Brexited | the worst threads live the longest

Do you think there will be a Deal or No Deal?

  • Total voters
    194
  • Poll closed .
GloryHunter07 said:
I thought this had been debunked.
Click to expand...

It has. You could sign it, and multiple times with different emails, but they did a nightly purge based on the electoral register to stop people signing it with multiple emails and fake names, so they wouldn't ultimately count towards the total figure.
 
dannyrhinos89 said:
It's cute people thought this would've made a difference anyway.

Signed by people from all over the world and has the ability for one person to sign it numerous times over.
Click to expand...

800,000 citizens live outside the UK. 200,000 entries from overseas. And most of the "multiple votes" get rejected after they are entered. You could use multiple real email addresses and fake names but even then most will rejected by data matching and the principle bot type methods don't work.
 
dannyrhinos89 said:
Dont know I've read peoples tweets saying they've signed it numerous times, all it takes is a creating a new email account which takes literally 5 minutes on gmail.
Click to expand...

Lots of leave enthusiasts have been falsely making the claim to try to discredit the petition.
 
Alex99 said:
Would it though? Perhaps clearly explaining that the referendum was in fact, advisory, and not a binding vote would go a long way, because it's something that is often ignored and rarely mentioned by the media when discussing Brexit, and doesn't appear to be common knowledge.

The fact that we had an advisory referendum, won by a narrow majority, following a campaign fraught with with illegal funding and outright lies, and that near three years on, we have no clear direction or course of action to actually carry out the result, would suggest to me that there is certainly at least some merit to revoking Article 50.

They could even caveat it with a promise to revisit the result in x number of years, after carrying out proper impact assessments, and detailing actual exit strategies that ensure the country is better off outside of the EU, as should be the case for us to leave.

This "leave at all costs" mentality is absolutely insane, and no government should be pandering so obviously to a group of vocal morons who want something to happen despite the seemingly obvious wide-spread, damaging consequences it will have.

EDIT: Also, any undermining of the democratic process that could have happened has already happened when a) Vote Leave was won through illegal funding and blatant lies, b) a snap election was called to consolidate power for the current PM, but actually only kept her in a job courtesy of a £1 billion bribe slung at a bunch of mercenary, god-bothering lunatics from Northern Ireland and c) the current PM is attempting to table a deal that has already been voted down heavily on two occasions already, without making any changes.
Click to expand...
None of those reasons will wash with most leave voters though, very few give a damn about illegal funding which at the end of the day is basically a technicality. You have a point wrt the lies told as I’m sure plenty of people will believed the £350m to the NHS lie and would have been swayed by that, plenty of those people would likely vote remain if given another chance.

Leavers will see any attempt at revoking article 50 as a betrayal and it’s not as though it would be only a few thousand, it would be millions, it also wouldn’t sit well with a lot of remain supporters I’d imagine, which is why a second vote is the only way forward.

Completely agree on your points about May and the DUP, it’s beyond a joke and the less said about that shower the better. May’s attempts at putting her deal through parliament have been pathetic.

The fact remains though that more people voted to leave than to remain, at the time no one knew exactly what leave meant, now we have a vision of that through May’s deal, so I think this should be put to the people again, leave or remain now that we know what leaving looks like.
 
One thing you probably could do is sign it for your grandparents or some other person you know wouldn't ordinarily be aware of it. I bet there's a thousand or so of those sorts of signature floating around.
 
So they continue with the leave means leave bullshit.

What happens if they revoke A50, spend the next indeterminate number of years coming to an agreement all sides can support. Putting aside a sensible amount of time each parliamentary session, so they actually get on with running the country in the meantime.

Then, in about 2050, when they have a solution, reinvoke A50 again.

Job done, everyone is happy :)
 
I'm not sure how democratic acting on an uninformed, lie ridden referendum that came out more or less 50/50 actually is. Particularly when one side spent loads of money illegally on their campaign.

A referendum would usually involve explaining the options and what they mean to the people and letting them decide. Not telling them to decide then explaining what it actually means after.

I am enjoying what a mess this is. MPs literally voting on whether they should be allowed to vote on things, among which is the option about whether to vote on things. It's actually amazing how useless they all are when they actually have to do something other than talk shite...I mean in spite of the fact I already presumed they were all completely useless.

I hope it carries on forever.
 
Eire Red United said:
None of those reasons will wash with most leave voters though, very few give a damn about illegal funding which at the end of the day is basically a technicality. You have a point wrt the lies told as I’m sure plenty of people will believed the £350m to the NHS lie and would have been swayed by that, plenty of those people would likely vote remain if given another chance.

Leavers will see any attempt at revoking article 50 as a betrayal and it’s not as though it would be only a few thousand, it would be millions, it also wouldn’t sit well with a lot of remain supporters I’d imagine, which is why a second vote is the only way forward.

Completely agree on your points about May and the DUP, it’s beyond a joke and the less said about that shower the better. May’s attempts at putting her deal through parliament have been pathetic.

The fact remains though that more people voted to leave than to remain, at the time no one knew exactly what leave meant, now we have a vision of that through May’s deal, so I think this should be put to the people again, leave or remain now that we know what leaving looks like.
Click to expand...

My point is that they shouldn't be blindly pandering to the leave voters though, regardless of how vocal or angry they get. The fact that no one voting leave really knew what they were voting for is another reason to at the very least revoke article 50 so the actual nature of leaving the EU can be determined.

As it is we're two days shy of the original deadline, without the remotest idea of how leaving the EU will actually work. It's a farce, and no amount of shouting from Wetherspoons-frequenting day-time drinkers should influence the government's handling of it, but it quite obviously has.
 
17 Van der Gouw said:
There are bound to be a decent proportion who have signed it a few times, I mean, most people these days have 3 or 4 email addresses.

I've also read about people signing it from overseas, but surely the system would filter those out?
Click to expand...

I dunno, when I signed it i had to give my postal address and name, then confirm I received an email. I think the site then periodically cross references names and postcodes from the electoral roll and purges any that are duplicates / don't match. You can still probably game it somewhat but it does seem to have a few protocols which will likely make it more or less accurate.
 
17 Van der Gouw said:
There are bound to be a decent proportion who have signed it a few times, I mean, most people these days have 3 or 4 email addresses.

I've also read about people signing it from overseas, but surely the system would filter those out?
Click to expand...

No, British Citizens can sign it wherever they are in the world, as I did although I know it's pointless.
 
Eire Red United said:
None of those reasons will wash with most leave voters though, very few give a damn about illegal funding which at the end of the day is basically a technicality. You have a point wrt the lies told as I’m sure plenty of people will believed the £350m to the NHS lie and would have been swayed by that, plenty of those people would likely vote remain if given another chance.

Leavers will see any attempt at revoking article 50 as a betrayal and it’s not as though it would be only a few thousand, it would be millions, it also wouldn’t sit well with a lot of remain supporters I’d imagine, which is why a second vote is the only way forward.

Completely agree on your points about May and the DUP, it’s beyond a joke and the less said about that shower the better. May’s attempts at putting her deal through parliament have been pathetic.

The fact remains though that more people voted to leave than to remain, at the time no one knew exactly what leave meant, now we have a vision of that through May’s deal, so I think this should be put to the people again, leave or remain now that we know what leaving looks like.
Click to expand...

Most of the more stubborn Leave supporters I know of are the type who nothing will sit well with. Even if we leave without a deal they will turn their attention to something else. Young people, foreigners who don't get kicked out, Raheem Sterling, benefits etc...

It's pretty pointless trying to keep people happy who are determined to act like victims of everyone else's existence. If anything a second vote or going back on the first will give them something to focus on for a while that might actually do some good. THe government and parliament in general would get slaughtered for creating the whole mess, and rightly so.

The time to stop looking for a solution that wont upset millions of people was as soon as the referendum result revealed only a 2% majority. Even if it was a simple process, one way or another half the country wouldn't be happy. Turns out our government has flounced it up so much that even the half who do get what they want will now be unhappy. The half who don't will settle down into a seething rage once they've set a few buildings on fire.
 
17 Van der Gouw said:
There are bound to be a decent proportion who have signed it a few times, I mean, most people these days have 3 or 4 email addresses.

I've also read about people signing it from overseas, but surely the system would filter those out?
Click to expand...

British citizens overseas are entitled to sign the petition. Most, but not all, other multiple entry attempts get rejected after data matching. You can seemingly enter multiple time but then get a rejection email later. A VPN and multiple real emails might work sometimes but the incidence of cheating will be fairly small.

And the petition will be ignored anyway.
 
Paul the Wolf said:
Yes probably, but none of the indicative votes I've seen are possible so don't know what's going to be in the second round.
Click to expand...

Not seen them all yet but quite a few seem bogus, seems we've got Malthouse compromise (again) and Norway Plus.

Norway plus is a funny one as loads of leave voters call for it despite having no clue that even with the plus element it involves so many of the things they don't want.

Benns tabled the custom union amendment. Achievable but it's a solution that will please nobody.
 
Jacob-Rees Mogg has written an article in the Daily Mail, confirming that he intends to back May’s deal.

He writes:

I apologise for changing my mind. Theresa May’s deal is a bad one, it does not deliver on the promises made in the Tory Party manifesto and its negotiation was a failure of statesmanship.

A £39 billion bill for nothing, a minimum of 21 months of vassalage, the continued involvement of the European Court and, worst of all, a backstop with no end date.

Yet, I am now willing to support it if the Democratic Unionist Party does, and by doing so will be accused of infirmity of purpose by some and treachery by others.

Or being a complete charlatan and liar.
 
Smores said:
Not seen them all yet but quite a few seem bogus, seems we've got Malthouse compromise (again) and Norway Plus.

Norway plus is a funny one as loads of leave voters call for it despite having no clue that even with the plus element it involves so many of the things they don't want.

Benns tabled the custom union amendment. Achievable but it's a solution that will please nobody.
Click to expand...

And also they want to change the WA , not only the Political declaration. Think there could be a reaction from the EU after tomorrow.

Parliament had an opportunity to do something sensible but it looks like a missed opportunity.
 
Paul the Wolf said:
And also they want to change the WA , not only the Political declaration. Think there could be a reaction from the EU after tomorrow.

Parliament had an opportunity to do something sensible but it looks like a missed opportunity.
Click to expand...

The Guardian took that analysis of Benns amendment too but for me it's a misreading. I read it as the package of both needs to contain a customs union not each document needs revising to include the custom union.

I'm probably wrong though perhaps there's technicalities requiring it including in the WA.
 
Smores said:
The Guardian took that analysis of Benns amendment too but for me it's a misreading. I read it as the package of both needs to contain a customs union not each document needs revising to include the custom union.

I'm probably wrong though perhaps there's technicalities requiring it including in the WA.
Click to expand...



That's the amendment but why not just put it in the Political declaration, although legally don't know.

Hope he's told Corbyn that it means the UK can't do their own trade deals.
 
So there are supposedly 17 different motions to be considered by the Speaker and whittled down and that doesn't include the actual Withdrawal Agreement.

Thus 18 different forms of Brexit or non-Brexit and Leavers supposedly knew what they voted for. And all this two days before the Uk are supposed to leave. The world is looking on.
 
Smores said:
The Guardian took that analysis of Benns amendment too but for me it's a misreading. I read it as the package of both needs to contain a customs union not each document needs revising to include the custom union.

I'm probably wrong though perhaps there's technicalities requiring it including in the WA.
Click to expand...

If it's not in the WA, it is not legally binding.

The Political Declaration can simply be discarded by whichever Tory Brexiteer ousts the PM later this year.
 
Damien said:
They'll be debating this petition the same day.

xEpsecC.png
Click to expand...

I presume this petition has only just been started compared with the one that got millions of signatures?
 
Regarding British signatures from abroad on the petitions website.

There have been votes from dozens of different countries.

Among them:

- 43,378 from France
- 19,884 from Germany
- 24,521 from Spain
- 23,871 from the United States
- 10,686 from Canada
- 18,626 from Australia

There's no reason at this point to believe these aren't genuine votes from British overseas, but the numbers aren't insignificant.

The government won't give a damn regardless.

Petition data from here. In JSON format, can be dumped into a JSON viewer.
 
17 Van der Gouw said:
Regarding British signatures from abroad on the petitions website.

There have been votes from dozens of different countries.

Among them:

- 43,378 from France
- 19,884 from Germany
- 24,521 from Spain
- 23,871 from the United States
- 10,686 from Canada
- 18,626 from Australia

There's no reason at this point to believe these aren't genuine votes from British overseas, but the numbers aren't insignificant.

The government won't give a damn regardless.

Petition data from here. In JSON format, can be dumped into a JSON viewer.
Click to expand...

The numbers are not insignificant, but then nor was the much larger number of people denied a say in the original opinion poll in 2016.

700,000 directly affected by this decision were not allowed a vote despite remaining British Citizens.
 
Just got this in my in-box (something about the date tells me I shouldn't get too excited):

==================

Dear SW,

Parliament is going to debate the petition you signed – “Revoke Article 50 and remain in the EU.”.

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/241584

The debate is scheduled for 1 April 2019.

Once the debate has happened, we’ll email you a video and transcript.

Thanks,
The Petitions team
UK Government and Parliament

====================
 
Meanwhile, looks like they've already started to solve the problem of what to do, post-BREXIT, with all that spare cash they'll save once wasteful MEPs are not frittering our money away in Brussels:

The $16m New York penthouse fit for a UK civil servant
Exclusive: Luxury apartment next to UN headquarters to be used by senior diplomat charged with seeking post-Brexit trade deals

"The government has bought a $15.9m (£12m) seven bedroom luxury New York apartment for a senior British civil servant charged with signing fresh trade deals in a post-Brexit world, the Guardian can reveal. …"

Full story: https://www.theguardian.com/politic...new-york-penthouse-fit-for-a-uk-civil-servant
 
Alex99 said:
Would it though? Perhaps clearly explaining that the referendum was in fact, advisory, and not a binding vote would go a long way, because it's something that is often ignored and rarely mentioned by the media when discussing Brexit, and doesn't appear to be common knowledge.

The fact that we had an advisory referendum, won by a narrow majority, following a campaign fraught with with illegal funding and outright lies, and that near three years on, we have no clear direction or course of action to actually carry out the result, would suggest to me that there is certainly at least some merit to revoking Article 50.

They could even caveat it with a promise to revisit the result in x number of years, after carrying out proper impact assessments, and detailing actual exit strategies that ensure the country is better off outside of the EU, as should be the case for us to leave.

This "leave at all costs" mentality is absolutely insane, and no government should be pandering so obviously to a group of vocal morons who want something to happen despite the seemingly obvious wide-spread, damaging consequences it will have.

EDIT: Also, any undermining of the democratic process that could have happened has already happened when a) Vote Leave was won through illegal funding and blatant lies, b) a snap election was called to consolidate power for the current PM, but actually only kept her in a job courtesy of a £1 billion bribe slung at a bunch of mercenary, god-bothering lunatics from Northern Ireland and c) the current PM is attempting to table a deal that has already been voted down heavily on two occasions already, without making any changes.
Click to expand...
Great post.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.