Jump to content
Guided Missile

Brexit - Enter at Your Own Risk

Saints Web Definitely Not Official Second Referendum  

165 members have voted

  1. 1. Saints Web Definitely Not Official Second Referendum

    • Leave Before - Leave Now
      38
    • Leave Before - Remain Now
      8
    • Leave Before - Not Bothered Now
      2
    • Remain Before - Remain Now
      89
    • Remain Before - Leave Now
      7
    • Remain Before - Not Bothered Now
      0
    • Not Bothered Before - Leave Now
      3
    • Not Bothered Before - Remain Now
      4
    • I've never been bothered - Why am I on this Thread?
      3
    • No second Ref - 2016 was Definitive and Binding
      11


Recommended Posts

Ditto with leavers if remain won. Pandora's box was levered open by Cameron, and all the evils released will not be put back inside.
And quite right too. Absolute disgrace to have another referendum and then throw the original votes in the bin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But it would tell us the way the country wants to go; Remain, Leave with a deal, Leave with no deal.

 

Splitting the leave vote against a one off choice to remain, that doesn't work for me

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Splitting the leave vote against a one off choice to remain, that doesn't work for me

 

I'm not saying that. You do leave with a deal versus leave without a deal, then the result of that v Remain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Johnson’s position is looking increasingly shaky. I reckon it’s 50:50 if he lasts the week
It's probably beneficial for the Conservative party if he gets voted out and then fights an election rather than being forced to break his promise after the 31st.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's probably beneficial for the Conservative party if he gets voted out and then fights an election rather than being forced to break his promise after the 31st.

 

None of this is beneficial to the Tory party - they look an absolute shambles at the moment.

 

As I said when GM and Wes were celebrating hard at Boris getting the job, they needed someone else to get the job first as that next leader had a poisoned chalice and would be out by the end of the year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not saying that. You do leave with a deal versus leave without a deal, then the result of that v Remain.

 

So another 2 votes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No, that's not accurate (and can we put the silly name calling aside for an adult conversation?). I know people who voted leave, but would rather remain than leave without a deal. That's why I am so aware of it being a thing.

 

I think if you knew at the time that if we don't get a deal we leave with no deal then you can't complain when no deal actually happens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think if you knew at the time that if we don't get a deal we leave with no deal then you can't complain when no deal actually happens.

 

No deal is not what was promised. “Name our own terms” and “easiest deal in history” is what was promised.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No deal is not what was promised. “Name our own terms” and “easiest deal in history” is what was promised.

 

Nobody promised you any thing, it was a referendum and as has been shown on here today both side said what they thought would happen and both were wrong. Many people involved at the time said if we don't get a deal we leave with no deal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's probably beneficial for the Conservative party if he gets voted out and then fights an election rather than being forced to break his promise after the 31st.

 

Not sure. At least probably a third of current Tory MPs don’t support him. So he’s got the confidence of maybe 200 out of 650 MPs. Combined with his mounting private life issues he might well never get the chance to fight a election

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nobody promised you any thing, it was a referendum and as has been shown on here today both side said what they thought would happen and both were wrong. Many people involved at the time said if we don't get a deal we leave with no deal

 

I don't understand your point - you're saying that there was a massive disparity between what was said by both sides and what has happened - if that is true (and it is) there is no greater case for a second referendum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't understand your point - you're saying that there was a massive disparity between what was said by both sides and what has happened - if that is true (and it is) there is no greater case for a second referendum.

 

What I'm saying is they do not and still don't know what will happen, you make your mind up how you want to vote and live with it. Unless you can see into the future you can only go with how you feel at the time

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
None of this is beneficial to the Tory party - they look an absolute shambles at the moment.

 

As I said when GM and Wes were celebrating hard at Boris getting the job, they needed someone else to get the job first as that next leader had a poisoned chalice and would be out by the end of the year.

Can't agree with you there. I believe most polls are showing Boris has jumped in popularity in the last few weeks. It may be bad for Johnson if the opposition were in any way competent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What I'm saying is they do not and still don't know what will happen, you make your mind up how you want to vote and live with it. Unless you can see into the future you can only go with how you feel at the time

 

Nah. Promises were made. The fact that the people making them either didn’t know if they could keep them or knew they couldn’t but made them anyway makes it worse . It doesn’t excuse anything

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not sure. At least probably a third of current Tory MPs don’t support him. So he’s got the confidence of maybe 200 out of 650 MPs. Combined with his mounting private life issues he might well never get the chance to fight a election
If he loses a vote of no confidence shortly and then they call a quick general election then he will be fighting it absolutely no doubt about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nah. Promises were made. The fact that the people making them either didn’t know if they could keep them or knew they couldn’t but made them anyway makes it worse . It doesn’t excuse anything

 

You're clutching at straws, how many people voted remain because of the lies George Osborne told. If you still believe mp's tell the truth then you probably also still believe in the tooth fairy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think if you knew at the time that if we don't get a deal we leave with no deal then you can't complain when no deal actually happens.

But if you are confident people want to leave with no deal, why are you against a referendum along the lines I suggested? That doesn't split the leave vote, it leaves it as a clear choice, while also giving everyone who wants deal or remain a voice.

 

You didn't answer the other question, would you support leaving with the existing withdrawal agreement? If Boris and the others hadn't blocked it, we would already have had brexit, how do you feel about that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But if you are confident people want to leave with no deal, why are you against a referendum along the lines I suggested? That doesn't split the leave vote, it leaves it as a clear choice, while also giving everyone who wants deal or remain a voice.

 

You didn't answer the other question, would you support leaving with the existing withdrawal agreement? If Boris and the others hadn't blocked it, we would already have had brexit, how do you feel about that?

 

We voted to leave three years ago, I don't believe you can have another referendum where remain is on the ballot paper. I've never read the withdraw agreement so cannot say too much on it but the fact Parliament rejected it 3 times and the fact that just about every thing I have read suggests it was an awful deal and never suited either the remain side of the vote or the leave side of the vote. How many times were we told no deal is better than a bad deal. I believe Boris Johnson wants a deal and with out Parliament tying his hands I think he'd get one, I read an article that suggested that when he became Prime Minister he was advised to go to Switzerland and talk to the World Trade Organisation, apparently he declined, If he was aiming to leave with no deal surely this would have been one of the first things he would have done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We voted to leave three years ago, I don't believe you can have another referendum where remain is on the ballot paper. I've never read the withdraw agreement so cannot say too much on it but the fact Parliament rejected it 3 times and the fact that just about every thing I have read suggests it was an awful deal and never suited either the remain side of the vote or the leave side of the vote. How many times were we told no deal is better than a bad deal. I believe Boris Johnson wants a deal and with out Parliament tying his hands I think he'd get one, I read an article that suggested that when he became Prime Minister he was advised to go to Switzerland and talk to the World Trade Organisation, apparently he declined, If he was aiming to leave with no deal surely this would have been one of the first things he would have done.

 

:lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We voted to leave three years ago, I don't believe you can have another referendum where remain is on the ballot paper. I've never read the withdraw agreement so cannot say too much on it but the fact Parliament rejected it 3 times and the fact that just about every thing I have read suggests it was an awful deal and never suited either the remain side of the vote or the leave side of the vote. How many times were we told no deal is better than a bad deal. I believe Boris Johnson wants a deal and with out Parliament tying his hands I think he'd get one, I read an article that suggested that when he became Prime Minister he was advised to go to Switzerland and talk to the World Trade Organisation, apparently he declined, If he was aiming to leave with no deal surely this would have been one of the first things he would have done.
In the last election the Tories "won" because they got most votes. So I presume you can't have another election with any other parties on the ballot paper

 

You're admitting the only deal on offer is rubbish. But in rejecting it there must be an option of no deal or be Brexit.

 

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In the last election the Tories "won" because they got most votes. So I presume you can't have another election with any other parties on the ballot paper

 

You're admitting the only deal on offer is rubbish. But in rejecting it there must be an option of no deal or be Brexit.

 

You cannot compare a once in a lifetime referendum with an election. Everybody thinks it's a crap deal, if the EU will not give us a deal that's acceptable then we leave with no deal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In the last election the Tories "won" because they got most votes. So I presume you can't have another election with any other parties on the ballot paper

 

You're admitting the only deal on offer is rubbish. But in rejecting it there must be an option of no deal or be Brexit.

 

You cannot compare a once in a lifetime referendum with an election. Everybody thinks it's a crap deal, if the EU will not give us a deal that's acceptable then we leave with no deal

It's not once in a lifetime. We've already had two.

 

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's not once in a lifetime. We've already had two.

 

That's not my quote that was said by David Cameron

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's not once in a lifetime. We've already had two.

 

That's not my quote that was said by David Cameron

 

Oh, another lie by remain.

Who would have thought!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We voted to leave three years ago, I don't believe you can have another referendum where remain is on the ballot paper. I've never read the withdraw agreement so cannot say too much on it but the fact Parliament rejected it 3 times and the fact that just about every thing I have read suggests it was an awful deal and never suited either the remain side of the vote or the leave side of the vote. How many times were we told no deal is better than a bad deal. I believe Boris Johnson wants a deal and with out Parliament tying his hands I think he'd get one, I read an article that suggested that when he became Prime Minister he was advised to go to Switzerland and talk to the World Trade Organisation, apparently he declined, If he was aiming to leave with no deal surely this would have been one of the first things he would have done.

 

This is where I find it confusing, because I hear calls of "brexit means brexit" and"just get it done", but many leave people rejected brexit when it was a solution they didn't like, so brexit doesn't always just mean brexit. If you can reject one form of brexit, why is it not allowed to reject another, because that one also doesn't suit some people?

 

Brexit could be done. Even the experts who said it's not a great deal said it would be better than no deal, which they voted against even more emphatically than the deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the fact Parliament rejected it 3 times... suggests it was an awful deal

 

Yay parliament fulfilling their constitutional role of holding the executive to account!

 

I believe Boris Johnson wants a deal and with out Parliament tying his hands I think he'd get one

 

Boo parliament just getting in the way of the executive!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is where I find it confusing, because I hear calls of "brexit means brexit" and"just get it done", but many leave people rejected brexit when it was a solution they didn't like, so brexit doesn't always just mean brexit. If you can reject one form of brexit, why is it not allowed to reject another, because that one also doesn't suit some people?

 

Brexit could be done. Even the experts who said it's not a great deal said it would be better than no deal, which they voted against even more emphatically than the deal.

 

The problem for me is that I don't believe the so called experts, so I'm not somebody who has a problem with a clean break.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The problem for me is that I don't believe the so called experts, so I'm not somebody who has a problem with a clean break.

 

Hopefully you are consistent with that stance and if you ever need surgery you do it yourself instead of having a so called surgeon do it for you. Nothing a power drill, some duct tape and a bottle of vodka can't handle right?

Bloody so called experts and their so called knowledge.:lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The problem for me is that I don't believe the so called experts, so I'm not somebody who has a problem with a clean break.

 

But can you see the irony that you think it's right that brexit was blocked by people like Boris, because parliament voted against the deal, which you think is valid and correct, yet parliament voted even more overwhelmingly against no deal, but you think that isn't valid.You can't really have it both ways.

 

Either parliament bøocking deal brexit was wrong and Boris messed up, or it's right and valid that parliament blocks no deal, because that was an even more comprehensive vote and would be again if they brought it back another two times.

 

The argument you're using against the deal is even more valid against no deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hopefully you are consistent with that stance and if you ever need surgery you do it yourself instead of having a so called surgeon do it for you. Nothing a power drill, some duct tape and a bottle of vodka can't handle right?

Bloody so called experts and their so called knowledge.:lol:

 

The following headline is from the Economist from 1999, do you think the 2 thirds majority were right to think the country should join the European single currency?

 

We asked Britain’s top academic economists whether it would be in the country’s economic interest to join the European single currency within the next five years. Of the 164 who replied, almost two-thirds said yes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But can you see the irony that you think it's right that brexit was blocked by people like Boris, because parliament voted against the deal, which you think is valid and correct, yet parliament voted even more overwhelmingly against no deal, but you think that isn't valid.You can't really have it both ways.

 

Either parliament bøocking deal brexit was wrong and Boris messed up, or it's right and valid that parliament blocks no deal, because that was an even more comprehensive vote and would be again if they brought it back another two times.

 

The argument you're using against the deal is even more valid against no deal.

 

The majority of the country not just Parliament thought May's deal was lousy. Blocking no deal is as much about the remain biased Parliament rejecting Brexit, if they had allowed it we would be leaving on October 31 with or with out a deal. Their only hope of stopping Brexit is by delaying it, the Lib Dems have now openly come out and said they will stop Brexit if they can and the Labour Party have a majority of mp's who do not want Brexit to happen. I can justify my views on those votes because of the reasons they voted the way they did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The majority of the country not just Parliament thought May's deal was lousy. Blocking no deal is as much about the remain biased Parliament rejecting Brexit, if they had allowed it we would be leaving on October 31 with or with out a deal. Their only hope of stopping Brexit is by delaying it, the Lib Dems have now openly come out and said they will stop Brexit if they can and the Labour Party have a majority of mp's who do not want Brexit to happen. I can justify my views on those votes because of the reasons they voted the way they did.

 

 

But the majority of the country, not just parliament, also thought the deal was better than no deal. Your argument against the deal is still identical to the argument against no deal. The reaction against no deal was much stronger than the reaction against the deal. Parliament stopping no deal is happening just like parliament stopping the deal, except more widely agreed on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The following headline is from the Economist from 1999, do you think the 2 thirds majority were right to think the country should join the European single currency?

 

We asked Britain’s top academic economists whether it would be in the country’s economic interest to join the European single currency within the next five years. Of the 164 who replied, almost two-thirds said yes

 

What would've been so wrong with joining the Euro?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The following headline is from the Economist from 1999, do you think the 2 thirds majority were right to think the country should join the European single currency?

 

We asked Britain’s top academic economists whether it would be in the country’s economic interest to join the European single currency within the next five years. Of the 164 who replied, almost two-thirds said yes

 

Yes.

 

https://www.statista.com/statistics/412806/euro-to-gbp-average-annual-exchange-rate/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The majority of the country not just Parliament thought May's deal was lousy. Blocking no deal is as much about the remain biased Parliament rejecting Brexit, if they had allowed it we would be leaving on October 31 with or with out a deal. Their only hope of stopping Brexit is by delaying it, the Lib Dems have now openly come out and said they will stop Brexit if they can and the Labour Party have a majority of mp's who do not want Brexit to happen. I can justify my views on those votes because of the reasons they voted the way they did.

 

Why did the majority feel the deal was lousy? Was it because that's what the right wing papers told us?

 

With the assumption that the only way to not put a hard border on Ireland is a CU or the backstop (and no-one has come up with anything else), why is the WA a lousy deal?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What would've been so wrong with joining the Euro?
It would have reduced the scope for currency speculation by the rich.

 

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The problem for me is that I don't believe the so called experts, so I'm not somebody who has a problem with a clean break.
This is the extremely worrying trend in politics. The likes of Johnson and co, who are obviously experts themselves (mainly in lying and manipulation) set themselves up as ordinary people against experts.

 

This is a very simplistic but effective way of giving people an easy way out of actually having to think about an issue.

 

"Get Brexit done" is a classic case. Don't think about the implications. Don't challenge the idea that it would be "done" once we crash out. Just be reassured that no thought is necessary, you're fed up of this Brexit business and want it over.

 

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have to say thanks to Scally for trying to answer questions and represent the no deal supporters mostly on his own, sometimes against comments that are mostly about being condescending or attacking, rather than discussing or debating. He or she has now mostly stopped the silly name calling to.

 

I think the main thing that's coming across for me is that Scally has chosen to believe and trust Boris Johnson, which is something many find very hard to do. If you take a position of trusting in what he says, then the path that way is pretty clear and it's easy to dismiss what the other side think of as evidence or argument against. Same vice versa.

 

My own position would be that Brexit should be delivered, but the only real way to do that would be the withdrawal agreement. It is difficult as that has already been rejected. However, no deal was also rejected by an even greater margin, so that is equally unacceptable, if not more so. There doesn't seem to be an alternative deal, so that creates an impasse. It's not one side stopping Brexit. Brexit has now been stopped by both sides, blocking a version of it that's unacceptable to them.

 

How to get past that impasse doesn't really seem to be to try to bulldoze through the version of Brexit that was the least popular.

 

The only route I can see is the new referendum along the lines that I posted before, which takes all voters' feelings into account and doesn't unfairly split the leave vote:

 

Leave or remain?

 

If leave, would you accept the withdrawal agreement? Yes/no

 

If the agreement isn't accepted by the majority, would you prefer to remain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It would have reduced the scope for currency speculation by the rich.

 

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

 

Maybe Gordon Brown should have had six economic indicators instead of 5 when he was deciding if we should adopt the euro, things could have turned out so differently if he'd used yours. Also do you know how many different currencies and commodities are actually traded every day?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Have to say thanks to Scally for trying to answer questions and represent the no deal supporters mostly on his own, sometimes against comments that are mostly about being condescending or attacking, rather than discussing or debating. He or she has now mostly stopped the silly name calling to.

 

I think the main thing that's coming across for me is that Scally has chosen to believe and trust Boris Johnson, which is something many find very hard to do. If you take a position of trusting in what he says, then the path that way is pretty clear and it's easy to dismiss what the other side think of as evidence or argument against. Same vice versa.

 

My own position would be that Brexit should be delivered, but the only real way to do that would be the withdrawal agreement. It is difficult as that has already been rejected. However, no deal was also rejected by an even greater margin, so that is equally unacceptable, if not more so. There doesn't seem to be an alternative deal, so that creates an impasse. It's not one side stopping Brexit. Brexit has now been stopped by both sides, blocking a version of it that's unacceptable to them.

 

How to get past that impasse doesn't really seem to be to try to bulldoze through the version of Brexit that was the least popular.

 

The only route I can see is the new referendum along the lines that I posted before, which takes all voters' feelings into account and doesn't unfairly split the leave vote:

 

Leave or remain?

 

If leave, would you accept the withdrawal agreement? Yes/no

 

If the agreement isn't accepted by the majority, would you prefer to remain

 

Thanks Norway, I don't trust any politicians and as I've said on here I've only ever voted Labour so I'm not a traditional floating voter. Labour have let down their leave voting supporters and watching Corbin in Parliament a person who has always been a euro sceptic trying to hold on to his role as Labour leader whilst going against what he believes in is hard for me to take. Politicians are all honest and don't lie until they open their mouths

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't really understand why the EU doesn't agree to a finite end date for the back-stop and to allow the UK to unilaterally withdraw from it, given a notice period. Article 50 provides for unilateral withdrawal and a finite end date, after which there is no deal, unless a deal has been agreed. As a point of principle, a finite back-stop with unilateral withdrawal seems no different to the pre-exit position on withdrawal. An infinite back-stop with no unilateral right to withdraw puts the exiting country in a less-flexible position than pre-exit which, at a principles level, is obviously wrong.

 

If that concession was made, which puts the EU in no worse a position than the current situation (particularly when taken alongside the other aspects of the WA), we'd probably have a deal.

 

Yes, it kicks the can down the road somewhat - you've still got to deal with what happens after the back-stop - but so does "no deal" and so does the proposed WA.

 

I'm critical of our government's approach and ineptitude over the last few years but I think the EU's position on the back-stop is certainly a subject of valid criticism. I don't think they would be conceding much, in practical terms, by offering the unilateral ability to the UK to end it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems Boris is trying to push for a deal with customs checks close to the Irish border, although it's still obscure exactly where. I'm not sure how this isn't a hard border, unless it's a half-hearted version, in which case it will leave the UK with a partially open border for immigration and goods.It'll be interesting to hear the details.

 

As far as I can see, the backstop is by far the most sensible solution, but then I'm not Irish or Northern Irish. It seems to be the only real Brexit, but of course leaves NI effectively in the EU.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It seems Boris is trying to push for a deal with customs checks close to the Irish border, although it's still obscure exactly where. I'm not sure how this isn't a hard border, unless it's a half-hearted version, in which case it will leave the UK with a partially open border for immigration and goods.It'll be interesting to hear the details.

 

As far as I can see, the backstop is by far the most sensible solution, but then I'm not Irish or Northern Irish. It seems to be the only real Brexit, but of course leaves NI effectively in the EU.

It would be interesting to see how a "semi open" border would work in practice. The official count gives 208 identified crossing points, unofficially estimates put it as high as 275.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

View Terms of service (Terms of Use) and Privacy Policy (Privacy Policy) and Forum Guidelines ({Guidelines})