OV9

Even if there's a public vote on whether to accept a certain deal, people won't understand what they are voting for.

Like most EU referendums

Rome and Nice had 1000 pages each...

NotoriousREV wrote: Thu Jan 17, 2019 7:57 am

Swervin_Mervin wrote: Wed Jan 16, 2019 10:54 pm

Simon wrote: Wed Jan 16, 2019 10:48 pm

I think the electorate would tolerate an EU ref because, from a news and reporting perspective (at least), it'd bring an end to the current stalemate and I believe that opinion has now switched to remain.

I think you're deluded. The vote would still likely be very close. Unless it's a very big margin either way, when do you stop? Best of 3?

This “Best of 3” bullshit needs to stop. It is entirely facile reasoning. A second referendum would not be a re-run of the first, it would be allowing the electorate the chance to decide on the actual terms of the deal vs no deal vs remain. Intellectually, you must be able to see that we have far more information to base our decision on than we did in 2016? The only possible objections to another referendum are either that you’re afraid the outcome will swing to remain, or pure voting fatigue.

There is also the likelihood of Farage coming back to prominence in the event of a Remain vote in a second referendum. That in itself is enough to persuade me that a second referendum is a bad thing. I still think we'll end up having one.

Rich B wrote: Wed Jan 16, 2019 10:51 pm

IanF wrote: Wed Jan 16, 2019 10:40 pm Thought this was a good insight into Labour’s predicament... Maximum Political Utility

https://news.sky.com/story/what-is-corb ... e-11609257

He hopes, I'm sure, to run down the clock until the prime minister is out of options, save for one: a new election. For Jeremy Corbyn, Brexit will always remain just that - his best (but most perilous) electoral opportunity.

If that is the case (it is) then that is fucking scandalous - it’s bascially deliberately fucking over the future of the entire country for personal gain.

I wonder whether it’s possible to have a No-Confidence vote on the Leader of the Opposition? A valid alternative is required for democracy to exist.

I don't want another vote or a general election or whatever. I don't want another x years of pissing money and time into this black hole while the country sits in a slowly deteriorating holding pattern.

What I really want is for the architects of this debacle to admit they didn't have the slightest idea what they were doing when they started and they've fucked it up at every point along the way.

I'd also like them to say the ref was non binding and we're not doing it anymore, what's the worst that could happen .

NotoriousREV wrote: Thu Jan 17, 2019 7:57 am

Swervin_Mervin wrote: Wed Jan 16, 2019 10:54 pm

Simon wrote: Wed Jan 16, 2019 10:48 pm

I think the electorate would tolerate an EU ref because, from a news and reporting perspective (at least), it'd bring an end to the current stalemate and I believe that opinion has now switched to remain.

I think you're deluded. The vote would still likely be very close. Unless it's a very big margin either way, when do you stop? Best of 3?

This “Best of 3” bullshit needs to stop. It is entirely facile reasoning. A second referendum would not be a re-run of the first, it would be allowing the electorate the chance to decide on the actual terms of the deal vs no deal vs remain. Intellectually, you must be able to see that we have far more information to base our decision on than we did in 2016? The only possible objections to another referendum are either that you’re afraid the outcome will swing to remain, or pure voting fatigue.

Of course I appreciate that (although it's not wholly correct, because the vast majority of those that would vote still wouldn't be fully aware of all of the ills of the EU and the potential negatives to staying in). But that would very much not heal any wounds. You'd still have a sizeable part of the country feeling deeply wounded and I doubt they'd just accept it and move on - i.e the same as now.

It was actually a staunch Remain colleague that brought the "best of 3" line up, and he's fairly strongly against another Ref for that reason.

IanF wrote: Thu Jan 17, 2019 9:52 am

Rich B wrote: Wed Jan 16, 2019 10:51 pm

IanF wrote: Wed Jan 16, 2019 10:40 pm Thought this was a good insight into Labour’s predicament... Maximum Political Utility

https://news.sky.com/story/what-is-corb ... e-11609257

He hopes, I'm sure, to run down the clock until the prime minister is out of options, save for one: a new election. For Jeremy Corbyn, Brexit will always remain just that - his best (but most perilous) electoral opportunity.

If that is the case (it is) then that is fucking scandalous - it’s bascially deliberately fucking over the future of the entire country for personal gain.

I wonder whether it’s possible to have a No-Confidence vote on the Leader of the Opposition? A valid alternative is required for democracy to exist.

well there was one in June 2016 that Corbyn lost by a HUGE margin (172 to 40). He seems to have forgotten this.

The bit that irritated me greatly last night was May's speech where she said "80% (I think) of people voted for a party with Brexit as part of their manifesto". Like we had a fucking choice when all the main parties had it?

NotoriousREV wrote: Thu Jan 17, 2019 10:59 am The bit that irritated me greatly last night was May's speech where she said "80% (I think) of people voted for a party with Brexit as part of their manifesto". Like we had a fucking choice when all the main parties had it?

Lib Dems..

I agree with Rev on his earlier comment about a second Ref. Also, I'm bored of hearing that a second vote is undemocratic. MORE referenda are never undemocratic. More referenda would be the very meaning of democratic!

Simon wrote: Thu Jan 17, 2019 11:51 am

NotoriousREV wrote: Thu Jan 17, 2019 10:59 am The bit that irritated me greatly last night was May's speech where she said "80% (I think) of people voted for a party with Brexit as part of their manifesto". Like we had a fucking choice when all the main parties had it?

Lib Dems..

I agree with Rev on his earlier comment about a second Ref. Also, I'm bored of hearing that a second vote is undemocratic. MORE referenda are never undemocratic. More referenda would be the very meaning of democratic!

im as fucked off with the result of the first one as anyone, but it’s already been put to the public whether we leave or remain. So the only thing we could really put back out is how we leave, but so far parliament can’t even collectively decide what the options are.

Simon wrote: Thu Jan 17, 2019 11:51 am

NotoriousREV wrote: Thu Jan 17, 2019 10:59 am The bit that irritated me greatly last night was May's speech where she said "80% (I think) of people voted for a party with Brexit as part of their manifesto". Like we had a fucking choice when all the main parties had it?

Lib Dems..

I agree with Rev on his earlier comment about a second Ref. Also, I'm bored of hearing that a second vote is undemocratic. MORE referenda are never undemocratic. More referenda would be the very meaning of democratic!

I recently pointed this out to a Brexit supporting relative. He seemed genuinely taken aback at the point, I assume the Fail or whatever shitrag he gets his news from just prints it and he repeats it though which is worrying.

Rich B wrote: Thu Jan 17, 2019 11:56 am

Simon wrote: Thu Jan 17, 2019 11:51 am

NotoriousREV wrote: Thu Jan 17, 2019 10:59 am The bit that irritated me greatly last night was May's speech where she said "80% (I think) of people voted for a party with Brexit as part of their manifesto". Like we had a fucking choice when all the main parties had it?

Lib Dems..

I agree with Rev on his earlier comment about a second Ref. Also, I'm bored of hearing that a second vote is undemocratic. MORE referenda are never undemocratic. More referenda would be the very meaning of democratic!

im as fucked off with the result of the first one as anyone, but it’s already been put to the public whether we leave or remain. So the only thing we could really put back out is how we leave, but so far parliament can’t even collectively decide what the options are.

If Parliament can't agree, that's more reason to put it back to the people. And if you put the question of how back to the people, you may as well confirm that the will of the people is still to Leave or not.

^^ Exactly. And I just read on Sky a YouGov poll taken on yesterday shows remain/leave is at 56/44:

'According to a YouGov poll published today, the UK would vote to stay in the EY by 56% to 44%, if a second EU referendum were held.

The 12-point lead is the "highest yet" for Remain, with exactly the same proportion (56% to 44%) now supporting calls for a fresh public vote.

The survey of more than 1,000 voters - on behalf of the People's Vote campaign for a second EU referendum - was conducted on Wednesday, after the PM's Brexit deal had been overwhelmingly rejected by MPs.

Labour MP and People's Vote support Chuka Umunna says: "This snap poll shows more than ever why the government needs to change course and hand this decision on Brexit back to the people."

And Peter Kellner, the former president of YouGov, says: "On our tracking question – would people vote Remain or Leave? – the Remain lead, 12%, is the highest yet.

"The proportion saying Remain is up from 48% in 2016 to 56% today; Leave support is down from 52 to 44%. This eight per cent swing is significant.

"It is higher than in any post-1945 election, except for 1997.

"No longer can it be said that opinion has not moved significantly since the referendum."

The poll also reveals backing for a seond EU referendum is not at 78% among Labour supporters.
'

I've solved it, just now while having a curry, and what could be more British than a job stealing foreigner having a long curry lunch followed by a nap.

This should be done.

The Queen cancels Brexit then abdicates to dodge the controversy.
Chuck and Bill also abdicate leaving wee George the new head of state. King George the thingeth will melt the hardest of leaver hearts thus restoring faith in the Monarchy.
Nigel Farage is made regent who will be obliged to have Cameron, May, Corbyn and BoJo all publically executed. He'll then spend a decade dressed in funny clothes waving a sword at the continent from Dover.
King George comes of age and has Nigel executed with full honours.
Everything will be back to normal by 2031.

You're welcome.

I still prefer the option of giving the Job to Rev to sort out...

Simon wrote: Thu Jan 17, 2019 12:54 pm The survey of more than 1,000 voters - on behalf of the People's Vote campaign for a second EU referendum...

ah

What do Brexiteers hope to accomplish by leaving?

This is a genuine question, I'm not trying to bait anyone. I'm an ardent remainer, and whilst the current system isn't prefect, I can't see any benefit to leaving. So I'm curious as to what people think we'll gain by leaving, and how long it will take us to see the benefits?


GG, try to keep it under 50,000 words please

Jackleg wrote: Thu Jan 17, 2019 5:38 pm What do Brexiteers hope to accomplish by leaving?

This is a genuine question, I'm not trying to bait anyone. I'm an ardent remainer, and whilst the current system isn't prefect, I can't see any benefit to leaving. So I'm curious as to what people think we'll gain by leaving, and how long it will take us to see the benefits?


GG, try to keep it under 50,000 words please

Good luck with all of that.

NotoriousREV wrote: Thu Jan 17, 2019 5:42 pm

Jackleg wrote: Thu Jan 17, 2019 5:38 pm What do Brexiteers hope to accomplish by leaving?

This is a genuine question, I'm not trying to bait anyone. I'm an ardent remainer, and whilst the current system isn't prefect, I can't see any benefit to leaving. So I'm curious as to what people think we'll gain by leaving, and how long it will take us to see the benefits?


GG, try to keep it under 50,000 words please

Good luck with all of that.

Pretty sure you wont get an answer from GG, he has dodged it at every turn. I asked a family member and he hummed and hawed but essentially he fell for the bus and reads shitrags so thought workers would be better off under Westminster.

Being in the EU is bad, we must leave
Being in the UK is bad, we must leave
Being in England is bad, we must leave
Being in Surrey is bad, we must leave
Being in Farnham is bad, we must leave


Etc etc