[Politics] Brexit

[cheshunt seagull]

The so called 'sane' 48% did an utterly ****wit job of selling staying in the EU so they can hardly be accused of being sane.

A lot of what turned out to be the 48% did try to get the people running the dreadful campaign to raise these issues. I work for a public body, so we couldn't take a position on a political issue, but many independent organisations in the area that I work were frantically trying to get the word out there about the impact of a lack of EU funding on schemes to support small and start-up businesses. All we had at the top was chaotic planning, a lack of detail and emotive messages that came across as hysterical and patronising. In retrospect what more can you expect from a PM that called a Referendum without doing any contingency planning for one of the outcomes? It is this lack of planning that set the tone for the complete shambles that we have seen since. A shambles much worse than even I, shellshocked at 5am on 24 June 16, would have thought possible in one of the world's most developed countries.

 

[The Clamp]

Interestingly you didn't feel the need to identify political 'mood swings' or some future economic disaster the day after the referendum result, you were already on discredit mode even then, it's clear irrespective of its validity you yearn for the referendum result to be overturned and exclusively reflect your own views.

That's not quite how it works.

Sigh. You don't get it at all do you. Nobody knew the exact outcome , economists predicted a huge economic downturn. They got that right, they just got the timings wrong. There have been huge economic negatives and a slight swell in some areas due to positivity reinforced stock prediction. Which will soon disappear if we leave the EU.

 

[pb21]

Interestingly you didn't feel the need to identify political 'mood swings' or some future economic disaster the day after the referendum result, you were already on discredit mode even then, it's clear irrespective of its validity you yearn for the referendum result to be overturned and exclusively reflect your own views.

That's not quite how it works.

On the contrary I don’t think the referendum result should be overturned, as things stand.

However I don’t think that we should necessarily go through with Brexit regardless, just because of the referendum result. Things change and it would be foolish to carry on down a particular path that you don’t want to, when you don’t have to, just because several years earlier you thought that would be best.

However that isn't the case at the moment, so we should stick to the path chosen.

 

[nicko31]

On the contrary I don’t think the referendum result should be overturned, as things stand.

However I don’t think that we should necessarily go through with Brexit regardless, just because of the referendum result. Things change and it would be foolish to carry on down a particular path that you don’t want to, when you don’t have to, just because several years earlier you thought that would be best.

However that isn't the case at the moment, so we should stick to the path chosen.

Cable is calling for a vote on the final deal a year from now with a bill starting in April

https://news.sky.com/story/liberal-democrats-call-for-second-eu-referendum-in-december-2018-11178315

Just can't see it myself unless there's a huge change in public opinion

 

[JC Footy Genius]

It should be respected, unless the people decide otherwise. You can repeat that I want the vote simply Ignored until you're blue in the face but it won't make it true.

The people have democratically decided on two occasions that Brexit should be enacted. If you want to keep asking them the question you are clearly ignoring their previous instructions. Difficult for some to grasp but there you go. The good old keep asking a question in the hope you eventually get the answer you want gambit .... how very EU.

 

[pb21]

The people have democratically decided on two occasions that Brexit should be enacted. If you want to keep asking them the question you are clearly ignoring their previous instructions. Difficult for some to grasp but there you go. The good old keep asking a question in the hope you eventually get the answer you want gambit .... how very EU.

And previously the people democratically decided on NINE occasions, since we had the referendum on joining the common market, that we should have pro EU governments in place.

So on nine occasions we voted to effectively remain in the EU, but you wanted the question asked again, how very EU.

 

[The Clamp]

And previously the people democratically decided on NINE occasions, since we had the referendum on joining the common market, that we should have pro EU governments in place.

So on nine occasions we voted to effectively remain in the EU, but you wanted the question asked again, how very EU.

This. They all conveniently forget that.

 

[Garry Nelson's teacher]

This thread has been pretty edgy at times and the odd insult isn't that rare. (You know who you are.) Why can't we have a Christmas Truce? It was good enough for the lads in the trenches in the Great War and they were trying to kill each other. We could all try to say one positive thing about the opposition..........or just kick a ball around.

OK: I'll get my coat.

 

[vegster]

Sigh. You don't get it at all do you. Nobody knew the exact outcome , economists predicted a huge economic downturn. They got that right, they just got the timings wrong. There have been huge economic negatives and a slight swell in some areas due to positivity reinforced stock prediction. Which will soon disappear if we leave the EU.

Because we never fell off the cliff the day after the vote its seems that everything is fine. However, are we worse off as a country financially and economically since the vote ? - yes. Are many key indicators of a strong economy improving ? -no. Will Brexit improve these figures given the fact that trading will become more difficult for us ? -no.

As we get closer to Brexit and one by one all the benefits of trade and co-operation start to leak away and companies " re-structure " and shift to mainland Europe or Ireland will we see the full implications. No doubt the likes of Gove and Johnson will see this a magnificent opportunity but of course we will be told we all have to work harder and tighten our belts as we learn to compete with industry in other countries.... Many people will see no short or medium term gain from all the money " saved " by not contributing to the EU, no " Savings " will find their way to the grass roots of the country.
Expect a flurry of cuts to workers rights in order to " Compete " in order to shore up payments to shareholders at the expense of investing in people and machinery as we find it harder to trade with countries nearest to us. The future certainly isn't looking good.

 

[JC Footy Genius]

And previously the people democratically decided on NINE occasions, since we had the referendum on joining the common market, that we should have pro EU governments in place.

So on nine occasions we voted to effectively remain in the EU, but you wanted the question asked again, how very EU.

Retaining membership not joining (we didn't get a vote till after we joined). When they voted that way they had every right to expect their democratic decision to be enacted, rightly so ..... democracy.

 

[pb21]

Retaining membership not joining (we didn't get a vote till after we joined). When they voted that way they had every right to expect their democratic decision to be enacted, rightly so ..... democracy.

And it will be enacted, unless something happens before it is enacted where the democratic consensus is then that it isn't enacted, rightly so ..... democracy.

 

[JC Footy Genius]

I thought that the reason we had the Brexit vote was because Cameron decided to he wanted to have one.

If TM (or any other Leader/Government) decides to have another, I don't understand the issue with it. Surely that's the nature of politics, people change their minds.

When they decide to let the plebs vote, then they vote.

Otherwise we would still have a Tory/Whig coalition from the 1700s

The political reason was to try and head off the rising (democratic) threat of UKIP, the technical reason .. we had a vote in the UK Parliament that voted 544 to 53 to hold one (democracy).

TM and JC were both elected on manifesto commitments to enact the democratic will of the majority and deliver Brexit the next scheduled GE isn't due till after we leave. People had a choice at the last 2017 GE to vote for a party that offered another referendum they got 7.4% of the vote .... parties commmited to delivering Brexit got 82.4%.

 

[BigGully]

On the contrary I don’t think the referendum result should be overturned, as things stand.

However I don’t think that we should necessarily go through with Brexit regardless, just because of the referendum result. Things change and it would be foolish to carry on down a particular path that you don’t want to, when you don’t have to, just because several years earlier you thought that would be best.

However that isn't the case at the moment, so we should stick to the path chosen.

The point is you have now locked in to some perceived change in peoples view and using it as some new found wisdom that might justify an challenge of the initial referendum result, none of this was in your psyche when you were posting a similar desire to re-run the race just one day after the result for no particular reason other than it wasn't in line with your vote.

It suggests you're a fraud, you have no particular principles on what might be the wishes of the UK's electorate at any particular time, you just want Brexit not to happen no matter how that happens.

 

[JC Footy Genius]

And it will be enacted, unless something happens before it is enacted where the democratic consensus is then that it isn't enacted, rightly so ..... democracy.

Yes it will. By something happening you mean one of the main parties reneging on their manifesto commitment/electoral mandate. Democracy my arse.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

And previously the people democratically decided on NINE occasions, since we had the referendum on joining the common market, that we should have pro EU governments in place.

So on nine occasions we voted to effectively remain in the EU, but you wanted the question asked again, how very EU.

Every one of those governments bar the recent coalition has been either Conservative or Labour both of whom have supported staying in since we joined. So people had a choice - vote for a pro-EU party because you agreed with other policies or effectively throw your vote away voting for an anti-EU party. Even when an anti-EU party DID get a substantial number of votes - more than the SNP, Plaid Cymru, Greens and even the Lib Dems they got handed a single paltry seat. Now I know that is how our system works but it's hardly fair democracy and people like myself who have wanted to leave the EU for thirty years haven't really have much of a choice - the referendum changed that. It removed general party politics from the question.

So in summary people haven't democratically decided on NINE occasions - the choice wasn't there to do so.

 

[pb21]

Every one of those governments bar the recent coalition has been either Conservative or Labour both of whom have supported staying in since we joined. So people had a choice - vote for a pro-EU party because you agreed with other policies or effectively throw your vote away voting for an anti-EU party. Even when an anti-EU party DID get a substantial number of votes - more than the SNP, Plaid Cymru, Greens and even the Lib Dems they got handed a single paltry seat. Now I know that is how our system works but it's hardly fair democracy and people like myself who have wanted to leave the EU for thirty years haven't really have much of a choice - the referendum changed that. It removed general party politics from the question.

So in summary people haven't democratically decided on NINE occasions - the choice wasn't there to do so.

I agree 100%, just highlighting the folly of JC Footy Genius suggesting that the last GE was further endorsement for Brexit!

 

[Gwylan]

Every one of those governments bar the recent coalition has been either Conservative or Labour both of whom have supported staying in since we joined.

Not true. The 1983 Labour Manifesto was for pulling out of Europe.
So, the electorate could have voted for anti-EU major party.
It was Labour's lowest vote for decades

 

[JC Footy Genius]

I agree 100%, just highlighting the folly of JC Footy Genius suggesting that the last GE was further endorsement for Brexit!

You're in the same camp as @Lincoln Imp then ... General elections aren't good enough nor are referendums (frightfully democratic) and you both can't provide a coherent response to the points I raise so divert elsewhere. At least you didn't head in the direction of The Clamp to try and rescue your democratically bankrupt position.

 

[The Clamp]

The point is you have now locked in to some perceived change in peoples view and using it as some new found wisdom that might justify an challenge of the initial referendum result, none of this was in your psyche when you were posting a similar desire to re-run the race just one day after the result for no particular reason other than it wasn't in line with your vote.

It suggests you're a fraud, you have no particular principles on what might be the wishes of the UK's electorate at any particular time, you just want Brexit not to happen no matter how that happens.

I will happily admit to that. I would hope that parliament overturns it rather than another referendum, and I'll tell you for why. We are, on the whole, simply not intelligent or informed enough to even begin to understand what it takes to enact a successful separation from the EU. We haven't the first clue about the economics or legalities, the nuances and caveats it takes to achieve such things and certainly no idea of the impact it will have. We should never have been trusted with this. The result proved that. Another consideration is of course, if we got it wrong again, people like you would be achingly smug and unbearable and your bigoted, ill informed behaviour would multiply a thousand fold. Unbearable!

No, far better to let experts and better educated and informed people make the decision. Let the government we elected to make huge decisions like this make huge decisions like this. The referendum showed one thing and one thing only. 52% of British people are stupid enough to protest vote us out of the strongest union we have ever known.

 

[Lincoln Imp]

The people have democratically decided on two occasions that Brexit should be enacted. If you want to keep asking them the question you are clearly ignoring their previous instructions. Difficult for some to grasp but there you go. The good old keep asking a question in the hope you eventually get the answer you want gambit .... how very EU.

A simplistic response that ignores the central point that if the question was asked again there would be far more information available to voters, and a far clearer perspective on the likely effects of voting one way or the other, than there was 18 months ago.
If, in these circumstances, people voted to Leave the EU then that would clearly be that.

You imply in your post that anyone voting for a particular party in a general election by definition supports every aspect of that party's manifesto. I think you're wrong but perhaps we should agree to disagree.

Finally, there have been occasions when voters have been faced with second referendums on EU issues but in most of these cases - Ireland and Denmark particularly spring to mind - the second referendum followed major policy changes designed to meet the voters' stated concerns.