This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum.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
 EverybodyDannsNow  SE19 23 Oct 19 10.50pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by susmik
Fair play, I’ve never seen someone more committed to a s*** joke - geezer must’ve referred to taking medication at least 20 times by now. It’s like in school when you discover ‘your mum’ - rinse and repeat.
|
|
| Maine Eagle USA 23 Oct 19 11.51pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger
Fine so a deal or no deal referendum then? Sounds fun. Remaining can't be an option though because we have done that one already and by your logic, it is not a definitive outcome either. Edited by Hrolf The Ganger (23 Oct 2019 8.02pm) LMAO. Thought you were all about the "will of the people" Hrolf? Apparently only if their will matches yours. Give the people a say, based on now actually knowing what Brexit looks like. How is remaining in the EU not implementable, sunshine, its the f&cking status quo so its already implemented!!! Hahah.
Trump lost. Badly. Hahahahahahaha. |
|
| .TUX. 24 Oct 19 12.04am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Maine Eagle
LMAO. Thought you were all about the "will of the people" Hrolf? Apparently only if their will matches yours. Give the people a say, based on now actually knowing what Brexit looks like. How is remaining in the EU not implementable, sunshine, its the f&cking status quo so its already implemented!!! Hahah. 1. I'm pretty certain that had the original result gone against his personal choice then he'd have happily accepted it. 3yrs wasted on top of the 10yrs of deliberately enforced austerity.
Buy Litecoin. |
|
Teddy Eagle  24 Oct 19 12.37am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Maine Eagle
No, no, no, and no some more. The first referendum cannot be implemented, because the country was split basically 50/50 and "leave the EU" is a very broad concept with many, many different ways of being achieved. Country split down the middle = parliament split down the middle. 3 years later and here we are, what a surprise. The point of a 2nd vote, is to not ask a binary, childlike simplistic, undeliverable, massively broad, umbrella, 10000 ft view question, it is to ask for specific responses to specific ways of leaving the EU. For example with the latest deal, or with no deal. Now that the details of the latest deal are known.....Now that the details of what "no deal" really means are known........Now that 350 million pound buses are known to be false....Now that lies by the remain campaign are known to be false.......Now is a good time to ask more specific questions which lead to deliverable outcomes. If you respected the will of the people in 2016, how about seeing if the will of the people has changed, based on new information/debunking of a litany of mistruths (on both sides). The will of the people counts in 2019 just like it did in 2016. 50/50? Really? Let’s suppose Trump lost the next election by 1 vote - you’d be dancing in the street. Shame for you it’s not going to happen.
|
|
| Maine Eagle USA 24 Oct 19 2.53am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by the silurian
So there were NO lies from the remain side then? Osborne didnt say there would be immediate recession (he talked about an emergency budget) and he didnt say there would be 500000 jobs lost immediately? Of course he didnt!! PS The vote was 48/52 close but still not 50/50....when we lose to Liverpool 1-0 will you say well it was close so well call it a draw?? Edited by the silurian (23 Oct 2019 8.26pm) Can you read?
Trump lost. Badly. Hahahahahahaha. |
|
| Maine Eagle USA 24 Oct 19 2.54am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Teddy Eagle
50/50? Really? Let’s suppose Trump lost the next election by 1 vote - you’d be dancing in the street. Shame for you it’s not going to happen. Haha. Trump is toast. But there is a thread for that.
Trump lost. Badly. Hahahahahahaha. |
|
| Maine Eagle USA 24 Oct 19 2.57am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by .TUX.
1. I'm pretty certain that had the original result gone against his personal choice then he'd have happily accepted it. 3yrs wasted on top of the 10yrs of deliberately enforced austerity. You people crack me up. So let me get this straight, you don’t think that the impact of Brexit is more understood now than it was in 2016? That is so stupid it is laughable. The 3 years were wasted because the vote was a waste of time. It was not implementable as a binary choice. Deliberately enforced austerity? Yes....and? Wtf are you going on about?
Trump lost. Badly. Hahahahahahaha. |
|
cryrst  The garden of England 24 Oct 19 6.00am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Maine Eagle
You people crack me up. So let me get this straight, you don’t think that the impact of Brexit is more understood now than it was in 2016? That is so stupid it is laughable. The 3 years were wasted because the vote was a waste of time. It was not implementable as a binary choice. Deliberately enforced austerity? Yes....and? Wtf are you going on about? How can the impact of brexit be known?
|
|
| the silurian The garden of England.(not really) 24 Oct 19 8.03am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
But you don't vote in a Tory, Labour or Liberal do you? You vote in a person to represent you, not a voting machine centrally operated from party headquarters. Who would you say was the greatest Parliamentarian? I would suggest that Winston Churchill would top many lists. Churchill changed party not just once, but twice because of his principles. Would you have wanted him to have to stand down? I don't want another referendum at all. I don't want any more referendums ever again. I want Parliament to decide. If this one can't then we ask a new one to try. Why don't you stand and then see if you can do any better? so you are saying that you vote for the personality rather than the party at a GE? Really? I was under the impression that you vote for the party you support. When I voted, it was for the person representing the party, not because he /she was a jolly good chap..
|
|
| the silurian The garden of England.(not really) 24 Oct 19 8.07am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Maine Eagle
Can you read? Very well thank you....your point is??
|
|
| Badger11 Beckenham 24 Oct 19 8.13am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by the silurian
so you are saying that you vote for the personality rather than the party at a GE? Really? I was under the impression that you vote for the party you support. When I voted, it was for the person representing the party, not because he /she was a jolly good chap.. In a perfect world WE is right. However how many people even know the name of their MP let alone what they have done for their community. This is why political parties came into being most of us vote for the party not the person because we don't have time to research it. I suspect that many voters are actually voting for the party leader even though they are not on the ballot paper except in one location. I just find it ironic that the MPs who have switched parties wan a confirmatory referendum because "we now know a lot more since 2016" however they don't believe that the public should be given a confirmatory vote on them changing parties. Funny that, if I was one of Anna Sourbry's voters I would be telling her that in light of recent events I now know more about her and realise I want to change my vote.
One more point |
|
| dannyboy1978 24 Oct 19 8.25am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Badger11
In a perfect world WE is right. However how many people even know the name of their MP let alone what they have done for their community. This is why political parties came into being most of us vote for the party not the person because we don't have time to research it. I suspect that many voters are actually voting for the party leader even though they are not on the ballot paper except in one location. I just find it ironic that the MPs who have switched parties wan a confirmatory referendum because "we now know a lot more since 2016" however they don't believe that the public should be given a confirmatory vote on them changing parties. Funny that, if I was one of Anna Sourbry's voters I would be telling her that in light of recent events I now know more about her and realise I want to change my vote. What a good and interesting point.
|
|
| Matov 24 Oct 19 8.27am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Teddy Eagle
50/50? Really? Well quite. Of all the spurious nonsense written by R2's, it is this one that is the most dangerous. That somehow how Leaves margin of victory was not enough. LOL. And why they are SO dangerous. Because if they get their way and we do not leave the EU, invalidating the result of the 2016 election, then a huge blow is inflicted on people's faith in our system. And not just on the 17.4 million. I know plenty of people who voted Remain in 2016 who believe the result should be implemented because they grasp the basic concept of how democracy works in terms of deciding elections. Along with sowing the seeds of perhaps the most dangerous and unpredictable political direction of English nationalism. Because after all, England voted to leave the EU. I think outside of London then every English region voted Leave (happy to be corrected on that btw). Leaving the door open for people to emerge and able to make the claim, with justification, that voting changes nothing. That other action is required. 52 beats 48. There is no fudging that or claiming it as being to close to call. Leave won by a clear margin. No recounts, no claims that the votes were not, on the whole, fairly cast or counted. A straight forward majority. And to try and dismiss that is beyond foolish.
"The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." - 1984 - George Orwell. |
|
| dannyboy1978 24 Oct 19 8.36am |
|
|---|---|
|
Would they be saying the same if if was reversed! Of coarse not
|
|
| DanH SW2 24 Oct 19 8.39am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Midlands Eagle
One of the excuses trotted out by the anti Brexit MPs is that they needed time to debate the Queen's Speech which was one of the reasons that they wanted to extend the time limit for debating Brexit. Yesterday afternoon they started to debate the Queen's Speech and when I look in at about 4:30 there were just 12 MP's sitting on the Conservative benches plus another 12 on the opposition side so it obviously wasn't important enough for the other 600 The initial prorogation was supposedly about the Queen’s Speech when everyone knew it wasn’t so what’s the point in anyone pretending otherwise? Anyway, the vast majority of MPs who voted against the timetable said, quite rightly, because it’s nowhere near enough time to pass one of the most important pieces of legislation in modern history.
|
|
| susmik PLYMOUTH -But Made in Old Coulsdon... 24 Oct 19 8.47am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by EverybodyDannsNow
Fair play, I’ve never seen someone more committed to a s*** joke - geezer must’ve referred to taking medication at least 20 times by now. It’s like in school when you discover ‘your mum’ - rinse and repeat. It is purely a joke between Steely and myself so why it concerns you I do not know!
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. |
|
| Midlands Eagle 24 Oct 19 9.59am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by the silurian
so you are saying that you vote for the personality rather than the party at a GE? Really? Are you confusing Wissy with normal people?
|
|
| chris123 hove actually 24 Oct 19 10.15am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Badger11
In a perfect world WE is right. However how many people even know the name of their MP let alone what they have done for their community. This is why political parties came into being most of us vote for the party not the person because we don't have time to research it. I suspect that many voters are actually voting for the party leader even though they are not on the ballot paper except in one location. I just find it ironic that the MPs who have switched parties wan a confirmatory referendum because "we now know a lot more since 2016" however they don't believe that the public should be given a confirmatory vote on them changing parties. Funny that, if I was one of Anna Sourbry's voters I would be telling her that in light of recent events I now know more about her and realise I want to change my vote. With the amount of devolved power we have now, there's an argument that county and local councillors have more whack when it comes to local issues. I don't know, but I would imagine some county council budgets are as big as some departments.
|
|
| Willo South coast - west of Brighton. 24 Oct 19 10.18am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Midlands Eagle
Are you confusing Wissy with normal people? One can only conclude that the erudite 'Wisbech Eagle' conducts a forensic assessment of the candidates in his constituency and he bases his vote on the result of his detailed study rather than base his vote according to party.This is his prerogative of course and is at total variance with the electorate as a whole. Apropos the insinuation of 'normality', given that I have had my sanity questioned on numerous occasions I am not best placed to form a judgement, besides I would not gallivant down this road on HOL and resort to detonating reputations in such negative terms.
|
|
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2025 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.