Forum menu
Well given the hassle it was to get in the last time I think Alpin has a point. Especially as the stated objective is be an off-shore tax haven, low-cost thorn in the side of the EU after Brexit.
It would seem strange to have people vote for a "sandwich", and only afterwards find out that it's actually a shit sandwich, then allow people to vote which type of shit they'd like in their sandwich, but not allow them to reconsider keeping the filet mignon they already had...
Molgrips, how many times can we ask?
I dunno, how many times is the situation going to fundamentally change and require a new answer?
If we'd decided on May's deal, but they were haggling over the fine print for a year, then no, there'd be no need for another ref. But given how nothing was planned, nothing was known and everything was hypothetical before the ref, we badly need another ref now with concrete options on it.
without some cherries
Why do without cherries? Cherries are nice.
The question was asked and clearly decided now we need a new ref on the type of leave deal to move forward.
I was in a restaurant last week, the waiter asked me what first course I wanted, it was a set menu there was a choice of three. I didn't like the soup (it was some kind of Cordoban cold tomato soup that was about 30% pureed garlic) and they kindly asked me which of the other two choices I wanted. I said no thanks to any of them cos I didn't want the others to have to wait for me.
Under your logic, I would have been forced to eat one of the other first courses even when I no longer wanted one.
That's a poor analogy really. A new ref on the type of leave deal can still have your fancy sandwich on the menu, it may cost a little more for the few but it will benefit the many.
EDIT, I hadn't read your post Molgrips. EDIT again, I've just read your odd analogy Molgrips. 'interesting'
The ref vote was for a version of brexit that we now know never existed
It was gonna be the 'easiest deal in history '
Cherries were there dannyh but the biggest democratic vote in British history decided they weren't important.
Cherries were there dannyh but the biggest democratic vote in British history decided they weren’t important.
But your point was that a soft Brexit deal would be just the same as before, but without cherries. The big question, therefore, is ‘why bother at all?’
Getting rid of cherries is a ****ing stupid idea full stop.
The biggest democratic vote in British history clearly decided to leave those cherries behind, end of, the cherries have now perished. move on.
A super soft leave option will be better than cherries for the few, it will be buying cherries for others.
Nope the vote was based on the lie that we could leave & keep the cherries
Cherries were there dannyh but the biggest democratic vote in British history decided they weren’t important.
er so what....
Whats the answer to the NI Border issue then and what do you do with 2 non viable Oil Refinerys that you end up with if we trade on WTO.
How does a guide dog cross the road in Ireland/NI when the only points they are legally permitted to are ports and airports.
just for starters.
The new referendum with the independent and impartial leave options will take those into account and offer realistic EU approved options. If there aren't any other options then we leave with a super soft agreement and life stays the same more or less. Deadlock broken we move on.
LEAVE CAMPAIGN: We can be much better off after Brexit, it'll be easy!
VOTERS: Really? That sounds pretty good
<vote>
GOVT: Ok, we're doing this. EU, what deal can we have?
EU: Well for a load of reasons this is all we can do.
MPS: No thanks, not good enough
GOVT: Well then we're leaving without a deal. We'll be a bit ****ed for a generation.
VOTERS: Wait, what? If we can't leave and be better off, we don't want to leave at all!
Not unreasonable, is it?
It's an unreasonable post and has no relevance to the complex situation we find ourselves in. Everyone voted for a wide variety of reasons, this is well established.
I don't think it's unreasonable to assume that many people voted out because they thought we'd be better off. This was what was promised, wasn't it? There are of course many categories as we've discussed many times.
The new referendum with the independent and impartial leave options will take those into account and offer realistic EU approved options. If there aren’t any other options then we leave with a super soft agreement and life stays the same more or less. Deadlock broken we move on.
1)TBH Mays deal was the EU approved option.
1B)Boris deal is the above with lipstick and more borders and DUP bungs that isn't as yet approved.
2)The others don't fly as FOM and the 4Freedoms the red lines and all that.
3)No Deal WTO sucks cox.
None of these deal with trade deals which are always meh.
whats the other independent and impartial leave options considering Boris is aiming for out next month deal or no deal and your proposing things that would be requiring EU negotiation.
You need to read the thread dude :o)
Given the evident difficulty in enacting all of the different things that "leave" meant I'm still struggling to understand why it is wrong to reflect the options available to us when framing a new referendum question to find out exactly what people want (rather than a anything to everyone concept). A lot has changed (socially, demographically, politically, etc.) since the 2016 referendum. Why is it wrong to reflect that in a question rather than tie everything to a single past decision and artificially exclude perfectly viable options that may be more popular the the others?
<span style="font-size: 0.8rem;">And this best of 3 stuff is nonsense.You have a referendum or election when there is a specific question to answer. Each one is independant of any previous ones and only has to encompass the reality of the situation at the time it is asked. Asking "remain vs Boris/may deal" or "remain vs no deal" are explicitly not the same question as "remain vs leave" . </span>
You need to read the thread dude :o)
Hopefully not from the begining 🙂
So your proposing more Unicorns then 🙂
And this best of 3 stuff is nonsense.You have a referendum or election when there is a specific question to answer. Each one is independant of any previous ones and only has to encompass the reality of the situation at the time it is asked.
As this is exactly how it currently works each time we have an election.
I think it's just the crap that keeps getting posted on facebook that keeps saying this and the whole we voted to leave blah blah.
Brain poison.
The People were promised that if the UK left the EU, the easiest deal in the history of deals would ensure that the UK would be better off.
All this time later and at a cost we can only imagine, the easiest deal in the history of deals has yet to materialise and, it turns out, some of the great things the people were promised, turned out to be outright lies.
There are laws in place that allow people a cooling off period where, if they were lied to before signing an agreement, the agreement becomes void.
If ever there was a shady deal that could benefit from the "cooling off period" laws, this is it.
No unicorns from me :o)
So it's the same as an election. Brain poison indeed. :o)
Yes there's no point in comparing it to a general election, it's a completely different concept.
But not only is it valid and useful to have a second referendum, it's essential. A public vote (without due consideration and care on anyone's part) got us in, thus a public vote is the only possible way out for the electorate and not least for the parties.
The party that goes for Brexit and screws everything up will be ruined. The party that revokes will blow the country up. Thus, it has to be the people that decide not MPs.
The referendum handed power to the people. The vociferous Brexiteers are now focused on 'the will of the people' so that's the only thing that can be used to justify any cause of action.
I agree with that. The 2nd referendum needs to offer leave options only to break the deadlock and move on.
We have had 1 ref to decide leave or remain now we need to get on with the finding out what type of leave the people want. everyone wins.
Actually, handing the next few big decisions over to "the people" might just be the best option with this lava-hot potato.
A referendum conducted when the premise is based on lies and distortions is not an exercise in democratic will, it's an exercise in democratic deceit.
The Swiss who are somewhat expert in these things void the result of a referendum conducted dishonestly and do a re-run.
So why can't we?
I agree with that. The 2nd referendum needs to offer leave options only to break the deadlock and move on.
The only thing that would break the deadlock and wouldn't disenfranchise remainers - is a three way referendum - no deal, deal or remain.
It would be remain.
Which is why I suspect you are against that.
We have had 1 ref to decide leave or remain now we need to get on with the finding out what type of leave the people want.
A ref to decide the future of the country based solely on a decision made by a third of the electorate? No thanks - put an option in there to reflect what another third want, then we're starting to get somewhere. Of course, 54% voted in 2017 for parties that ruled out no deal, so you'll be happy to take that off the table.
we need to get on with the finding out what type of leave the people want. everyone wins.
Ah, I think I see your problem. You suspect that the type of leave the people want is not to leave at all, hence not allowing them to give that answer. You’re afraid. I still think that another referendum will still result in us leaving, you can drop the fear, and get ready to campaign for the “proposed leave option” against not leaving… you’ll likely be on the winning side. You only need to move about 5% of voters… and a far bigger swing took place during the 2016 campaign. Support a “proposed leave option vs remain” Referendum and get a mandate to push ahead. Embrace it. Set out to win it. Don’t be afraid.
Nope rayban, the majority will be happy to leave with a deal that has been voted for by the people.
We need a referendum that has been put together by an independent and impartial body with leave only options /eu approved/ to break the deadlock and move on.
Yes pondo there should be a similar option to what we have now on the new ref just without some cherries, we could leave with a very similar deal but we let the people decide. fair and square jobs a goodun.
Can you run me through that one more time Kelvin, I'm afraid of?
Nope rayban, the majority will be happy to leave with a deal that has been voted for by the people.
No they won't.
Most remainers do not want the deal, most brexiteers do not want the deal. A two way referendum forces people to either abstain and delegitimise the vote or vote for something they do not support.
Anyone who thinks otherwise is a brexiteer who is worried that the dream is fading away.
Yes the majority will be happy to have a referendum on leave only options.
you are talking about things I haven't said or implied then claiming I must be a brexiteer.
Yes the majority will be happy to have a referendum on leave only options.
Proof?
exsee
Member
We have had 1 ref to decide leave or remain now we need to get on with the finding out what type of leave the people want. everyone wins.
As long as practically everyone- 96%- who voted to leave, agrees with the version of leave that's on offer. Otherwise, you end up finding the most popular form of leave, which will be less popular than remaining.
And that will never happen. Every version of brexit is too hard for some, too soft for others. There has never been a majority for any particular form of brexit. It is, as's been said, the basic problem of running your brexit campaign by promising everything to everyone, regardless of whether it's possible or whether it contradicts your other promises- you might win the referendum that way but you can never deliver.
(the brexiteers saw this problem very clearly; but they still decided to do it, because they knew the alternative of offering only realistic brexits would doom them to losing.
The response of course is to say "well people voted for some sort of brexit, therefore we have to deliver some sort of brexit". But if you promise to sell someone a hovercar, and then it turns out that there's no such thing as a hovercar, you wouldn't then demand that they throw away their current car and buy a cardboard box with TOTALLY A HOVERCAR written on in, because they wanted a hovercar.
Yes pondo there should be a similar option to what we have now on the new ref just without some cherries, we could leave with a very similar deal but we let the people decide. fair and square jobs a goodun.
Brilliant, I totally agree - nothing could be more similar than our currrent deal, put it on the ballot and job's a good 'un indeed. After all, the Leave campaign have nothing to fear from it, do they?
Yes the majority will be happy to have a referendum on leave only options.
How do you make this claim? Polls have been showing for ages that isn’t the case at all.
What we need is a “leave based on these proposals” vs remain Referendum. I feel Leave are very likely to win that, assuming the proposed form of leaving is well set out and explained. If Remain is ruled out in the questions, then any old shit can be proposed, and there’s no need to explain it.
I’m afraid of?
What are you afraid of? Well, your keenness to rule out the currently most popular option suggests that you’re afraid of that option winning the most support.
Rayban I don't have any proof, it's my opinion in reply to this below.
The only thing that would break the deadlock and wouldn’t disenfranchise remainers – is a three way referendum – no deal, deal or remain.
Proof?
Northwind that's not really true, you are suggesting that everyone who voted for remain would always vote remain regardless of leave options. Remain voters voted for all sorts of different reasons and this is well established.
Northwind that’s not really true, you are suggesting that everyone who voted for remain would always vote remain regardless of leave options. Remain voters voted for all sorts of different reasons and this is well established.
But it has been shown in polling data that they would given the choice.
Repeatedly.
People who say they’d vote differently to how they did in 2016 are still few and far between according to pollsters. But, of course, there are all those pesky under 22 voters waiting to have their say before we leave… they don’t tend to look kindly on the current mess, and mostly want the whole Brexit boondoggle canned ASAP.
Remain voters voted for all sorts of different reasons and this is well established.
Just so we're absolutely clear on this, here are all the different versions of remain:
Remain
Remain
Remain
Remain
Remain
Now, it should be obvious at this point that if you voted for remain, regardless of your reasons for doing so, you were voting for the same version of remain as everyone else.
Do you get it now or would you like a ****ing picture story?
Kelvin, Show me the polls that have asked that question, you can't pretend there is proof of something different by showing a poll that asks a completely different question.
I am afraid by the consequences of overturning the biggest democratic vote in British history. Many rational people have lost their heads and are happily spouting hatred because 'I want to remain/leave'
The new ref has to be leave only options put together by an independent impartial group to break the deadlock and move on
How can you propose leaving out the option most people currently support in the name of democracy?
I may like a general election without Johnson’s Conservative Party being allowed to stand candidates, but there’s no way I could dress it up as democratic.
Is this just an internet game, or do you really believe your “leave options only referendum” makes sense?
excee
Proof?
Northwind that’s not really true, you are suggesting that everyone who voted for remain would always vote remain regardless of leave options. Remain voters voted for all sorts of different reasons and this is well established.
Sorry but in this one single post you have just removed all credibility from yourself.
Remain really is Remain.