If you're the EU, how do you even react to that mess? I can't see beyond an accidental crash out at this point, there's just no consensus in the UK for a clear course of action.
Brexited | the worst threads live the longest
- Thread starter Silva
- Start date
If you're the EU, how do you even react to that mess? I can't see beyond an accidental crash out at this point, there's just no consensus in the UK for a clear course of action.
If there was a second referendum, would it have to be a binary choice between leaving with no deal or staying? It seems ridiculous to resurrect May's deal as an option on the ballot paper when MPs have already judged it to be not fit for purpose, but I can imagine MPs preferring that option to offering no deal, out of fear of that option winning.
I still see a lot of talk about a People's Vote, but far less debate about what it would actually entail. Although that might be because Im not looking in the right places.
I still see a lot of talk about a People's Vote, but far less debate about what it would actually entail. Although that might be because Im not looking in the right places.
They're both as bad as each other. Just pointing out a minor technicality, most don't realise how big a role government played in the recession.
Think I originally saw it here (from Guardian 19.02.24 but there was a longer piece from EU perspective in Handelsblatt here in Germany:
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...could-be-delayed-until-2021-eu-sources-reveal
I bet if it was a cancel Brexit option (without necessarily needing to hold a second referendum) it would gain a lot more support.
I think some are so fatigued by the process they just don’t want anything more to do with it and thus no deal appeals more than a second referendum.
I think some are so fatigued by the process they just don’t want anything more to do with it and thus no deal appeals more than a second referendum.
Even brexiteers have stopped pretending there any good outcomes from brexit. I just wish it wasn't us carrying out this train wreck and it was another European country.
That David Davis voted for the deal shows you how much of a farce brexit has become.
That David Davis voted for the deal shows you how much of a farce brexit has become.
When they voted for Brexit, they did NOT vote for any deal. Period. So it's that simple. It's easy to lie and say people didn't know what they were voting for. They did. The only people who act or say they're tired are those trying to swing the vote. No deal. If the people in charge are unable to handle it, they're in the wrong job period. As it is, it's a joke that someone who didn't want it in the first place does the negotiations. It's a complete joke.
What a load of shite. People had no idea what they were voting for. That's become blatantly obvious since the referendum happened. The fact that they're trying to get a deal shows how little they knew about the repercussions at the time.
You speaking on behalf of how many people?...How many people that voted for it, have you actively spoken too (not on the internet chartrooms). For starters nations need to be able to create money. So it isn't great to begin with because we're under the thumb of the bankers anyway which means society is being constructed without your input. But let's say what your saying is true. What does that say about the level of society that is being created around you? That most people have next to zero survival skills. Is that progress?
Absolute nonsense. How many people before the referendum were arguing leaving the EU without a deal? All the talk was how they will give us this and that cause they wanted to sell cars. You're post is disingenuous. Don't even know why I am replying.
If the Brexiteers are so confident in their direction then why not allow another vote now the picture is clearer and we have this parliamentary logjam?
A cross party group of MPs are apparently now planning to push for a softer Brexit and will instigate a series of indicative votes on the various options in an attempt to find a majority for something (possibly a customs union, an EEA- style deal including single market membership, or a second referendum etc).
They believe there is a “silent majority” for a softer form of Brexit, with up to 50 Conservative MPs prepared to back the idea rather than countenance no deal.
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...y-are-ready-to-push-may-towards-softer-brexit
Not seen a YouGOV poll that gives those results. Latest one from YouGOV today :
There are apparently a lot of "badly worded" polls out there:
This is from the weekend's Guardian OpEd:
Its quite clear that most of the Politicians didnt even know what Brexit meant, given the fantasies they sold. How on earth could Brexit voters know when their politicians didnt?
Your argument don't even make sense. Think logically. He's making the claim and I asked him the question. It's up to him to back up what he's saying. I don't have to because I pointed out what's obvious and was smart enough to do it first.
Because the average person is more in touch with reality then the average politician
Bollocks. The average politician knew feck all about how the EU worked and the average Joe knew even less .
I would have some sympathy for this opinion if there was a way of ensuring the people expressing it had to bear the brunt of the impact if/when the shit hits the fan. People like James O'Brien and Terry Christian champion this idea, which is unfortunately a complete fantasy, that if there are job losses after Brexit, as a result of Brexit, people who voted for it, people who advocated a no deal outcome, should be the first ones out the door. If there are shortages of medicine, the people who wanted no deal should be at the back of the queue. Then it would be slightly more palatable.
Unfortunately this could and would never happen. What you would actually have is the majority of people who advocate this kind of thing complaining bitterly about the inconvenience to their lives, the same as people who saw it coming, blaming the government for it and demanding something is done about it.
Bollocks again, you claimed that all leave voters know what they voted for. So, Striker10, how many voters have you actually spoken to?
"(not on the internet chartrooms)"
The referendum proved there is a disparity between what the people think and what parliamentarians think. I think May's deal might get a lot of support if it was put to the people up against no deal.
So during the referendum campaign when Boris Johnson and Daniel Hannan were talking about staying in the single market and the likes of Farage and Rees-Mogg were talking of something similar to the Norway model, all 17.4m leave voters were more aware of the reality and were ignoring those comments as they wanted no deal?
Your just trying to turn my question on me when I wasn't even talking to you. So I won't respond. But this is all in regards to the nwo. The reality is we have no power without the ability to make money anyway. What the poster stated was a blanket statement. I don't have to answer to you.
That article basically says that no one in the EU proposed or is interested in a lengthy extension. The only scenario of an extension is in case of an actual agreement and for implementation of that agreement whatever that is.
This is the key point and one that needs to be answered first
Last edited:
Leaving without a deal wasn’t even an option on the table a year ago. Some shifted their position to no deal once they realised May wasn’t going to get good terms from the EU, but it wasn’t being talked about as a realistic option during the referendum. If it was the Brexit option then I suspect Remain would’ve won.
People need to wake up. The people pushing for No Deal (Farage, JRM, Johnson) are in it for themselves, and stand to make money from it. They’re not pushing for it because of ‘the will of the people’.
Politicians lie. For a whole host of reasons. But that isn't the totality of the reason people voted to leave the Eu
The idea of brexit was to be out of the EU. As far as i'm aware. Do we want to live in a dictatorship? I hear china care for their workers. The ones that get stressed, if they jump out the window they'll land in a safety net. As a nation people need to understand, we need to make the laws and we also need to make the money. Because the money system for starters is hampering us big time. We're being screwed by the bankers anyway.
I think it probably would to. But if the vote has to include two options, and one of them has to be to cancel Brexit, it becomes a decision about which Brexit option you offer. How can MPs offer the people May's deal as the only option for Brexit when they themselves dont think it is fit for purpose? And when, anecdotally at least, there seems to be quite a decent appetite in the country for no deal?
Its a difficult question, that connects with the post I made a couple of minutes ago. Democratically, should MPs give the people the right to vote for something that know / believe is going to hurt them, that they believe they will end up regretting? Should the sheer stupidity of that option disqualify it from inclusion on the ballot paper? Should electorates be treated like children, basically?
I dont see how a referendum would be legitimate without no deal as an option. In that sense finding some way to make it a three way vote, without unfairly splitting the Brexit vote, seems the only way to go - so a two question referendum. Or, more likely, for this reason a second referendum is a non starter.
But leaving the EU doesn't dictate that it's leaving with no deal and a lot of people who voted leave would have done so based on those lies (which were framed as promises).
It was not a single idea. I'm sure there are plenty who wanted to leave at any cost. Given how much effort was spent on talking up the economic prospects of brexit and dismissing the economic downsides of it, it seems equally clear that a lot of people who voted leave did not vote for doing so at all costs. They voted because they had been duped into believing brexit would be largely free of economic consequences.
I don't need to speak to them, it's obvious from the media and the backtracking that people had no idea. They bought into the idea that the NHS would get an extra £350m a week (it hasn't), they bought into the idea that immigration would drop (it won't), they bought into the idea that the UK would be better off outside the EU (it won't). They were fooled, they were promised all these things that they won't get now. They bought the lies.
So.. how many people have you talked to who knew exactly what they were voting for? Can you categorically say that those who voted to leave knew exactly what they were voting for, which is what you said in your first post.
I don't even know what you're on about in the rest of your posts. Nonsensical ramblings.
You know how politics is. They tweak a few things but it amounts to the same thing.
How can it be undemocratic to give the people one more say?
Who’re people going to blame if we leave without a deal and the country suffers? I can’t believe how stubborn people are being over this, like their lives are suddenly going to be better when the UK leaves?
Firstly why you so angry? Don't you know you can't think properly when your emotional? Obvious from the media? Gimme a break. Look, the media is about as corrupt as the church is. The nation will be flooded. So why have a government at this point?...
I'm not emotional or angry
it's an internet forum, I wouldn't post on it if it made me angry. Why is the go to reply on here when someone has no viable argument in return to just go "omg you're being so emotional and angry man". I guess you don't have a viable response to me so I'll leave it at that.Only if they accept the reason we put forward for an extension; however since the EU keep saying the UK doesn't know what it wants, then logically they can't grant an extension?
Its leave with no deal, or revoke A50 and remain, which is exactly what we voted on 23rd June 2016, the binary choice was implicit in the question and it still is. Its this self delusion that our politicians have practised for two almost three years that has made the UK a laughing stock. Everyone outside the UK knew after Mays Lancaster House speech when she said "No deal is better than a bad deal" that it was always doing to be no deal or no Brexit, the EU could not, even if they wanted to, give us a 'good deal' They would be signing EU's own death warrant.
The only extension now the EU might consider is if our PM says we are revoking A50 but need time to pass the legislation through parliament.
Because to ignore a vote is to set a dangerous president. From a psychological POV, you can transpose it ideologicially to what the nazis did - which is repeat a lie often enough and eventually you'll believe it. You have to respect the people. If there is no respect to begin with then what does it say about the country? Are we still wearing diapers? Can we not accept a choice that people made and be positive? Diversity is our strength yes? It is or it isn't? We're pretty diverse....so what exactly are we doing as a nation? Progressing or regressing?...
I'm not emotional or angry
Yes, so less of the attitude.
Because you make things up. The campaign was heavily based on the idea that the UK would get a more favorable deal from the EU and that German manufacturers and French farmers would put pressure on their respective governments in order to make sure that it happens, prominent Leave campaigners claimed that the UK would not leave the single market and that Norway was their favored model. The public was never sold the idea of a total break with no deal.
There is no mandate for no deal. Asking people how they want to leave the EU isn't ignoring the vote, it is respecting it.