nigel Farage to work together on Brexit. The International Development Secretary, who wants to replace Theresa May as PM, said he’s wil…

www.thesun.co.uk

I must be smoking opium cos you really can’t make this stuff up!

 

[JonW]

Are these the same false facts that no-one disputed 3 years ago after the result and Mp’s vowed to uphold and implement.
What if everyone voting leave didn’t care about the facts and just voted emotionally to leave the Eu , cos they don’t like what’s its become or its future ambition?

So 17.4 million Eu dislikers.....all emotional voters.

What would be your excuse your for not leaving under those factless circumstances?

Further, last weeks Eu elections were held with May as PM. Voters knew that. Fact, indeed it complies 100% with your "given the changes in facts and the realisation that what had had been promised was not deliverable, that the majority view might be different"

She has now resigned (post election) so this fact may improve the Tory chances of a greater share of the vote.

Will we re run it again Jon?

And if there is a narrow majority again one way or another then what? And at what point is it a decisive vote? This could go on for ever. Much like this thread. ;-)

I'm afraid you haven't quite understand the rules of this game Needamaser.

A narrow win for "Remain" next time would see them put an end to Brexit once and for all, dusted.- isn't that correct Remainers?

They are playing by a different rulebook. Democracy relies on losers respecting a majority vote. That hasn’t happened in this country on this issue- yet.

Some good questions in here, but also some incorrect assumptions being made.

I suspect it’s a waste of my time to respond, but:

1. To suggest no-one disputed the facts three years ago is historical blindness. It’s been known and stated, ad nauseam, that a lot of the information presented, from both sides, was not true.
2. If people choose to vote based on emotion, that’s fine, and I respect their right to do so. What I don’t like is people who tried to make a decision based on the facts being lied to and now feeling like they were misled.
3. If another referendum was held, with better control of the information presented, and clear options that were not as blunt as ‘stay’ or ‘leave’, then I think most people would accept the outcome as being whatever it was. Even if it was a narrow margin.
4. I also think a referendum (or an election) may be the only way that Parliament will ever grow a set of balls and actually make a decision
5. To suggest the European elections last week was another referendum is crazy. They were a chance to elect people to be a member of the European Parliament. I know lots of people who didn’t vote at all (because they view it as a meaningless role), and lots of people who voted tactically to demonstrate their protest vote.
6. Also, let’s not forget that more people voted in favour of a party that supports a 2nd referendum than people who voted for Farage or a no-deal Brexit…

 

[Wattie]

Some good questions in here, but also some incorrect assumptions being made.

I suspect it’s a waste of my time to respond, but:

1. To suggest no-one disputed the facts three years ago is historical blindness. It’s been known and stated, ad nauseam, that a lot of the information presented, from both sides, was not true.
2. If people choose to vote based on emotion, that’s fine, and I respect their right to do so. What I don’t like is people who tried to make a decision based on the facts being lied to and now feeling like they were misled.
3. If another referendum was held, with better control of the information presented, and clear options that were not as blunt as ‘stay’ or ‘leave’, then I think most people would accept the outcome as being whatever it was. Even if it was a narrow margin.
4. I also think a referendum (or an election) may be the only way that Parliament will ever grow a set of balls and actually make a decision
5. To suggest the European elections last week was another referendum is crazy. They were a chance to elect people to be a member of the European Parliament. I know lots of people who didn’t vote at all (because they view it as a meaningless role), and lots of people who voted tactically to demonstrate their protest vote.
6. Also, let’s not forget that more people voted in favour of a party that supports a 2nd referendum than people who voted for Farage or a no-deal Brexit…

Never a waste of time JW. Respect your views.

1. Ok, but the result was accepted and used as manifestos to be implemented by those elected to do so. Only 1 Tory MP, Ken Clarke did not vote for A50.
2.By your own admission this occurred on both sides. Politicians lie all the time. This is not new.
3. Never going to happen now, Too much Ill feeling and emotion involved- plus the emperor has no clothes, leavers have seen the lengths politicians have gone to, to betray them.
4.That depends upon the referendum. I maintain any secondary vote should be , no deal, any deal on the table to leave. Respects the first result.
You’ll argue that remain should be there too but to me that betrays the first result and democracy especially given a remainer PM fecked it all up.

1. Fair enough but I was suggesting that the material facts had changed in response to your argument the material facts had changed in the first referendum......leading to a re vote.
2. Well I’d argue

A. That’s an irrelevant point given we’ve triggered leave and it was a promised that it would be implemented, no deal etc.
B. Most people couldn’t decide, it seems, how they want to have a second referendum as their vote was split among about 6 parties - all promising different things. Remainers not knowing quite how they’d like to remain? Fully out, in/out?
Leavers predominantly supported the Brexit party......no such reservation there. No deal is just fine.

 

[JonW]

Never a waste of time JW. Respect your views.

1. Ok, but the result was accepted and used as manifestos to be implemented by those elected to do so. Only 1 Tory MP, Ken Clarke did not vote for A50.
2.By your own admission this occurred on both sides. Politicians lie all the time. This is not new.
3. Never going to happen now, Too much Ill feeling and emotion involved- plus the emperor has no clothes, leavers have seen the lengths politicians have gone to, to betray them.
4.That depends upon the referendum. I maintain any secondary vote should be , no deal, any deal on the table to leave. Respects the first result.
You’ll argue that remain should be there too but to me that betrays the first result and democracy especially given a remainer PM fecked it all up.

1. Fair enough but I was suggesting that the material facts had changed in response to your argument the material facts had changed in the first referendum......leading to a re vote.
2. Well I’d argue

A. That’s an irrelevant point given we’ve triggered leave and it was a promised that it would be implemented, no deal etc.
B. Most people couldn’t decide, it seems, how they want to have a second referendum as their vote was split among about 6 parties - all promising different things. Remainers not knowing quite how they’d like to remain? Fully out, in/out?
Leavers predominantly supported the Brexit party......no such reservation there. No deal is just fine.

I think it’s a very bold prediction to say a 2nd referendum is never going to happen. It wouldn’t surprise me at all if there was one.

I’d also be absolutely fine with the referendum being based on how do we implement the outcome of the first vote. So, a single transferable vote, and something like;

We have committed to respect the outcome of the first referendum where there was a majority in favour of Britain leaving the EU. To implement this there are options. Please vote for which options you would support, in order of preference:

1. Leave on 31 October with no deal
2. Leave on 31 October with the agreed transition arrangements negotiated by Theresa May
3. Leave on 31 October with a customs union
4. Leave on 31 October with a Norway/Sweden like arrangement
5. some other option...
6. none of the above, revoke Article 50, and start again

 

[Wattie]

I think it’s a very bold prediction to say a 2nd referendum is never going to happen. It wouldn’t surprise me at all if there was one.

I’d also be absolutely fine with the referendum being based on how do we implement the outcome of the first vote. So, a single transferable vote, and something like;

We have committed to respect the outcome of the first referendum where there was a majority in favour of Britain leaving the EU. To implement this there are options. Please vote for which options you would support, in order of preference:

1. 
   
   • Leave on 31 October with no deal
   
   
   • Leave on 31 October with the agreed transition arrangements negotiated by Theresa May
   
   
   • Leave on 31 October with a customs union
   
   
   • Leave on 31 October with a Norway/Sweden like arrangement
   
   
   • some other option...
   
   
   • none of the above, revoke Article 50, and start again

Well I think that’s a good start however the Eu have said that Mays deal is non negotiable.
That therefore leaves
1,2.
(3 and 4 aren’t leaving ) BRINO. I’d rather remain than have a ******** EU bias half way house.
5 the Eu won’t negotiate.
6. Is off the ballot as it totally disrespectful to the first referendum.

 

[lifes2short]

Here’s a learning point.
Many are misinformed that the Gold Coast doesn’t get ice in winter but you can clearly see it in the image below.

G&T, lots of ice. Cheers.View attachment 57304

that's a fantastic view, is that your penthouse apartment

 

[JonW]

Well I think that’s a good start however the Eu have said that Mays deal is non negotiable.
That therefore leaves
1,2.
(3 and 4 aren’t leaving ) BRINO. I’d rather remain than have a **** EU bias half way house.
5 the Eu won’t negotiate.
6. Is off the ballot as it totally disrespectful to the first referendum.

But that is just your view of what leaving means. For many leavers they would be fine with 3 or 4.

I also don’t understand how starting again is disrespectful of the first decision. It doesn’t have to mean we wouldn’t still seek to find a basis on which we would leave, but just means we start afresh, and remove the ticking time bomb... given that it clearly an option that is open to us if we don’t like the others, I think it has to be on the ballot paper.

 

[Wattie]

But that is just your view of what leaving means. For many leavers they would be fine with 3 or 4.

I also don’t understand how starting again is disrespectful of the first decision. It doesn’t have to mean we wouldn’t still seek to find a basis on which we would leave, but just means we start afresh, and remove the ticking time bomb... given that it clearly an option that is open to us if we don’t like the others, I think it has to be on the ballot paper.

Jon,
Not according to the Eu elections...Brexit Party voters are happy for no deal....hence the massive majority over everything else!
Europe Has said it will not start again. That’s fine, neither will we. Only one of our economies can handle it......and it isn’t theirs!
It is ridiculous to think we can only leave if Europe gives us a deal, or indeed a deal as diabolical as Mays.....the Eu than has no incentive to give us a deal as it doesn’t want us or indeed anyone else to EVER leave.

Take your seat, put your seatbelt on, sit back and relax! The A50 flight from Brussels is departing 31/10.

 

[MaserCoupe]

But that is just your view of what leaving means. For many leavers they would be fine with 3 or 4.

I also don’t understand how starting again is disrespectful of the first decision. It doesn’t have to mean we wouldn’t still seek to find a basis on which we would leave, but just means we start afresh, and remove the ticking time bomb... given that it clearly an option that is open to us if we don’t like the others, I think it has to be on the ballot paper.

That’s exactly it, I couldn’t agree with you more. Prior to and leading up to the referendum, the messaging around the customs union and single market access was inconsistent by advocates of both Leave and Remain.

They are on record for saying as much and contradicting each other regarding our access to the single market.

Daniel Hannan (founder of vote leave) himself Stated, "To repeat, absolutely nobody is talking about threatening our place in the single market".

Then again on another occasion he states
"absolutely nobody is suggesting we would give up our position in the free market in Europe".
There are also examples of leave campaigners claiming the UK could adopt a position similar to Norway which is still part of the single market while not being an EU member.

Aaron Banks, a founder of the Leave.EU campaign tweeted in November 2015 “Increasingly the Norway option looks the best for the UK”.

It’s fair to say that these examples are the exception rather than the rule when it comes to claims about the single market, but it makes the case again that the discussion before the referendum wasn’t entirely consistent on the kind of relationship the UK could have with the EU after leaving.

So yes the messaging on both sides was inconsistent hence now the ERG pushing for the only option left to them of a No Deal and Parliament resisting. Nothing un-democratic in revisiting the issues to clear any confusion and or having a final say. Checking the facts and the details, to be absolutely sure before pulling the trigger.

 

[Wattie]

N

That’s exactly it, I couldn’t agree with you more. Prior to and leading up to the referendum, the messaging around the customs union and single market access was inconsistent by advocates of both Leave and Remain.

They are on record for saying as much and contradicting each other regarding our access to the single market.

Daniel Hannan (founder of vote leave) himself Stated, "To repeat, absolutely nobody is talking about threatening our place in the single market".

Then again on another occasion he states
"absolutely nobody is suggesting we would give up our position in the free market in Europe".
There are also examples of leave campaigners claiming the UK could adopt a position similar to Norway which is still part of the single market while not being an EU member.

Aaron Banks, a founder of the Leave.EU campaign tweeted in November 2015 “Increasingly the Norway option looks the best for the UK”.

It’s fair to say that these examples are the exception rather than the rule when it comes to claims about the single market, but it makes the case again that the discussion before the referendum wasn’t entirely consistent on the kind of relationship the UK could have with the EU after leaving.

So yes the messaging on both sides was inconsistent hence now the ERG pushing for the only option left to them of a No Deal and Parliament resisting. Nothing un-democratic in revisiting the issues to clear any confusion and or having a final say. Checking the facts and the details, to be absolutely sure before pulling the trigger.

Oh MC.
Not respecting a vote is 100% undemocratic.
No excuse justifies it. That’s as extremist as it gets, without it democracy is a non-starter.

I’m more informed than most and I’ve never even heard of the examples you quote. How many others did?
What’s more, you seem to be admitting that “there were inconsistencies on both sides” as JonW had mentioned.

Didums.

Take your seat, put your seatbelt on, sit back and relax! The A50 flight from Brussels is departing 31/10......i’ll bring you a complimentary G&T, lots of ice.

 

[Wanderer]

Anyone watching 'Years and Years' on BBC?

Years and Years (TV series) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[lifes2short]

Many are misinformed that the Gold Coast doesn’t get ice in winter but you can clearly see it in the image below.

G&T, lots of ice. Cheers.View attachment 57304

out of interest what would something like your penthouse be worth out there

 

[philw696]

66 Billion pounds wasted so far !

 

[Wattie]

Brexit party tops Westminster election poll for first time

Survey by Opinium suggests Nigel Farage would be 20 seats short of a majority, with Conservatives reduced to 26 MPs

www.theguardian.com

Seems people are fed up at being fecked over.