Keeping up with the latest Brexit News

Which option would you prefer?

  • Leave with no deal

    Votes: 122 74.4%
  • Leave with the WA without the backstop

    Votes: 42 25.6%

  • Total voters
    164
  • This poll will close: .

PatMrex

Suspended
For the exact same reason it is different to other national referendums. No surprises there.
Only because those on the opposing side haven't aligned themselves with democracy and would rather suppress it in this case. No surprises there.
 

PatMrex

Suspended
Democracy is in a perilous position now in the UK, whereby 45 years of EU membership has corrupted our political class. Our Parliamentarians like our judges have mimicked and evolved themselves to a convenient continental philosophy of a 'top down' approach. The historical philosophy on the continent ensures bureaucrats and commissioners know better than the hoi polloi and decision making is invested in them to make the right decision for the plebs - hence why Brits look across the Channel and see the EU as undemocratic. That has never been the case in British democracy where a 'bottom up' approach places servants into power; yet the remain faction have defied the democratic constitution and have turned their backs on centuries of history. Stifling and stymieing the democratic process in order to grind Brexit to a halt by telling us after three and a half years that we're all better "informed" now with their Owrellian Newspeak propaganda that is designed to soften the electorate up and make us change our minds.

We have seen previous referendums in the EU overturned by the overlords in Brussels, countries like Ireland, Denmark and France were made to vote again because they initially voted against something the technocrats were in favour of. Britain, and its democracy is now at risk of repeating this undemocratic folly because it's what our better-ers demand. By going down this route and on this principle alone the UK was right to vote leave.
 

Pacifico

Distinguished Member

Hmm... so we need to do something else as a poll of polls has shown that a majority want to stay in the EU.

Of course we had 6 different companies each doing a 'poll of polls' for the referendum - and every one of them got the result wrong..:D
 

Pacifico

Distinguished Member
Why would a Government of National Unity be any less democratic than the rump of the Conservative Party?

Possibly because it will only contain remainers and no representatives of the 52% who want to leave?

Just a guess..:smashin:

Edit.. I tell you what, I will support a GNU when it has JRM as leader..
 

Rasczak

Distinguished Member
The people are more for brexit than against. If our parliament was representative they would be for leaving.

View attachment 1205177
We've had a General Election since those stats.
And you constantly posted in the past that as we voted for remain EU parties we must want to remain. In 2017 the vote was over 80% for leave parties. By your own argument we must want to leave.

Want links to all that?
I challenged Sonic to find links because, if you actually read the 2017 manifestos of the Conservatives and Labour, it becomes abundantly clear that the unequivocal mandate for any Brexit is not nearly as clear cut as suggested by our Brexiteers. Sonic either missed the point or came across my previous post to Squiffy which explained it, hence the charity nonsense.

For the benefit of everyone, the key highlights from the manifestos on Brexit:

Conservatives

Britain needs..to get the best Brexit deal for our country and its people.

We need to deliver a smooth and orderly departure from the EU and forge a deep and special partnership with our friends and allies across Europe.



Labour

We must...build a close new relationship with the EU, protect workers’ rights and environmental standards, provide certainty to EU nationals and give a meaningful role to Parliament throughout negotiations.

We will scrap the Conservatives’ Brexit White Paper and replace it with fresh negotiating priorities that have a strong emphasis on retaining the benefits of the Single Market and the Customs Union.

We will end Theresa May’s reckless approach to Brexit, and seek to unite the country around a Brexit deal that works for every community in Britain

Britain needs to negotiate a Brexit deal that puts our economy and living standards first.

We cannot put at risk our links with our largest trading partner. Instead we need a jobs-first Brexit that allows us to upgrade our economy for the 21st century.



In light of such comments in the manifesto, it is rather clear that the 2017 General Election provides absolutely no mandate for no deal. Indeed, it is a categorical rejection of it by 80%+ of the electorate and exposes the reason why Brexiteers are terrified of another referendum.
 

ghrh

Well-known Member
Only because those on the opposing side haven't aligned themselves with democracy and would rather suppress it in this case. No surprises there.
That's what democracy is. Not sure why you think "alignment" is democratic when there is a split decision.
 

ghrh

Well-known Member
We have seen previous referendums in the EU overturned by the overlords in Brussels, countries like Ireland, Denmark and France were made to vote again because they initially voted against something the technocrats were in favour of. Britain, and its democracy is now at risk of repeating this undemocratic folly because it's what our better-ers demand. By going down this route and on this principle alone the UK was right to vote leave.
And they can keep voting and change their minds over and over again.
I am not sure if you are aware of the results of previous national UK referendums as your reply doesn't seem to indicate this.
 

Rasczak

Distinguished Member
Interesting that you pick that one. Yet again. Wasn’t that tested in court ;) Perhaps you can share the result of it?
That's my point. Sonic asked if it was fine for politicians to mislead. The red bus example- along with the court judgement - says yes it is.

You really should read all posts rather than cherry pick.
 

Bl4ckGryph0n

Distinguished Member
That's my point. Sonic asked if it was fine for politicians to mislead. The red bus example- along with the court judgement - says yes it is.

You really should read all posts rather than cherry pick.
Hmm interesting interpretation.

And remember assumptions are the mother of all fudgeups.
 

Rasczak

Distinguished Member
And remember assumptions are the mother of all fudgeups.
As you have just found by not reading the whole thread ;)

Look, I think that manifesto pledges and political statements should carry some weight and bind those that say them. But as "Brexit do or die on 31 October" is likely to show us, that simply isn't the case!
 

Sonic67

Distinguished Member
I challenged Sonic to find links because, if you actually read the 2017 manifestos of the Conservatives and Labour, it becomes abundantly clear that the unequivocal mandate for any Brexit is not nearly as clear cut as suggested by our Brexiteers. Sonic either missed the point or came across my previous post to Squiffy which explained it, hence the charity nonsense.

For the benefit of everyone, the key highlights from the manifestos on Brexit:

Conservatives

Britain needs..to get the best Brexit deal for our country and its people.

We need to deliver a smooth and orderly departure from the EU and forge a deep and special partnership with our friends and allies across Europe.



Labour

We must...build a close new relationship with the EU, protect workers’ rights and environmental standards, provide certainty to EU nationals and give a meaningful role to Parliament throughout negotiations.

We will scrap the Conservatives’ Brexit White Paper and replace it with fresh negotiating priorities that have a strong emphasis on retaining the benefits of the Single Market and the Customs Union.

We will end Theresa May’s reckless approach to Brexit, and seek to unite the country around a Brexit deal that works for every community in Britain

Britain needs to negotiate a Brexit deal that puts our economy and living standards first.

We cannot put at risk our links with our largest trading partner. Instead we need a jobs-first Brexit that allows us to upgrade our economy for the 21st century.



In light of such comments in the manifesto, it is rather clear that the 2017 General Election provides absolutely no mandate for no deal. Indeed, it is a categorical rejection of it by 80%+ of the electorate and exposes the reason why Brexiteers are terrified of another referendum.
Both manifestos were to leave the EU.

Hence pointing out that that over 80% of the vote was to leave in 2017.

I didn't say they were specifically for no deal.

Also being a little economic with the truth. You missed out this:

The negotiations will undoubtedly be tough, and there will be give and take on both sides, but we continue to believe that no deal is better than a bad deal for the UK.

Which makes clear no deal is better than a bad deal.
 

Rasczak

Distinguished Member
Both manifestos were to leave the EU.

Hence pointing out that that over 80% of the vote was to leave in 2017.
But all were for a close relationship with the EU which absolutely puts no deal off the table. Even putting aside the Tory votes, the combined might of tthe remainder, there is a 50%+ number against no deal. That is why Brexiteers are scared stiff of another referendum.
 

Sonic67

Distinguished Member
Hmm... so we need to do something else as a poll of polls has shown that a majority want to stay in the EU.

Of course we had 6 different companies each doing a 'poll of polls' for the referendum - and every one of them got the result wrong..:D
And from YouGov too. YouGov is special in that you deliberatly sign up to it. It doesn't stop people at random and ask their intention.

So I could get together with my mates. We all sign up, we all keep saying we want to leave.
 

Dbcoup

Distinguished Member
But all were for a close relationship with the EU which absolutely puts no deal off the table. Even putting aside the Tory votes, the combined might of tthe remainder, there is a 50%+ number against no deal. That is why Brexiteers are scared stiff of another referendum.
I'm not scared, my objection is the first one had an instruction that has not yet been honoured.
Why should anyone abide by a 2nd one?

Jo Swinson has said many times, it doesn't matter how many there is, unless the answer is to remain, she will not accept it.
 
Last edited:

PatMrex

Suspended
That's what democracy is. Not sure why you think "alignment" is democratic when there is a split decision.
Because even those who oppose the democratic vote of preference align with democracy. It really is quite simple. When the Conservative party win a GE, Labour voters don't take to the streets, media, courts and parliament itself to overturn the result. They abide by the result. That's how democracy for centuries used to work in this country.
 

Sonic67

Distinguished Member
But all were for a close relationship with the EU which absolutely puts no deal off the table. Even putting aside the Tory votes, the combined might of tthe remainder, there is a 50%+ number against no deal.
"Close relationship" can be interpreted in a lot of ways.

Again you are saying specifically "no deal." I know what the manifestos said and the parties stances.

Hence why I said over 80% was "to leave." I never said over 80% was for "no deal."


That is why Brexiteers are scared stiff of another referendum.
1. Who?
2. What's the point? If people don't respect the first one, they won't respect a second. Some MPs have admitted they won't.
3. Why does it take two votes to leave?
4. The evidence is it will be leave again.
5. And what will it ask anyway?
 

PatMrex

Suspended
And they can keep voting and change their minds over and over again.
I am not sure if you are aware of the results of previous national UK referendums as your reply doesn't seem to indicate this.
And your post indicates you don't believe in democracy full stop.

Not until you get the right answer you want.

Now, where have you learnt to take that en vogue disposition from, I wonder. Sham democrat.
 

ghrh

Well-known Member
And your post indicates you don't believe in democracy full stop.
Not until you get the right answer you want.
Now, where have you learnt to take that en vogue disposition from, I wonder. Sham democrat.
You must be living in a different country as you don't understand how parliamentary democracy works.
 

ghrh

Well-known Member
"Close relationship" can be interpreted in a lot of ways.

Again you are saying specifically "no deal." I know what the manifestos said and the parties stances.

Hence why I said over 80% was "to leave." I never said over 80% was for "no deal."



1. Who?
2. What's the point? If people don't respect the first one, they won't respect a second. Some MPs have admitted they won't.
3. Why does it take two votes to leave?
4. The evidence is it will be leave again.
5. And what will it ask anyway?
The same point as the first referendum and any subsequent ones. A large scale, national opinion poll. Unless there is strong change in opinion in one way or the other nothing will change.
 

PatMrex

Suspended
But all were for a close relationship with the EU which absolutely puts no deal off the table. Even putting aside the Tory votes, the combined might of tthe remainder, there is a 50%+ number against no deal. That is why Brexiteers are scared stiff of another referendum.
Well apart from the Tory manifesto that also stated 'we believe no deal is better than a bad deal' it should also be noted what a "close relationship" means in the eyes of the EU.

Fundamentally, it means the EU wants to hold the keys to vast swathes of the UK's economy whereby it keeps the UK locked in to 'satellite status' and subordinating the UK to its external tariffs amongst a host of other things. And irrespective of whether they damage the UK's economy or not. The UK won't have a say in many of these areas and will only be consulted like Turkey currently is. The EU wants a "level playing field" to control any advantageous competition an independent sovereign nation can muster on its own accord. It will want to keep control of the UK's territorial waters only consulting the UK of any changes it decides to make in favour of its fully paid up members.

Close relationship is a euphemism for subordination and acquiescing to EU demands. The only thing close about it, is keeping the UK locked into its political and economic sphere of influence.

Just likes it's currently trying to do with Switzerland
 

Rasczak

Distinguished Member
And you must be living on a different planet as you don't understand parliament has no sovereignty higher than a popular mandate.
We have already established that there has been a General Election since the referendum result and therefore the latter is refined by the former. The GE put no deal off the table so the public should now be asked to endorse a deal or revocation. It is only how that question should be asked that is up for debate.

Close relationship is a euphemism for subordination and acquiescing to EU demands. The only thing close about it, is keeping the UK locked into its political and economic sphere of influence.
I don't agree with your interpretation - I would describe it as close alignment for mutual gain - but, ultimately, it is what the British people chose in 2017.
 

PatMrex

Suspended
We have already established that there has been a General Election since the referendum result and therefore the latter is refined by the former. The GE put no deal off the table so the public should now be asked to endorse a deal or revocation. It is only how that question should be asked that is up for debate.
No it didn't take no deal off the table. That's a complete lie. No deal is/was and still is the legal default. And the Tory manifesto also stated 'we believe no deal is better than a bad deal'.
 

psikey

Distinguished Member


Britain will only be granted a Brexit extension by the EU if it agrees to hold a general election or a second referendum, it emerged on Wednesday night.


David Sassoli, the president of the European Parliament, set out the condition during a debate in Brussels.
 

Rasczak

Distinguished Member
No it didn't take no deal off the table. That's a complete lie. No deal is/was and still is the legal default. And the Tory manifesto also stated 'we believe no deal is better than a bad deal'.
The Tory manifesto first and foremost promised a deal. Checkout my link and you will see it throughout the document. But even then, the Tories only secured 42% of the vote so they lack a majority for no deal. It might be the enduring legal default but the people haven't agreed to it which is why Parliament, acting on their behalf, won't allow it.
 

Rasczak

Distinguished Member
In other news, the former Chancellor, Phillip Hammond, has come forward with an interesting proposal to break the deadlock - a withdrawal agreement that promises zero tariffs with the EU and equivalence (but not membership of) the customs union:
 

Trending threads

Latest news

Disney+ hits 10 million subscribers after first 24 hours
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Sharp unveils 30-inch rollable OLED TV
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
ATC launches C1 Sub Mk2 active subwoofer
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Best Home AV Products 2019 - Editor's Choice Awards
  • By Steve Withers
  • Published
Disney+ unveils Maclunkey cut of Star Wars: A New Hope
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Top Bottom