Non - Brexit

SlowDownDerek said:
I completely disagree. Sure the politicians have struggled to cope with implementing the result - arguably they've struggled to interpret the result let alone implement it. We've got a system that is completely unprepared and unable to deal with this type of problem and we've got a completely divided country with various factions shouting each other down. How realistically are MPs supposed to sort the mess out?

Calling them leeches, bloodsuckers, etc. might make you feel better but it adds nothing to the debate and gets us nowhere. Not to mention the fact that people who have completely the opposite view to you are also calling them similar things because they are not doing what they want... in a 48-52 referendum. Your expectations as to what could be achieved in the circumstances are unrealistic.

The last thing we need is for the actual Prime Minister to fuel people's anger against their elected representatives. Do you think that all MPs will be voted out and we'll get new ones that everyone is happy with? That's like Jimnnina banging on about PGMOL as if getting rid of them will magically sort the problem.

She's irresponsibly fueling the hatred of politicians because she's messed the whole thing up since day one. It doesn't help anyone and has surely made concensus in parliament even less likely.
Click to expand...

I know you disagree but I was actually disagreeing with you.

And I'm afraid you are way behind the curve on this.

Sometimes people need a slap.

The people have been angry with the political classes since before June, 2016, and the Westminster bubble has pretty much ignored them, even the Brexit result failed to wake them up.

Frankly, Mrs May spoke for the majority of ordinary folk last night.

It wasn't about left or right, remain or leave, it was about telling politicians that they are too busy acting in their own interests, and not the nations.


"...Calling them leeches, bloodsuckers, etc. might make you feel better but it adds nothing to the debate and gets us nowhere..."

That was an incredibly cheap shot and I, foolishly, expected better of you. However it helps illustrate a point; exactly what is there left to add to the debate?

We've had almost three years of debate and the politicians have achieved nothing. The time for debating, cheap talk and rhetoric is over. It's time for MPs to act in the national interest.
 
redharry said:
just glad MP's aren't in the Firkin Shed ordering a pint before the game - the rest of us would never get served while they make their mind up what to have.
Click to expand...

I'd be a bit pissed off if there were 6 different beers on but the landlord insisted that I could only have a pint of the one he was recommending though.

I'd probably end up leaving with no pint at all. ;)
 
billythekid said:
It’s about opininos at the end of the day.

I think the MPs are to blame for this mess.

It is their job to represent the people who put them in Parliament to sort this out and not think of what they want and personal ambitions etc.

Once the result was known nearly three years ago the best people to get the best deal from all Parties should have been involved.

There remit was to honour the result and get on with carrying it out.

Not bickering and sulking like they are now because they got a ticking off and told a few home truths.

Everyone in the House are to blame, not the British public who called for Brexit, they just want them to deliver what they were asked to do.
Click to expand...
I’m afraid you’re lumping us all in there, Billy. Clearly me and 16 million others are not part of your British public.
 
Remain is a word . Leave is a word . If we Leave it like that they Remain just words......the full meanings of those words when connected to the other word Brexit or the ' Context ' of Brexit, cannot possibly mean anything unless they are Separated from the Words ' Conservative' or ' Labour' in their context as titles of political parties, incumbents of which, must see Brexit from the point of view of the Nations welfare only!
Brexit or Failed Brexit HAS to stand alone from the ' class' problem, workers and bosses, rich and poor!
Then ...those 2.5 years of words can be made to actually describe ' Action!
 
Last edited:
This second referendum, so those that want it want it based on just the withdrawal agreement or the actual deal that is yet to be decided.

Or is this peoplesvote supposed to be held at every stage until remain win?
 
DJ said:
This second referendum, so those that want it want it based on just the withdrawal agreement or the actual deal that is yet to be decided.

Or is this peoplesvote supposed to be held at every stage until remain win?
Click to expand...

I'd settle for vote giving the chance of revoking article 50 but with an assurance that we leave in 3 years and a government of national unity is formed until we leave.

Right now we're going over a waterfall in a barrel.
 
stanthevan said:
I’m afraid you’re lumping us all in there, Billy. Clearly me and 16 million others are not part of your British public.
Click to expand...

But don’t you accept the result? Even if it wasn’t what you voted for.

We have had elections in various countries, including the US and us where the majority vote doesn’t win, people might not like it but it’s accepted as that is how it has always been.

I know this is different, but surely with over 33 million voting and for once we actually get a result where the majority who voted for Brexit had more votes than Remain, that should be honoured?
 
AFCB Lost in Brum said:
I know you disagree but I was actually disagreeing with you.

And I'm afraid you are way behind the curve on this.

Sometimes people need a slap.

The people have been angry with the political classes since before June, 2016, and the Westminster bubble has pretty much ignored them, even the Brexit result failed to wake them up.

Frankly, Mrs May spoke for the majority of ordinary folk last night.

It wasn't about left or right, remain or leave, it was about telling politicians that they are too busy acting in their own interests, and not the nations.


"...Calling them leeches, bloodsuckers, etc. might make you feel better but it adds nothing to the debate and gets us nowhere..."

That was an incredibly cheap shot and I, foolishly, expected better of you. However it helps illustrate a point; exactly what is there left to add to the debate?

We've had almost three years of debate and the politicians have achieved nothing. The time for debating, cheap talk and rhetoric is over. It's time for MPs to act in the national interest.
Click to expand...

Not sure why you think it was a cheap shot - it's not even really much of a criticism in my view.

Anyway, my main point is that I think you are oversimplifying how straightforward it is to resolve this issue - they could have come up with a solution that 100% satisfies whatever it was you voted for and over 50% of the country would still be up in arms because it's not what they wanted.

My second point is ramping up the threatening rhetoric towards MPs is irresponsible on your behalf let alone the actual Prime minister.

Like I say you sound like Jimnnina moaning about refs as if there are loads of other refs out there that could/would do a better job. We get the politicians we deserve.
 
billythekid said:
But don’t you accept the result? Even if it wasn’t what you voted for.

We have had elections in various countries, including the US and us where the majority vote doesn’t win, people might not like it but it’s accepted as that is how it has always been.

I know this is different, but surely with over 33 million voting and for once we actually get a result where the majority who voted for Brexit had more votes than Remain, that should be honoured?[/
I know I will have all sorts of insults chucked at me but I don’t accept the result. It was based on lies, misinformation, fake news and illegal activity. Please don’t put me in with those who voted for it. The country is split down the middle and it’s unfair to say it’s what the British public want. It’s what half want.
Click to expand...
 
What were the mps supposed to deliver, still no one can explain whether no deal, soft brexit, hard brexit is the way to go.

Who is capable of providing consensual leadership, mps have a duty to act in the best interest of the country consistent with their best judgement, the omnishambles of leave means leave could be seen to be a choice between the result of the referendum and the reality of jobs, houses, health services, policing, education.
 
Ommunia strafing the media now with his rubber bullets...I thought he was hiding until today....he must think he smells a General Election!

Well Chukka me ol Mukka.......where were you when they voted for Corbyn as Leader...you had plenty of support and with that smart appearance could have swung a few ladies away from the Tories !
No... you opted to wait......lets see what you got now then Sunny Boy!
 
JIMNNINA said:
What were the mps supposed to deliver, still no one can explain whether no deal, soft brexit, hard brexit is the way to go.

Who is capable of providing consensual leadership, mps have a duty to act in the best interest of the country consistent with their best judgement, the omnishambles of leave means leave could be seen to be a choice between the result of the referendum and the reality of jobs, houses, health services, policing, education.
Click to expand...

Imagine if we voted Corbyn in and people suggested MPs shouldn't adopt the policies contained in his manifesto on the premise that some think tank had predicted that it would lead to job losses and a fall in GDP.


It's mental to use this line of argument.
 
blandford_cherry said:
Yeah the speeches, immigration, nhs, trade etc. On the back of it now not all information was correct and I think Everyone assumed once article 50 went in it would be simple.

There can’t be a 2nd referendum on it. It would be ridiculous
Click to expand...
But a second vote would also be a voice for you to say no this is not what your said it would be like, or if you are happy with it you could confirm it. As I said I think a second vote only affects negatively a very very small number of people who profit from the nuclear option. Unless you own a hedgefund and have short positions on anything UK. I never asked, you may well do.
 
northstandmark said:
There are so many problems with a second vote though, which I rarely see it's (almost all Remain wishing) advocates talk about. And they haven't changed in the last year or two, so I'm just repeating things really.

Now I appreciate that I am utterly biased, as a soft Brexit is exactly my preferred outcome. So please keep that in mind!

Mostly the problem is: What happens if leave wins again?

Will Remain accept the result for starters?
Whenever I ask that question, people mostly say they would accept it. Some though are honest enough to admit they would forever campaign strongly against leaving the EU because it's the conviction they hold. And I can respect more that answer, and it's honesty. Rather than the many people who I suspect of being disingenuous when saying they simply want "more democracy".

But putting that aside and looking at the constitutional element of the problem: What would another leave result actually mean?
May's deal? No deal? Start talks again from scratch? Hold another General Election to put together a different set of MPs?
It really leaves us no better off really in terms of clarity and mandate.

If Remain wins, but by god forbid an even smaller margin than Leave won last time? Does Leave win on aggregate? Or does it give Remain sufficient mandate to cancel all things Brexit and ignore it all happened?

The only outcome of another referendum that provides clarity for anyone is a massive Remain win. Which I appreciate a lot of people want. But that's by no means certain. Polling often suggests that most people haven't changed their minds, and those who voted leave will still vote leave, and visa versa. So I'm skeptical that this one outcome of any clarity will occur. Whichever way it would go, I think it would be tight. Such is the division we see.

I think all it'll do is just sow even more discontent and hatred among our population. I think we would all need to think through these questions very carefully before we plunged the country into another vote.

Thus is only way forward from this mess that I can see is a soft Brexit, that implements the last referendum, whilst respecting the closeness of the vote, and provides a platform that can be refined over time. If a party wants to stand at General Elections with a manifesto for another referendum, and they gain power on that mandate, then by all means we have to honour that come wat may.
Click to expand...
A second vote and the leave side have to write down their achievable realistic plans bearing in mind what we can and can’t have, or simply say leave everything and go on wto terms. If that won again, I cannot argue at all.

My gripe is the leave side changed their tune the day after. All the promises fell away and a after the event literal interpretation of the question was then talked as the obvious.

If they said ‘this is achievable, this is what you can read and plan for’ then I would and could not argue if that won again.
 
dutchcherry said:
A second vote and the leave side have to write down their achievable realistic plans bearing in mind what we can and can’t have, or simply say leave everything and go on wto terms. If that won again, I cannot argue at all.

My gripe is the leave side changed their tune the day after. All the promises fell away and a after the event literal interpretation of the question was then talked as the obvious.

If they said ‘this is achievable, this is what you can read and plan for’ then I would and could not argue if that won again.
Click to expand...

But you can't promise the outcome of negotiations - it's so easy for the other side to frustrate negotiations and turn promises into 'lies'. Given that the EU doesn't want the UK to leave they can effectively force them to stay. Throw in the significant minority of UK remainers that want to disrupt the process of leaving and it is impossible to promise anything. I've heard people suggest that this means we should therefore stay as we are but how can we be happy being members of a rapidly centralising organisation that most people in the UK don't particularly like? We also, as voters, don't appear to be able to stop the centralisation.

By the same token the EU can't make any promises as to what the future of their organisation will look like - compared the institution now to what people voted on in 1975. Why should 'leave' be held to a higher standard than 'remain'?
 
dutchcherry said:
But a second vote would also be a voice for you to say no this is not what your said it would be like, or if you are happy with it you could confirm it. As I said I think a second vote only affects negatively a very very small number of people who profit from the nuclear option. Unless you own a hedgefund and have short positions on anything UK. I never asked, you may well do.
Click to expand...

But why? It was a one off. The majority wanted leave so we leave. What happens if the next split is 51% 49%? What happens if that doesn’t work out? It’s happened people need to move on and accept it. Silly petitions, even if they reach 5,000,000 seem pointless as 17,000,000 voted to leave in the first place.
 
Druss_the_Legend said:
So 3 options...but she is not saying which? Shes not laying out the plan for the next 8 days. Why not?
Click to expand...

They said on the radio today mp’s are even more against her than they were before after they got blamed last night.

Next week could become fascinating, I can imagine the deal will not get voted for and the EU come up with something at the last minute
 
SlowDownDerek said:
I completely disagree. Sure the politicians have struggled to cope with implementing the result - arguably they've struggled to interpret the result let alone implement it. We've got a system that is completely unprepared and unable to deal with this type of problem and we've got a completely divided country with various factions shouting each other down. How realistically are MPs supposed to sort the mess out?

Calling them leeches, bloodsuckers, etc. might make you feel better but it adds nothing to the debate and gets us nowhere. Not to mention the fact that people who have completely the opposite view to you are also calling them similar things because they are not doing what they want... in a 48-52 referendum. Your expectations as to what could be achieved in the circumstances are unrealistic.

The last thing we need is for the actual Prime Minister to fuel people's anger against their elected representatives. Do you think that all MPs will be voted out and we'll get new ones that everyone is happy with? That's like Jimnnina banging on about PGMOL as if getting rid of them will magically sort the problem.

She's irresponsibly fueling the hatred of politicians because she's messed the whole thing up since day one. It doesn't help anyone and has surely made concensus in parliament even less likely.
Click to expand...

Thats rubbish, the people voted to leave, but the MPS didn't.
thats why May is having a go at them. Leave your own agendas at home and get us out of bloody Europe.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

;