remain was on the 2016 ballot paper and it lost. Having it on the next ballot just implies the last vote didn’t really count imo. I can appreciate other opinions but I don’t think there should be another referendum. The WA is there on the table, it’s better than no deal and there’s not enough time or political willpower to start renegotiating. MPs should sign it
Brexited | the worst threads live the longest
- Thread starter Silva
- Start date
remain was on the 2016 ballot paper and it lost. Having it on the next ballot just implies the last vote didn’t really count imo. I can appreciate other opinions but I don’t think there should be another referendum. The WA is there on the table, it’s better than no deal and there’s not enough time or political willpower to start renegotiating. MPs should sign it
If the result of the 1st gets overturned before implementation that is ignoring in my book.
In reality there is little difference between the 2 referendums. It is still Leave v Remain and I doubt many people have changed their minds at all. But no, you're right, I do understand and no, I don't like it, it just doesn't feel right. Not because I am a Leaver. I've said before I voted remain and will do so again but I certainly do not think Brexit is a complete disaster like some others do.
I have said all along, UK Governments (both Labour and Tory) over the last 30 years should have been more open regarding our integration the EU and had referendums taken place at the point each new treaty was produced we wouldn't be in this mess. It would have been with public consent.
I'm not intentionally saying no one can change their mind Smores , but also telling 52% of people, 'Sorry, we don't like your answer, have another go' is also wrong and a major reason why the Tories could potentially do so well in a GE.
Far too sensible.
Except that in 2016 People knew what remaining meant. The absolute shit show that has been the last three years clearly shows that no one knew what leaving meant or looked like.
So a Referendum of this deal v Remain is perfectly logical.
I don’t agree. This also implies that this time around everyone voting will be fully aware of what is in the WA which they obviously won’t.
Don't worry, Speaker's seeing through the crap today:
You see, I disagree. Did the remain campaign make any mention of further EU integration and the steady walk towards full federalism? The possibility of an EU military force? No. Remain was fought on the keeping the Status Quo when in fact this isn't what we will get.
If another referendum was to take place then, as Leave won, remain shouldn't be an option. It should only be what mode of withdrawal. Boris's WA agreement, Soft Brexit or Hard Brexit.
Crikey, this is fun
My point remains the same, it needn't have been a shit show. Politicians have made it one.
It was always going to be, because the situation when you're throwing away a wealth of integration and opportunity is inherently shit.
But only if you view full political integration as a benefit. Leave voters largely do not clearly.
And I didn't vote remain because I wanted political integration, that is the area of being part of the EU I don't like, I voted remain because of my work and I had doubts about how it would affect my job. Whether those doubts have foundations I don't and may never know, but I made the call and would do so again.
In the UK, these invisible faceless nasty people from the EU, where do these people come from, what is their ultimate goal and why ( the British press have a lot to answer for) pushing the UK around whereas in the other 27 it's those 27 countries who decide the future between them.
Do you also insist that a government honours all election mandates before another election is held?
And what's wrong if they do? 44 million people don't want it. It's not the will of the people.
Last edited:
Did I say political? I didn't.
LBC, Barnsley, you say. A pub? Whoopidoo.
I'd like to know what's worse than civil riots? Murdering more Remain supporting MP's? Is that the threat?
If people want to riot, smash up they own cities and kill remain people, they will quickly be arrested and then join those Tommy Robinson supporters in jail.
So you're argument is based on hypothetical policies of further integration the UK has veto powers on and democratically elected representatives of the people to discuss these potential future policies?
I'm struggling to understand why you voted remain at all.
I think that's because he didn't.
That's not how I see them Paul and none of my posts have ever alluded to that and yes, the british press have a hell of a lot to answer for on all sides of all arguments.
No but that is slightly different. We don't elect a Government then before they hold power quickly re-vote and get someone else in. We allow them to either succeed or fail with their manifestos before either keeping them or removing them.
Nothing wrong with wanting to stop Brexit sammsky, but more people voted for Brexit than against it.
No, I did. Integration with the EU is political.
The same nonsense was mentioned a few days ago, it defies any logic.
Literally, says you.
Financial, social, social security, travel, cultural, educational, scientific, agricultural, industrial, sport, defence, intelligence, etc, etc...
Simply because of my job. My work is so closely intertwined with the EU that I didn't really contemplate voting any other way.
If I voted Leave I would be quite comfortable admitting it Massive Spanner, why would I not? I'm just neither a die-hard remainer like a lot of you on here. I've got people who i love massively who all voted Leave.
But the UK would play a major part in where the EU would be heading if they stayed.
Big mistake of the UK was to vote in MEPs who spend their time stirring up hatred and earning money on the side doing LBC radio programmes, for example, instead of doing their real job representing the interests of the UK as an MEP.
No you wouldn't because there are loads of posters over the last three years in here just like you, who said they voted remain because they know 95% of posters in here are very pro-remain but then proceeded to spout nothing but support for leave and defend leave and criticize remain and the EU etc.
Nobody who would vote for remain would spend so much time vehemently defending leave and criticizing remain.
In a way I can kind of understand it because most posters who do come in here and openly admit to voting leave are usually flooded with responses calling them wrong.
I also asked you earlier to provide concrete examples of what these "good points" all the leave voters you know have for doing so and so far there's nothing other than your own opinions and hyperbole.
Eurosceptic MEP's were voted in largely because rightly or wrongly the UK has a very large Eurosceptic population.
But we have allowed them to succeed or fail and it's been the latter, it's been 3 years. How have they not had that opportunity to pass this policy in the same way as with any other policy?
If the public now back remain (I'm not sure either way) then implementing Brexit would be against the electorates wishes and that can't ever be democratic
Yes but what is achieved by turning up once in a blue moon having a rant in the EU parliament and not contributing to the interests of the UK
And why does the Uk have a Eurosceptic population, because of people like Farage and the British press. Ironically one of saddest people if the UK leave, especially with a deal, will be Farage.
I'll never understand why people are so vehemently against a second referendum when after the next extension, it will be over three and a year years since the initial vote. Surely after three and a half years where the result of the referendum still hasn't been implemented because it's so complex and so self destructive then it's OK to have another referendum.
Or is that not long enough? If this continues for five years, can there be another referendum then? What about ten years? Is that long enough?
Or is that not long enough? If this continues for five years, can there be another referendum then? What about ten years? Is that long enough?
I assure you I would tell the truth. I'm here as a Man Utd fan nothing more, I don't need to lie to make friends on here as I ultimately don't care what people on a phone screen or monitor think of me. It's not compulsory for me to post or read what others say. I enjoy politics and largely enjoy the banter but I hold very centrist views so as a result I seem to piss off both sides of most arguments.
I'm not defending leave any further than having a feeling that their democratic will has been ignored and MPs (both sides) haven't helped at all. I don't like what parliament has become this last 3 years.
And who has 'concrete' anything in this? My Mum and Dad are angry that what they voted for in 1975 has turned into something far different to what they were promised and my friends just believe in parliamentary sovereignty and financial independence. They believe, rightly or wrongly, that we can forge our own path.
Those are not good points though, that's just personal opinion, not points.
There is plenty concrete in this, if the UK remains in the EU it doesn't tank the economy, it protects the rights of foreign nationals, it guarantees young British people the right to work and live in Europe, it protects the GFA etc. Those are concrete facts. What are the facts/points/whatever that you think are so good from your leave voting relatives? Can you tell me?
Absolutely nothing.
Look, I can't speak for all leave voters about why the UK has so much eurosceptisism but My Mum and Dad (not just them obviously) were asked in 1975 if they wanted to join the EEC, nothing more than a free trading bloc so they were told. Over they years they have seen successive governments signing treaties, ceding huge swathes of our sovereignty away without their consent. Now I don't care what people think of me for saying it but I sympathise with their view.
Despite Norway being part of Schengen?
Norway has a hard border. Schengen does not follow the same border laws as the GFA/CTA
I'm getting really annoyed at the number of journalists failing in their jobs even Peston has been shocking lately. Is Dom digging out dirt on these people or something?
The Letwin amendment does not in anyway impact the 31st deadline yet it's reported everywhere that it's a delay tactic. A simpleton could understand that it's only to block no deal should Boris withdraw the extension after a deal passes the MV.
The Letwin amendment does not in anyway impact the 31st deadline yet it's reported everywhere that it's a delay tactic. A simpleton could understand that it's only to block no deal should Boris withdraw the extension after a deal passes the MV.
The likelyhood that remain would now win rather than a concern for democracy or some notion of the will of the people is what seems to behind most objections to.a second referedum.
Referendums are an idiotic idea most of the time but the shit show the first one reigned down onus can probabky only be fixed with another. Or if not fixed resolved in the least destructive way now possible.
I also voted in the 1975 referendum. It was never just a trading bloc. The number one reason, although there were many reasons, I voted for staying was freedom of movement not so that British Leyland could sell their cars more easily - Whatever treaties or laws have been signed by successive British governments are signed by governments which presumably voted for by the British electorate and by the EU parliament with British representation.
I said this recently r.e. Kuennsberg but it's true for the rest of them: I just don't think the majority are very good at their job; they find Parliamentary mechanisms confusing and, worse, a solid portion seem to find the whole thing just a bit tedious. There's many things that this Brexit shit show has been, but if you're a political nerd (which you damn well should be if it's your fecking job) boring is far from one of them. It's a bit like Sky employing a pundit to watch the football to tell everybody that it's shit and that rugby is a better sport. Too many of them are in it because it's a jolly jape and they can continue to hang around with their university mates at the HoC as long as they write up some tosh now and again to meet a deadline.
Its always notable that when those who advocate a second referendum, always have to state and... "Remain should be an option on the ballot", because they are fundamentally aware that Remain as an option to solve Brexit has now gone, it has no legitimacy. Unfortunately the consent of the loser's was not forthcoming and therefore it is now only about 'a deal' (May's or Boris's, or if he ever gets into power, Jeremy's).
Had the consent been forthcoming, no deliberate political 'sandbagging' a full blown support of the Governments attempt to secure a deal etc. then its quite possible when May came back with her deal, and it proved acceptable to nobody, then there was the perfect legitimate opportunity to say lets revoke A50 and go away and think again. That opportunity came and went, now neither side will 'stand down' and it will be brute political force that settles the argument and no sane Government in the UK will even think of offering a referendum on anything, ever again!
Cede huge swathes of sovereignty? Don't be daft.
We cede only as much as we choose to, which is consent.
It was a contentious affair even back then Paul, if you voted in it (I won't call you old by the way, I was literally only born in that year
) you should know. Ted Heath, addressing Eurosceptic concerns (don't quote me exactly) stated something along the lines that there would be no more integration without consent. That consent was never specifically given and here we are.The idea that a second referendum would somehow be any less "legitimate" than the first is just mind-bendingly stupid.