The Consequences of Brexit [Part 6] READ FIRST POST BEFORE COMMENTING

[WiseOwl182 10]

1 hour ago, Top Cats Hat said:

Really?

 

Of course it all depends on when a second vote is held but the remain vote is increasing every day and has been since June 2016.

Unsubstantiated claim. Please provide a link that shows this to be true 

[Penistone999 10]

28 minutes ago, I1L2T3 said:

Nope, imposing a version of Brexit that nobody voted for isn’t democracy.

Why do you think no deal is a good idea?

People vote to LEAVE , not half in half out, not stay tied to the EU in various ways, because that isnt leave . Brexit means leave .

[I1L2T3 10]

26 minutes ago, hobinfoot said:

It makes me smile when I read the comments on here. How is it that the information given on here isn't known to the politicians but can be found by people who contribute.

What information don’t the politicians have?

 

Looks to me like they have it all, but it also looks like two main parties desperately trying not to disintegrate. Party management it seems is more important than the country, for both Tories and Labour

Just now, Penistone999 said:

People vote to LEAVE , not half in half out, not stay tied to the EU in various ways, because that isnt leave . Brexit means leave .

There no such thing as fully out. That can never happen. The reasons are obvious.

[Litotes 63]

21 minutes ago, WiseOwl182 said:

Unsubstantiated claim. Please provide a link that shows this to be true 

Already have done - read the thread!

2 hours ago, WiseOwl182 said:

Rubbish.

 

As always with you, a well argued and substantiated answer - NOT!

Best way forwards would be a single transferable vote with all the leave scheme on the paper, and also remain.

 

At the moment, remain would win - which is why the beleavers don't want to offer the electorate a democratic choice.

[apelike 10]

26 minutes ago, Litotes said:

Best way forwards would be a single transferable vote with all the leave scheme on the paper, and also remain.

Dont be daft that would never work. It may work for electing politicians but I very much doubt it would work in any referendum as doing so would make voting too complicated and drawn out, and its not something the UK voters are used to. Its probably why they rejected the AV system of voting, at least Cameron got the result he wanted in that referendum.

[I1L2T3 10]

34 minutes ago, Litotes said:

Already have done - read the thread!

As always with you, a well argued and substantiated answer - NOT!

Best way forwards would be a single transferable vote with all the leave scheme on the paper, and also remain.

 

At the moment, remain would win - which is why the beleavers don't want to offer the electorate a democratic choice.

It goes further than that.

 

Prominent leave leaders, including at least one high profile MP, have argued for shutting down parliament until after 29 May to run down the clock and provent our sovereign democratic parliament from doing its job.

 

That is how much democracy means to them in reality: zilch

2 minutes ago, apelike said:

Dont be daft that would never work. It may work for electing politicians but I very much doubt it would work in any referendum as doing so would make voting too complicated and drawn out, and its not something the UK voters are used to. Its probably why they rejected the AV system of voting, at least Cameron got the result he wanted in that referendum.

I agree.

 

Three options as Wiseowl said: no deal, Mays deal or remain.

 

Either of the leave options should have to reach 50% to be selected outright, same for remain. If both leave options combine over 50% then it’s A50 extension and renegotiate. 

 

That seems more more than fair.

[tinfoilhat 11]

1 hour ago, ANGELFIRE1 said:

I would go with that.

 

The problem we leavers had was a PM who waved the white flag and capitulated before she even met with the EU. They told May to jump and her answer was, how high.

 

Angel1.

Then you're stupid.

 

Sorry if it's a bit harsh, but if you genuinely think we can just disentangle ourselves and 700 trade and technical bodies with the stroke of a pen I struggle to think of a better word.

[Top Cats Hat 10]

1 hour ago, ANGELFIRE1 said:

The problem we leavers had was a PM who waved the white flag and capitulated before she even met with the EU. They told May to jump and her answer was, how high.

Teresa May went the EU with a list of impossible demands and was told to do one and to come back when she had something sensible to say.

 

I assume a Leave PM would have gone to the EU with a list of even more impossible demands and been a bit more aggressive and shouty.

 

The outcome would have been exactly the same.

[apelike 10]

13 minutes ago, tinfoilhat said:

Then you're stupid.

 

Sorry if it's a bit harsh, but if you genuinely think we can just disentangle ourselves and 700 trade and technical bodies with the stroke of a pen I struggle to think of a better word.

To be honest I thought that was what the 2 years after triggering A50 was for, and not for negotiating with the EU what we couldn't have.

[tinfoilhat 11]

16 minutes ago, apelike said:

To be honest I thought that was what the 2 years after triggering A50 was for, and not for negotiating with the EU what we couldn't have.

You aren’t far off. The EU told us from day one what we couldn’t have and we’ve spent two years asking for it. A no deal would a disaster.

[Top Cats Hat 10]

20 minutes ago, apelike said:

To be honest I thought that was what the 2 years after triggering A50 was for, and not for negotiating with the EU what we couldn't have.

Yet another thing we were told before the referendum was that to completely disengage from the EU and replace all the various agreements, treaties, multilateral projects etc. would take between ten and fifteen years if we were to do it without damaging the UK economy. Trying to do it in two years is just plain reckless, and those who say that we should have left on day one are just complete idiots.

[I1L2T3 10]

No deal is the leavers default after trying and failing to rationalise every other possibility.

 

Its how we’ve gone from Farage arguing it wouldn’t be so bad to be like Norway to the stage he is at now, arguing for a cliff edge exit.

 

They have failed to prove that any option would be better than staying so have given up trying to argue, quite absurdly arguing that no deal is what the 51.9% actually voted for.

 

I dont think many leave leaders genuinely want to want to be responsible for no deal, so this is part of building the betrayal narrative. The betrayal narrative keeps Farage in business. It protects his £310k a year LBC wage, it might even keep his MEP gig going, and it protects his gold plated EU pension.

 

Shame he wasted all that money on German passports for his kids.

 

 

Edited February 10, 2019 by I1L2T3