Brexit 2020+

Yes I blame them too, don’t assume I’m a DUP supporter.

That’s not an assumption I have made. I have made quite a few others, though.

Guys – dougie has stuck his head above the parapet. Try to shoot him kindly ? Insults are not nice and he has not been offensive himself

How do you tell someone nicely that they have been sold a pup and are repeating the mistake by regurgitating propaganda from the same people that duped them?

And that they are talking shit as a result?

I think the deal that was proposed was perfectly acceptable as a brexit compromise.

he has not been offensive himself

He absolutely has, even if unintentionally. His last post as quoted at the top of this page was about the most offensive thing I’ve read on here.

Hardly cougar but I get your point. Ok not personally offensive?

heck – what has happened to me? I’ve gone all moderate 😉

You’ve grown as a person.

I think the deal that was proposed was perfectly acceptable as a brexit compromise.

What deal that was proposed? The UK side will still not make clear what they want and have still not actually made any proposals that are concrete and plausible

He absolutely has, even if unintentionally. His last post was about the most offensive thing I’ve read on here.

It’s OK. I’m sure Dougie is sorry if you felt offended by what he said (another classic Boris tactic).

Lolz@ Cougar – i’m still only 5’9 3/4

You’ve grown as a person.

Wins the internet award for dry humour 2020…..?

😉

remain must take share of the blame for the presence of Bojo as PM.

I’m increasingly disinclined to continue this discussion, but this needs a light shining under it.

Boris was voted in by just shy of 200,000 paid-up Tory party members. It should go without saying, but remainers probably feature quite low in this demographic.

Tory party membership took a massive upswing a few months before the vote, I can’t remember exact numbers but it was something like a third of the total IIRC.

Just before this, Aaron Banks / Leave.EU launched a Twitter campaign encouraging their followers to go pay their £25 to sign up. This, obviously, is totally unrelated.

You are being played. You are being manipulated. You are being lied to. Why the actual frank aren’t you angry yet? I’m bloody incendiary.

I think the deal that was proposed was perfectly acceptable as a brexit compromise.

The problem is that aside from the fact that there are no tangible benefits to brexit, there was no benefit to May’s “deal” from either side of the argument. The deal was almost as good as we have already only relinquishing our seat at the table as a decision maker. Remain and Leave alike went “well, what’s the bloody point of that then?” which is why it got kicked to the kerb as many times as it did.

This is the elephant in the room. Any sort of ‘compromise’ leaves both Leave and Remain worse off. It’s the one thing that’s united the country in this debacle, every man woman and child in the county saw it for the (red white and blue, oven ready) glitter-sprinkled turd that it was.

Ok a caveat to that is that the PM is never directly elected, if it was a Labour government the case would be the same.

Why is it offensive to say that a democratic vote was ignored by all sides instead of being accepted and the resulting parliamentary infighting it caused has stalled the process for 4 years? Remain and leave have stalled the process.

Thanks TJ I’m pretty sure I have not personally attacked anyone on this thread dispite having to answer many more voices than my own and dispite being personally insulted.

I was asked to inject something into the echo chamber which I have done.

I could easily go to a brexiteer thread and have my own opinions bounced back at me.

heck – what has happened to me? I’ve gone all moderate 😉

can i just say, i’m very proud of you. 🙂

Lolz@ Cougar – i’m still only 5’9 3/4

I’ve got half an inch over you.

I’m also taller.

Why is it offensive to say that a democratic vote was ignored by all sides instead of being accepted and the resulting parliamentary infighting it caused has stalled the process for 4 years?

It’s probably not, but sadly (as its been done to death) it needs reminding that the vote you refer to was purely advisory. The Tory government could have avoided the four years of turmoil you mention by constructively tackling the question ‘That was inconclusive. Why is the country divided like that and what can we do to fix it?’ rather than charging blindly along their predetermined ideological cul-de-sac.

Why is it offensive to say that a democratic vote was ignored by all sides instead of being accepted and the resulting parliamentary infighting it caused has stalled the process for 4 years? Remain and leave have stalled the process.

if you’re saying both leave and remain hated every deal presented to them, you’d be right. including johnson and the erg. then they got rid of may, johnson fked about a bit, basically presented the same deal, and the ( now in control cons ) voted it through. BTW, the erg lot are now saying that the withdrawal agreement wasn’t what they wanted and isn’t really brexit ( despite having voted for it themselves ). what do you make of that?
edit: they actually want the withdrawal agreement withdrawn.

Why is it offensive to say

If you don’t understand how passing the blame is offensive then I don’t think I can explain it.

that a democratic vote

It was a referendum, not a democratic vote.

was ignored by all sides

It was not ignored If it had been ignored then we wouldn’t have left, would we.

instead of being accepted and the resulting parliamentary infighting

An opposition is a core tenet of a democracy. Without it you have a dictatorship. Remember the democratic Leave mantra, “shut up and get on with it”? I swear we could have avoided a lot of this lunacy just by buying 17 million dictionaries.

it caused has stalled the process for 4 years? Remain and leave have stalled the process.

Welcome to parliamentary democracy, that’s how it’s worked for 200 years.

You argument is “leavers are at fault for not agreeing with us” and as a response to that I refer you to some of my peers’ earlier rebuttals, particularly the ones starting with ‘f’.

You can **** right off.  It’s fairly obvious it’s the fault of you and your ilk.

<span style=”font-size: 0.8rem;”>snoutflakes trying to shift blame like the **** they are.</span>

It was a referendum, not a democratic vote.

Please explain what is undemocratic about a referendum?

Surely referenda are highly democratic as everyone gets their say.

Welcome to parliamentary democracy, that’s how it’s worked for 200 years.

Not that Joris hasn’t done some damage to it with his childish attempts to subvert it. Cummings would do away with it altogether.

You are being played. You are being manipulated. You are being lied to. Why the actual frank aren’t you angry yet? I’m bloody incendiary.

And then you start to wonder why many of these people would do such a thing. Or at least anyone with a half questioning outlook on life would. And you read what the likes of Gove and Little Liam Fox would like to do to the NHS. You note that Tory MPs are voting down motions in parliament that seek to stop the NHS being on the table in trade negotiations.

And then you get really angry, because the whole thing is a one-off heist while they’ve still got the chance. A heist they managed to con a lot of ‘impressionable’ people into voting for by appealing to their worst inner prejudices.

And then you think “well, the Americans did the same thing”, but you then realise they had their stupid racist/xenophobic tantrum in a vote that can be pretty easily reversed after four years. And then you realise we really world-beating in one thing. Stupidity.

<Slow hand clap>

Please explain what is undemocratic about a referendum?

Surely referenda are highly democratic as everyone gets their say.

You won, get over it.

Referenda are only binding when the act that creates it explicitly states it. The brexit one didn’t. Commiting to brexit or not is therefore the personal choice of the PM and is not  legally mandated. One of the reasons why vote leave got off the hook is because of this. The supreme Court ruled that their actions were not breaking electoral law because the referendum was non-binding. If it were binding the result would gave been declared null. See the contradiction and sophistry involved and why so many people are so angry?

A referendum is in essence an opinion poll, nothing more. The verdict was a marginal win for leave but was treated as winner takes all. And by winner I mean the brexiteer elite. The rest of us are ****, leave and remain voter alike, and our lives will be poorer. Not necessarily because of brexit per say but how it was conducted and is being pursued.

Please explain what is undemocratic about a referendum?

Surely referenda are highly democratic as everyone gets their say.

Do I have to? It was four years ago and has been discussed to death, this is another Page 2 argument.

Sigh. Once more with feeling:

The UK operates a system of parliamentary democracy.

A democratic vote in the UK is for parties. The result is mandatory.

A referendum is an opinion poll. It is advisory. It has nothing to do with the democratic process.

We do not have direct democracy in this country, we never have. We do not vote on individual policies (in any sort of manner which is intended to be binding), we never have.

In countries which do have direct democracy (eg, Switzerland) ballots require a supermajority and the government still has ultimate power of veto if they don’t like a result. Because not doing so would be bloody stupid. Like, say you had a vote on whether to abolish tax, that would probably have a massive majority in favour but it would be ruinous to the country’s economy. Should they go ahead because “the people have spoken”?

Whereas here the 2016 referendumb is seemingly simultaneously both mandatory and advisory depending on which outcome best suits the brexies at the time. It fell down in court because it was ruled that May enacted Article 666 of her own volition, yet it’s still held up as the absolute reason we must go through with this because not to do so would be undemocratic. It’s Schrodinger’s Referendum. You are being lied to, have I mentioned that yet?

I’m truly, utterly sick to the hind teeth of hearing about the referendum. You won, we lost and I really wish you’d take the advice you’ve been screaming at us for years and shut up and get on with it.

If it were binding the result would gave been declared null.

Popular misconception. Everything else you said is bang on but that bit is not actually true, it’s just speculation. The court refused to make such a comment as it was outside the scope of the case.

See Dougie, we fact-check our own too. This is how we get smarter and learn things.

You won, we lost and I really wish you’d take the advice you’ve been screaming at us for years and shut up and get on with it.

They can’t because now they’re having doubts and they want a grownup to hold their hand and go “there there it will all be fine”.

Well, it won’t.

So **** off.

Popular misconception. Everything else you said is bang on but that bit is not actually true, it’s just speculation. The court refused to make such a comment as it was outside the scope of the case.

A fair point and one I returned to correct but was too late. This was the opinion of informed legal commentators not the supreme court.

Another one to ponder

The Ashers case went to the highest level in the UK, the supreme court. It has now been forward to the European court, which in fairness will likely return the same decision.

Do you guys think that it is good to be able to go above the highest court in the country? Or does this undermine determination of law by the UK?

Can the swear filter be turned off for this thread? All the **** in the world just won’t cut it right now.

Do you guys think that it is good to be able to go above the highest court in the country? Or does this undermine determination of law by the UK?

Why does justice begin and end with national boundaries?

See Dougie, we fact-check our own too. This is how we get smarter and learn things.

Yes I get that, it’s the very reason I haven’t joined a leave thread. However the thread is simply entitled Brexit 2020+

They can’t because now they’re having doubts and they want a grownup to hold their hand and go “there there it will all be fine”.

Well, it won’t.

So **** off.

I don’t need anyone’s reassurance and I’m sure many people who voted leave feel the same.

For every opinion I read on here I can read a counter opinion elsewhere.

I’m pretty sure Ratko Mladic would rather have been tried by a Serb court, for example.

Are you equating genocide to a row over a cake? I also think Mladic is being tried by the UN

Do you guys think that it is good to be able to go above the highest court in the country?

I think it’s essential, as it happens. If only for helping keep our own courts free from interference from the executive, and for somewhere for people to turn when they are singled out for abuse from members of that executive. You see, being elected to national government should not mean you can then do anything you want, in my opinion, and checks and balances, including international courts, are essential to protect citizens from overreaching governments.

 Or does this undermine determination of law by the UK?

It is also worth pointing out that Brexiteers are only keen on the rulings of UK courts when they get their own way.

‘Enemies of the People’ – ring any bells?

Go have a lie down and play Land of Hope and Glory and The Dambusters March a few times.

Daft thing is, I could play those tunes as well and feel good. Patriotism is not the same as Nationalism – which contradicts another fallacy your ilk would have everyone believe.

Are you equating genocide to a row over a cake? I also think Mladic is being tried by the UN

Emotive straw man alert. The point is not the magnitude of the crime/issue but the ability of supranational justice to override national justice if the state in question goes rogue.

Incidentally, what is your opinion on the Asher case?

Surely referenda are highly democratic as everyone gets their say.

Indeed, referendums are, but they are expensive and time consuming so historically have been reserved for major constitutional issues.

I didn’t think everyone got a say. Did all the economic migrants get a vote? After all, they are potentially the worst affected.

Do you guys think that it is good to be able to go above the highest court in the country? Or does this undermine determination of law by the UK?

The case was referred to the ECHR, not an EU body by the way, as it is covered by the European convention on human rights. The court oversees the actions of signatories and we played a major part in setting it up, and part of its explicit remit to to hold national governments to account for their actions under the act. So in this case yes, the court is independent of any nation state so has no national or political bias, and can deliver judgements accordingly.

Incidentally, what is your opinion on the Asher case?

The same as the supreme court ruling