This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum.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
  Hrolf The Ganger  12 Oct 19 11.50pm |
|
|---|---|
|
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 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? Absolute horse shyte. You represent a small minority of fools who see any credibility or worth in a second vote. Edited by Hrolf The Ganger (12 Oct 2019 11.51pm)
|
|
| Invalid user 2019 12 Oct 19 11.51pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Westminster Voting Intention: CON: 33% (=) LAB: 27% (=) LDM: 18% (-1) BXP: 12% (-1) Via @ComRes, 9-10 Oct. Changes w/ 4-6 Oct.
|
|
| Maine Eagle USA 13 Oct 19 4.34am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Spiderman
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 Wow what a fool you truly are. They knew jacks*** because jacks*** was known at the time, dummy. Don’t seem to recall anyone talking about Northern Ireland in 2016. If you cannot understand that more is known about brexit today than was known in 2016, I fail to see how you are intelligent enough to cross the road without getting run over.
Trump lost. Badly. Hahahahahahaha. |
|
| Maine Eagle USA 13 Oct 19 4.35am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger
Absolute horse shyte. You represent a small minority of fools who see any credibility or worth in a second vote. Edited by Hrolf The Ganger (12 Oct 2019 11.51pm) Ok genius, how do you propose to resolve this issue? A general election solves nothing at all. It is you spouting the horse manure, as usual. Where is your pal Stirly though?
Trump lost. Badly. Hahahahahahaha. |
|
| Matov 13 Oct 19 4.52am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Maine Eagle
Ok genius, how do you propose to resolve this issue? A general election solves nothing at all. It is you spouting the horse manure, as usual. Where is your pal Stirly though?
Our Parliament is currently in a state of suspended animation. Labours position has changed dramatically since 2017 as has the Lib Dems. A new election would be fought on either leave, a second referendum or else revoke. Let's say we have a second referendum. What is to say that Parliament will not seek to obstruct the result of that again? The point you R2's make time and time again is that the referendum was only advisory. Parliament is quite within its right to reject the result. Fine. We get that now and therefore why would a second referendum be one that Parliament now honours? Or would they really promise this time? No fingers crossed behind their backs? No. The problem is with our current crop of MP's. So lets directly elect them on the basis of their Brexit stance. With any GE that follows a second referendum still all about Brexit anyway. That is what makes it so ludicrous an idea. The Leave/Remain argument was settled on June 23rd. Done and dusted. All that remains now is for Parliament to honour it. A second referendum is merely a side-show to that. Out of interest why do you think Leavers should respect the result of a second referendum when R2's have clearly failed to respect the result of the first?
"The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." - 1984 - George Orwell. |
|
| chris123 hove actually 13 Oct 19 5.26am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Maine Eagle
Yeh but you think Jacob Rees-Mogg is a good bloke, so I am afraid your viewpoint is hard to take seriously, Willo. Conflate and dismiss eh?
|
|
| dannyboy1978 13 Oct 19 7.51am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Maine Eagle
Wow what a fool you truly are. They knew jacks*** because jacks*** was known at the time, dummy. Don’t seem to recall anyone talking about Northern Ireland in 2016. If you cannot understand that more is known about brexit today than was known in 2016, I fail to see how you are intelligent enough to cross the road without getting run over. Northern Ireland was repeatedly spoke about but over 60 million UK populations shouldn't Edited by dannyboy1978 (13 Oct 2019 7.54am)
|
|
| eritheagle Erith 13 Oct 19 8.43am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Maine Eagle
Wow what a fool you truly are. They knew jacks*** because jacks*** was known at the time, dummy. Don’t seem to recall anyone talking about Northern Ireland in 2016. If you cannot understand that more is known about brexit today than was known in 2016, I fail to see how you are intelligent enough to cross the road without getting run over. But yet we still preferred the unknown to being in the EU!
|
|
| chris123 hove actually 13 Oct 19 9.40am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by dannyboy1978
Northern Ireland was repeatedly spoke about but over 60 million UK populations shouldn't Edited by dannyboy1978 (13 Oct 2019 7.54am)
|
|
| Spiderman Horsham 13 Oct 19 10.21am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Maine Eagle
Wow what a fool you truly are. They knew jacks*** because jacks*** was known at the time, dummy. Don’t seem to recall anyone talking about Northern Ireland in 2016. If you cannot understand that more is known about brexit today than was known in 2016, I fail to see how you are intelligent enough to cross the road without getting run over. Nice bloke aren't you! I knew quite a bit about the EU/NI and what Brexit would mean. I have had many dealings with EU related issues. In your eyes I may not be intelligent enough to cross the road but somehow you managed to cross the Atlantic, dummy
|
|
| steeleye20 Croydon 13 Oct 19 10.21am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by chris123
For 24 hours after taking office, May had good intentions. Then 'brexit means brexit' and you knew she was doomed...
|
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 13 Oct 19 10.32am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Matov
Who are the 'many'? Seriously. The only people pushing for the notion of a second referendum are those who lost the first. Why does it matter who came up with the idea? The suggestion was that this would enable the country to start to heal by finding a way in which a large majority would be stakeholders in whatever the outcome turned out to be. This was about the healing process and not which choice would be made. 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. I very much doubt that too many would actually boycott when push came to shove, especially after a properly prepared information campaign when not only the options but the reasons for why they are being offered is concluded. Those who decide to sit on their hands at that point will just look like quitters. 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? As I would expect the "deal" option, finally hammered out to be acceptable to Parliament as a whole, to be the preferred choice then Brexit would happen. No doubt that would leave Farage and his like still moaning but the Brexit party would soon go the way of UKIP. 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? "us leavers"? You obviously only speak for yourself. As the hardest of the hard leavers would have chosen "deal" as their second choice then if that is chosen they will have a connection to it, and will become reconciled to it, in time. All except Farage and his fan base, who would become as much part of British history as Sir Oswald Mosley is today.
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. |
|
| Spiderman Horsham 13 Oct 19 10.35am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by EverybodyDannsNow
Mate on this thread alone you must be at about 20 “are you saying leavers are dumb” - it’s less of a chip, more of a whole potato at this point. It’s something which long pre-dates ‘Wissie’ getting involved on here. Since you believe I have a chip on my shoulder can I refer you to Maine Eagles most recent reply to one of my posts, I quote: They knew jacks*** because jacks*** was known at the time, dummy. Don’t seem to recall anyone talking about Northern Ireland in 2016. If you cannot understand that more is known about brexit today than was known in 2016, I fail to see how you are intelligent enough to cross the road without getting run over.
|
|
| susmik PLYMOUTH -But Made in Old Coulsdon... 13 Oct 19 10.36am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Spiderman
Nice bloke aren't you! I knew quite a bit about the EU/NI and what Brexit would mean. I have had many dealings with EU related issues. In your eyes I may not be intelligent enough to cross the road but somehow you managed to cross the Atlantic, dummy WELL SAID.
Supported Palace for over 69 years since the age of 7 and have seen all the ups and downs and will probably see many more ups and downs before I go up to the big football club in the sky. |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 13 Oct 19 10.39am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by cryrst
So only a tiny majority is the important bit then. In trying to heal a divided country the argument being put is that achieving a large majority is indeed important, whichever way the result goes. Would you have a different opinion of whether leaving was correct and would you back it wholeheartedly.
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 13 Oct 19 10.46am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by dannyboy1978
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) On the first question, all of them. Anyone who claims otherwise is either being disingenuous or are in denial. No-one at all who voted in 2016 had all the information they needed. On the second question, all of them again, but that's just on this forum. It isn't in the country at large.
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 13 Oct 19 10.52am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by dannyboy1978
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 Parliament always makes the last decision. That's their job. They have triggered Article 50, thus meeting the commitments they gave but so far cannot agree the method by which they leave. A "no deal" wasn't on the table in 2016. The leave campaigns had said that finding a suitable exit arrangement would be a piece of cake. That it hasn't proved correct is not the fault of those who voted to remain.
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. |
|
| Badger11 Beckenham 13 Oct 19 10.52am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
On the first question, all of them. Anyone who claims otherwise is either being disingenuous or are in denial. No-one at all who voted in 2016 had all the information they needed. On the second question, all of them again, but that's just on this forum. It isn't in the country at large. I voted for UK independence from the EU I knew that there would be bumps in the road but it's up the parliament to sort out the detail. Anything less than independence is not what I voted for. Just because the EU is throwing up roadblocks to protect itself doesn't change my view in fact it makes me more determined that we should be independent. If you're going down the road that the vote is invalid because some aspects of us leaving are problematic then you should apply that logic to every general election. How many people who vote know the party manifesto in detail? They don't, they take a general view e.g. if you are concerned about public services your probably vote Labour the detail is up to the politicians.
One more point |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 13 Oct 19 10.57am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Belmont
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? Of course it does. 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. It isn't though the basis of our democracy. That rests in Parliament itself and not in the results of referendums. I won't labour the point as it's been covered by me many times but we don't send delegates to Parliament we send representatives. Those representatives met the commitments they gave when triggering Article 50, but have so far failed to find a method that a majority of them can accept.
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. |
|
| Spiderman Horsham 13 Oct 19 11.10am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
On the first question, all of them. Anyone who claims otherwise is either being disingenuous or are in denial. No-one at all who voted in 2016 had all the information they needed. On the second question, all of them again, but that's just on this forum. It isn't in the country at large. You are getting incredibly tiresome. How can you possibly know any of this? Total and utter arrogance
|
|
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2025 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.