Topic

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

The Brexit Thread (LOCKED)

Visit the current forum | Forum Rules

Page 1365 of 1552 < 1361 1362 1363 1364 1365 1366 1367 1368 1369 >

Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 12 Oct 19 2.22pm
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger That would be totally unacceptable and totally pointless. One more time. For obvious reasons, a second vote on membership would have no credibility. Totally unacceptable? To whom? You obviously and many of the ultra Brexiteers but not to me or many other people. Whether it is, or not, is completely irrelevant though. We don't take those decisions. Our elected representatives do and if they do then we both have to live with them. That's the way it works. For one more time. For obvious reasons. A second vote on membership would have no credibility in your opinion. As you aren't, so far as I am aware, an MP then your opinion on whether Parliament would be right or wrong to decide to hold a second vote, and whether the result would be credible, is not going to change anything. Your role, like mine, is to help decide who represents us. As many seem to feel that holding a new confirmatory vote would enable us to begin to move on as a country then there is a strong argument for it's credibility. There will always be some who decide to stay out of the tent. That's been the case over the European project since it was first raised when I was a kid. For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Wisbech Eagle

Truro Cornwall 12 Oct 19 2.22pm

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

That would be totally unacceptable and totally pointless.

One more time. For obvious reasons, a second vote on membership would have no credibility.

Totally unacceptable? To whom? You obviously and many of the ultra Brexiteers but not to me or many other people. Whether it is, or not, is completely irrelevant though. We don't take those decisions. Our elected representatives do and if they do then we both have to live with them. That's the way it works.

For one more time. For obvious reasons. A second vote on membership would have no credibility in your opinion. As you aren't, so far as I am aware, an MP then your opinion on whether Parliament would be right or wrong to decide to hold a second vote, and whether the result would be credible, is not going to change anything. Your role, like mine, is to help decide who represents us.

As many seem to feel that holding a new confirmatory vote would enable us to begin to move on as a country then there is a strong argument for it's credibility.
There will always be some who decide to stay out of the tent. That's been the case over the European project since it was first raised when I was a kid.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Rudi Hedman Caterham 12 Oct 19 2.37pm
When does the bowls season restart? Do you play indoors? COYP

Rudi Hedman

Caterham 12 Oct 19 2.37pm

When does the bowls season restart?

Do you play indoors?

COYP

Matov 12 Oct 19 3.15pm
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle As many seem to feel that holding a new confirmatory vote would enable us to begin to move on as a country then there is a strong argument for it's credibility. Who are the 'many'? Seriously. The only people pushing for the notion of a second referendum are those who lost the first. Which is what makes it not only daft but potentially ruinous. It will be boycotted and whilst Remain will win, it will do so on the back of a much lower turn out along with less than 17.4 million votes. How on earth does that allow us to move on? Or do you expect the Brexit party to just disband? For our future membership of the EU to be off the table when it comes to political discourse? All it means is that the country becomes even more divided. Or do you think that us Leavers should accept the results of any second referendum? That the will of a majority is what matters above all else? That somehow it will us Leavers who are besmirching the very basis of how democracy is meant to operate? "The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." - 1984 - George Orwell.

Matov

12 Oct 19 3.15pm

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

As many seem to feel that holding a new confirmatory vote would enable us to begin to move on as a country then there is a strong argument for it's credibility.

Who are the 'many'? Seriously. The only people pushing for the notion of a second referendum are those who lost the first.

Which is what makes it not only daft but potentially ruinous. It will be boycotted and whilst Remain will win, it will do so on the back of a much lower turn out along with less than 17.4 million votes.

How on earth does that allow us to move on? Or do you expect the Brexit party to just disband? For our future membership of the EU to be off the table when it comes to political discourse?

All it means is that the country becomes even more divided. Or do you think that us Leavers should accept the results of any second referendum? That the will of a majority is what matters above all else? That somehow it will us Leavers who are besmirching the very basis of how democracy is meant to operate?

"The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." - 1984 - George Orwell.

cryrst The garden of England 12 Oct 19 3.24pm
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle We have all had 40+ years of experience and of seeing the European project evolve from the EEC into the EU. Some like it, some don't. By 2016 you are quite right. The EU was nothing like the EEC we originally entered. It was much more complex and all our regulatory systems and standards had been moulded to be part of it. A simple binary question obtained a small majority in favour of leaving this complex organisation but what has subsequently emerged is that the question could not be answered in that way. Complicated questions cannot be answered in simple ways. In 2016 no-one really understood that. Most, but obviously not everyone, does now. The majority back in 2016 said they wanted to leave, but only by a tiny margin. Now is 2019 and not 2016 and what they now want is unknown until it is tested. All the indications are that enough have changed their minds to reverse the result of 2016. Time will tell. So only a tiny majority is the important bit then. What if it was 70 30 to leave. Would you have a different opinion of whether leaving was correct and would you back it wholeheartedly. Elections have put parties in charge by tiny majorities. Do they not count as they are only tiny. Watch labour if they get power change the voting rules to suit a minimum difference or you dont win.

cryrst

The garden of England 12 Oct 19 3.24pm

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

We have all had 40+ years of experience and of seeing the European project evolve from the EEC into the EU. Some like it, some don't.

By 2016 you are quite right. The EU was nothing like the EEC we originally entered. It was much more complex and all our regulatory systems and standards had been moulded to be part of it. A simple binary question obtained a small majority in favour of leaving this complex organisation but what has subsequently emerged is that the question could not be answered in that way. Complicated questions cannot be answered in simple ways.

In 2016 no-one really understood that. Most, but obviously not everyone, does now. The majority back in 2016 said they wanted to leave, but only by a tiny margin. Now is 2019 and not 2016 and what they now want is unknown until it is tested. All the indications are that enough have changed their minds to reverse the result of 2016. Time will tell.

So only a tiny majority is the important bit then.
What if it was 70 30 to leave.
Would you have a different opinion of whether leaving was correct and would you back it wholeheartedly.
Elections have put parties in charge by tiny majorities.
Do they not count as they are only tiny.
Watch labour if they get power change the voting rules to suit a minimum difference or you dont win.

dannyboy1978 12 Oct 19 3.47pm
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle We have all had 40+ years of experience and of seeing the European project evolve from the EEC into the EU. Some like it, some don't. By 2016 you are quite right. The EU was nothing like the EEC we originally entered. It was much more complex and all our regulatory systems and standards had been moulded to be part of it. A simple binary question obtained a small majority in favour of leaving this complex organisation but what has subsequently emerged is that the question could not be answered in that way. Complicated questions cannot be answered in simple ways. In 2016 no-one really understood that. Most, but obviously not everyone, does now. The majority back in 2016 said they wanted to leave, but only by a tiny margin. Now is 2019 and not 2016 and what they now want is unknown until it is tested. All the indications are that enough have changed their minds to reverse the result of 2016. Time will tell. Is there anyone one on this forum who voted leave not knowing what they voted for? And who on this forum is still happy with their leave vote knowing what they want? Edited by dannyboy1978 (12 Oct 2019 3.48pm)

dannyboy1978

12 Oct 19 3.47pm

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

We have all had 40+ years of experience and of seeing the European project evolve from the EEC into the EU. Some like it, some don't.

In 2016 no-one really understood that. Most, but obviously not everyone, does now. The majority back in 2016 said they wanted to leave, but only by a tiny margin. Now is 2019 and not 2016 and what they now want is unknown until it is tested. All the indications are that enough have changed their minds to reverse the result of 2016. Time will tell.

Is there anyone one on this forum who voted leave not knowing what they voted for? And who on this forum is still happy with their leave vote knowing what they want?

Edited by dannyboy1978 (12 Oct 2019 3.48pm)

dannyboy1978 12 Oct 19 3.52pm
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle I heard Hammond make a good argument. That's what happens when you listen to people. I would much prefer that Parliament could sort this out as that's where our democracy is centred. However, if they believe that to enable the country to come together holding a referendum would help to do that then I am willing to listen to them. It would be Parliament's decision. Of course it would have a leave option, probably a choice of two leave options, alongside a remain one, with the votes of the least popular being transferred to their second choice. In other words the people didn't vote in the way parliment wanted so parliment want to make the last dicision. And remoaners wonder why we are angry

dannyboy1978

12 Oct 19 3.52pm

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

I heard Hammond make a good argument. That's what happens when you listen to people. I would much prefer that Parliament could sort this out as that's where our democracy is centred. However, if they believe that to enable the country to come together holding a referendum would help to do that then I am willing to listen to them. It would be Parliament's decision.

Of course it would have a leave option, probably a choice of two leave options, alongside a remain one, with the votes of the least popular being transferred to their second choice.

In other words the people didn't vote in the way parliment wanted so parliment want to make the last dicision. And remoaners wonder why we are angry

Belmont 12 Oct 19 4.41pm
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle Totally unacceptable? To whom? You obviously and many of the ultra Brexiteers but not to me or many other people. Whether it is, or not, is completely irrelevant though. We don't take those decisions. Our elected representatives do and if they do then we both have to live with them. That's the way it works. For one more time. For obvious reasons. A second vote on membership would have no credibility in your opinion. As you aren't, so far as I am aware, an MP then your opinion on whether Parliament would be right or wrong to decide to hold a second vote, and whether the result would be credible, is not going to change anything. Your role, like mine, is to help decide who represents us. As many seem to feel that holding a new confirmatory vote would enable us to begin to move on as a country then there is a strong argument for it's credibility. There will always be some who decide to stay out of the tent. That's been the case over the European project since it was first raised when I was a kid. I very rarely post as you may or may be aware but can I ask you a question, do you or do you not believe that parliament works on behalf of the people? If so the referendum has already established what the people want so they should deliver it, that to me is the whole basis of democracy.

Belmont

12 Oct 19 4.41pm

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

I very rarely post as you may or may be aware but can I ask you a question, do you or do you not believe that parliament works on behalf of the people?

If so the referendum has already established what the people want so they should deliver it, that to me is the whole basis of democracy.

Lyons550 Shirley 12 Oct 19 4.51pm
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle Much better to do nothing than do something wrong. If it takes more time to get it right then we just need to accept that and sort it out. No-body is procrastinating in any way. They just won't accept an exit which they are sure will cause us avoidable harm. You might want to reflect why Johnson has waited this long before getting to this point. He is leaving Parliament almost no choice other than to reject whatever deal comes back, even if the EU do manage to approve it. Can't stand the guy myself but if you're seriously trying to deflect from the procrastination of the opposition instead accusing Johnson of the same you're more deluded than most others on here think you are. They're not procrastinating to get it right, they're doing so because they fear change. Nothing more nothing less, that's why after all the machinations around prorogation and getting back into parliament they spent the next TWO days arguing.... The Voice of Reason In An Otherwise Mediocre World

Lyons550

Shirley 12 Oct 19 4.51pm

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

Much better to do nothing than do something wrong. If it takes more time to get it right then we just need to accept that and sort it out. No-body is procrastinating in any way. They just won't accept an exit which they are sure will cause us avoidable harm.

You might want to reflect why Johnson has waited this long before getting to this point. He is leaving Parliament almost no choice other than to reject whatever deal comes back, even if the EU do manage to approve it.

Can't stand the guy myself but if you're seriously trying to deflect from the procrastination of the opposition instead accusing Johnson of the same you're more deluded than most others on here think you are.

They're not procrastinating to get it right, they're doing so because they fear change. Nothing more nothing less, that's why after all the machinations around prorogation and getting back into parliament they spent the next TWO days arguing....

The Voice of Reason In An Otherwise Mediocre World

Hrolf The Ganger 12 Oct 19 5.19pm
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle Totally unacceptable? To whom? You obviously and many of the ultra Brexiteers but not to me or many other people. Whether it is, or not, is completely irrelevant though. We don't take those decisions. Our elected representatives do and if they do then we both have to live with them. That's the way it works. For one more time. For obvious reasons. A second vote on membership would have no credibility in your opinion. As you aren't, so far as I am aware, an MP then your opinion on whether Parliament would be right or wrong to decide to hold a second vote, and whether the result would be credible, is not going to change anything. Your role, like mine, is to help decide who represents us. As many seem to feel that holding a new confirmatory vote would enable us to begin to move on as a country then there is a strong argument for it's credibility. There will always be some who decide to stay out of the tent. That's been the case over the European project since it was first raised when I was a kid. To the vast majority who want Brexit resolved by the 31st October whether they voted leave or remain. Only a few delusionals like yourself think dragging this out further will be good for anyone except maybe Jeremy Corbyn.

Hrolf The Ganger

12 Oct 19 5.19pm

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

Totally unacceptable? To whom? You obviously and many of the ultra Brexiteers but not to me or many other people. Whether it is, or not, is completely irrelevant though. We don't take those decisions. Our elected representatives do and if they do then we both have to live with them. That's the way it works.

To the vast majority who want Brexit resolved by the 31st October whether they voted leave or remain.

Only a few delusionals like yourself think dragging this out further will be good for anyone except maybe Jeremy Corbyn.

steeleye20 Croydon 12 Oct 19 6.00pm
I think Johnson should cancel brexit and go the country. The public have not been sold on brexit for 2 years, he would scoop the remain majority and the tory faithful are already there regardless. Imagine the benefits of being the PM who got rid of brexit....

steeleye20

Croydon 12 Oct 19 6.00pm

I think Johnson should cancel brexit and go the country.

The public have not been sold on brexit for 2 years, he would scoop the remain majority and the tory faithful are already there regardless.

Imagine the benefits of being the PM who got rid of brexit....

Hrolf The Ganger 12 Oct 19 6.50pm
Originally posted by steeleye20 I think Johnson should cancel brexit and go the country. The public have not been sold on brexit for 2 years, he would scoop the remain majority and the tory faithful are already there regardless. Imagine the benefits of being the PM who got rid of brexit.... You represent a small minority.

Hrolf The Ganger

12 Oct 19 6.50pm

Originally posted by steeleye20

I think Johnson should cancel brexit and go the country.

The public have not been sold on brexit for 2 years, he would scoop the remain majority and the tory faithful are already there regardless.

Imagine the benefits of being the PM who got rid of brexit....

You represent a small minority.

cryrst The garden of England 12 Oct 19 7.58pm
Originally posted by steeleye20 I think Johnson should cancel brexit and go the country. The public have not been sold on brexit for 2 years, he would scoop the remain majority and the tory faithful are already there regardless. Imagine the benefits of being the PM who got rid of brexit.... Better still. Do brexit and screw a GE until its legally implemented. Might get shot of the marxists at the head of labour.

cryrst

The garden of England 12 Oct 19 7.58pm

Originally posted by steeleye20

I think Johnson should cancel brexit and go the country.

The public have not been sold on brexit for 2 years, he would scoop the remain majority and the tory faithful are already there regardless.

Imagine the benefits of being the PM who got rid of brexit....

Better still.
Do brexit and screw a GE until its legally implemented.
Might get shot of the marxists at the head of labour.

dannyboy1978 12 Oct 19 7.59pm
Originally posted by steeleye20 I think Johnson should cancel brexit and go the country. The public have not been sold on brexit for 2 years, he would scoop the remain majority and the tory faithful are already there regardless. Imagine the benefits of being the PM who got rid of brexit.... I would probably stop thinking if I were you!

dannyboy1978

12 Oct 19 7.59pm

Originally posted by steeleye20

I think Johnson should cancel brexit and go the country.

The public have not been sold on brexit for 2 years, he would scoop the remain majority and the tory faithful are already there regardless.

Imagine the benefits of being the PM who got rid of brexit....

I would probably stop thinking if I were you!

Maine Eagle USA 12 Oct 19 11.09pm
Originally posted by cryrst Yup and I'm not the dummy whos addicted to wedding cake If you mean the steady procession of weddings of mates in the early to mid 2000s, you are bang on, son. Trump lost. Badly. Hahahahahahaha.

Maine Eagle

USA 12 Oct 19 11.09pm

Originally posted by cryrst

Yup and I'm not the dummy whos addicted to wedding cake

If you mean the steady procession of weddings of mates in the early to mid 2000s, you are bang on, son.

Trump lost. Badly. Hahahahahahaha.

Maine Eagle USA 12 Oct 19 11.12pm
Originally posted by Willo I don't normally immerse myself in Brexit threads on HOL as I have enough discussion about it and other political matters outside this cherished site, often much to the chagrin of my dear wife. However in response to the suggestion that any second referendum (God forbid) should NOT have any LEAVE option I thought I would reveal a discussion I had the other night.The overwhelming opinion amongst the multitudes was that in order to respect the referendum when 17.4 million voted to leave, any subsequent referendum should only offer 2 choices, Leave with a deal agreed or leave without a deal.This of course would mean Remainers would not vote but at least it would respect the result of the 2016 referendum! Anyhow, enough of my interjections on this thread.I shall concentrate on the football threads and leave this discussion to the experts! I really have no desire to rear-up like a shocked dray horse like I do outside HOL when certain political matters are discussed as it cannot be any good for my blood pressure so I shall bow out gracefully! Edited by Willo (12 Oct 2019 12.30pm) Yeh but you think Jacob Rees-Mogg is a good bloke, so I am afraid your viewpoint is hard to take seriously, Willo. Trump lost. Badly. Hahahahahahaha.

Maine Eagle

USA 12 Oct 19 11.12pm

Originally posted by Willo

I don't normally immerse myself in Brexit threads on HOL as I have enough discussion about it and other political matters outside this cherished site, often much to the chagrin of my dear wife.

However in response to the suggestion that any second referendum (God forbid) should NOT have any LEAVE option I thought I would reveal a discussion I had the other night.The overwhelming opinion amongst the multitudes was that in order to respect the referendum when 17.4 million voted to leave, any subsequent referendum should only offer 2 choices, Leave with a deal agreed or leave without a deal.This of course would mean Remainers would not vote but at least it would respect the result of the 2016 referendum!

Anyhow, enough of my interjections on this thread.I shall concentrate on the football threads and leave this discussion to the experts! I really have no desire to rear-up like a shocked dray horse like I do outside HOL when certain political matters are discussed as it cannot be any good for my blood pressure so I shall bow out gracefully!

Edited by Willo (12 Oct 2019 12.30pm)

Yeh but you think Jacob Rees-Mogg is a good bloke, so I am afraid your viewpoint is hard to take seriously, Willo.

Trump lost. Badly. Hahahahahahaha.

Maine Eagle USA 12 Oct 19 11.20pm
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger To the vast majority who want Brexit resolved by the 31st October whether they voted leave or remain. Only a few delusionals like yourself think dragging this out further will be good for anyone except maybe Jeremy Corbyn. I think a certain crooked man with a foreign sounding surname (no, not Mark Francois) would become a bit irrelevant if Brexit went through, so he is probably loving this s*. Time to face facts. The will of the people mattered in 2016. The vote in 2016 was not deliverable though, simple. You can argue about WHY is was not deliverable, but you cannot argue, that it has not been delivered upon! The great unwashed masses and their 'will' matters in the same way in 2019 as we approach 2020, as it did in 2016. People are regaled of FAR more information about what this really will cost, and deliver, than 2016. No one can deny that, so how about asking for the will of the people, when they are at their most informed about said matter, as opposed to when they didnt know jack s* in terms of details, backstops, medicines, NHS money etc. Isn't the will of a moderately informed person, a bit more salient, than the will of a dumbass who doesnt know anything? A GE does NOT definitively resolve this. A second referendum with an option to cancel the whole s* show, force through a no deal, or go for a deal of some kind or a Norway type approach (combined votes MUST be counted for all leave or remain flavors) is the only way. The combined votes must be tallied, thus eliminating options not aligned with that umbrella position (leave or remain) then the individual votes cast for those particular options can be counted and they way forward can be clear. If people are worried about tactical voting then have a clear leave or remain vote, then vote separately about how to leave, and bob is your f*ing uncle. Hey presto, we would have a way to leave the EU, which parliament and no doubt the EU, would support. Wouldn't it be good to actually have a mechanism to resolve this? Trump lost. Badly. Hahahahahahaha.

Maine Eagle

USA 12 Oct 19 11.20pm

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

To the vast majority who want Brexit resolved by the 31st October whether they voted leave or remain.

Only a few delusionals like yourself think dragging this out further will be good for anyone except maybe Jeremy Corbyn.

I think a certain crooked man with a foreign sounding surname (no, not Mark Francois) would become a bit irrelevant if Brexit went through, so he is probably loving this s***.

Time to face facts. The will of the people mattered in 2016. The vote in 2016 was not deliverable though, simple. You can argue about WHY is was not deliverable, but you cannot argue, that it has not been delivered upon!

The great unwashed masses and their 'will' matters in the same way in 2019 as we approach 2020, as it did in 2016.

People are regaled of FAR more information about what this really will cost, and deliver, than 2016. No one can deny that, so how about asking for the will of the people, when they are at their most informed about said matter, as opposed to when they didnt know jack s*** in terms of details, backstops, medicines, NHS money etc.

Isn't the will of a moderately informed person, a bit more salient, than the will of a dumbass who doesnt know anything?

A GE does NOT definitively resolve this.

A second referendum with an option to cancel the whole s*** show, force through a no deal, or go for a deal of some kind or a Norway type approach (combined votes MUST be counted for all leave or remain flavors) is the only way.

The combined votes must be tallied, thus eliminating options not aligned with that umbrella position (leave or remain) then the individual votes cast for those particular options can be counted and they way forward can be clear.

If people are worried about tactical voting then have a clear leave or remain vote, then vote separately about how to leave, and bob is your f***ing uncle. Hey presto, we would have a way to leave the EU, which parliament and no doubt the EU, would support.

Wouldn't it be good to actually have a mechanism to resolve this?

Trump lost. Badly. Hahahahahahaha.

Spiderman Horsham 12 Oct 19 11.36pm
Originally posted by steeleye20 These guys that will sign on to anything just to 'get it done' will be at the front of the queue whining when it all goes wrong. And it will, because the UK is incompetent. Name any successful project in the last 10 years? The Olympic Games 2012 I concur. There will be a collective sigh of relief in Europe when they are finally rid of the UK. Everything that you hated about the ex-wife the EU is suffering, the reality of divorce is that you are still lumbered with them! That is probably the biggest load of b****cks you have posted (and that is saying something) Of course they are desperate to lose our financial contributions

Spiderman

Horsham 12 Oct 19 11.36pm

Originally posted by steeleye20

These guys that will sign on to anything just to 'get it done' will be at the front of the queue whining when it all goes wrong.

And it will, because the UK is incompetent.

Name any successful project in the last 10 years?

The Olympic Games 2012 I concur.

There will be a collective sigh of relief in Europe when they are finally rid of the UK.

Everything that you hated about the ex-wife the EU is suffering, the reality of divorce is that you are still lumbered with them!

That is probably the biggest load of b****cks you have posted (and that is saying something) Of course they are desperate to lose our financial contributions

Spiderman Horsham 12 Oct 19 11.40pm
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle I heard Hammond make a good argument. That's what happens when you listen to people. I would much prefer that Parliament could sort this out as that's where our democracy is centred. However, if they believe that to enable the country to come together holding a referendum would help to do that then I am willing to listen to them. It would be Parliament's decision. Of course it would have a leave option, probably a choice of two leave options, alongside a remain one, with the votes of the least popular being transferred to their second choice. Is that the Hammond who is pro-remain and spouted nonsense about how the economy would implode if we left

Spiderman

Horsham 12 Oct 19 11.40pm

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

I heard Hammond make a good argument. That's what happens when you listen to people. I would much prefer that Parliament could sort this out as that's where our democracy is centred. However, if they believe that to enable the country to come together holding a referendum would help to do that then I am willing to listen to them. It would be Parliament's decision.

Of course it would have a leave option, probably a choice of two leave options, alongside a remain one, with the votes of the least popular being transferred to their second choice.

Is that the Hammond who is pro-remain and spouted nonsense about how the economy would implode if we left

Spiderman Horsham 12 Oct 19 11.41pm
Originally posted by steeleye20 Who would have thought, considering its troubled past, that Northern Ireland could well end up the most prosperous part of the UK, in contrast to down at heel brexit land. You would think, if they retain the CU and single market access, that many enterprises will be making a bee-line for Belfast! Presumably you will be joining them a you appear to loathe us so much

Spiderman

Horsham 12 Oct 19 11.41pm

Originally posted by steeleye20

Who would have thought, considering its troubled past, that Northern Ireland could well end up the most prosperous part of the UK, in contrast to down at heel brexit land.

You would think, if they retain the CU and single market access, that many enterprises will be making a bee-line for Belfast!

Presumably you will be joining them a you appear to loathe us so much

Spiderman Horsham 12 Oct 19 11.49pm
Originally posted by Maine Eagle I think a certain crooked man with a foreign sounding surname (no, not Mark Francois) would become a bit irrelevant if Brexit went through, so he is probably loving this s*. Time to face facts. The will of the people mattered in 2016. The vote in 2016 was not deliverable though, simple. You can argue about WHY is was not deliverable, but you cannot argue, that it has not been delivered upon! The great unwashed masses and their 'will' matters in the same way in 2019 as we approach 2020, as it did in 2016. People are regaled of FAR more information about what this really will cost, and deliver, than 2016. No one can deny that, so how about asking for the will of the people, when they are at their most informed about said matter, as opposed to when they didnt know jack s* in terms of details, backstops, medicines, NHS money etc. Isn't the will of a moderately informed person, a bit more salient, than the will of a dumbass who doesnt know anything? A GE does NOT definitively resolve this. A second referendum with an option to cancel the whole s* show, force through a no deal, or go for a deal of some kind or a Norway type approach (combined votes MUST be counted for all leave or remain flavors) is the only way. The combined votes must be tallied, thus eliminating options not aligned with that umbrella position (leave or remain) then the individual votes cast for those particular options can be counted and they way forward can be clear. If people are worried about tactical voting then have a clear leave or remain vote, then vote separately about how to leave, and bob is your fing uncle. Hey presto, we would have a way to leave the EU, which parliament and no doubt the EU, would support. Wouldn't it be good to actually have a mechanism to resolve this? And who does this refer to? How do you know they didn't know jack s? because they are the great unwashed? Total b*cks

Spiderman

Horsham 12 Oct 19 11.49pm

Originally posted by Maine Eagle

I think a certain crooked man with a foreign sounding surname (no, not Mark Francois) would become a bit irrelevant if Brexit went through, so he is probably loving this s***.

The great unwashed masses and their 'will' matters in the same way in 2019 as we approach 2020, as it did in 2016.

People are regaled of FAR more information about what this really will cost, and deliver, than 2016. No one can deny that, so how about asking for the will of the people, when they are at their most informed about said matter, as opposed to when they didnt know jack s*** in terms of details, backstops, medicines, NHS money etc.

Isn't the will of a moderately informed person, a bit more salient, than the will of a dumbass who doesnt know anything?

A GE does NOT definitively resolve this.

Wouldn't it be good to actually have a mechanism to resolve this?

And who does this refer to?

How do you know they didn't know jack s***? because they are the great unwashed?

Total b***cks

Page 1365 of 1552 < 1361 1362 1363 1364 1365 1366 1367 1368 1369 >

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

The Brexit Thread (LOCKED)

Site Map