Off Topic Politics Thread

[fatletiss]

Ah Beddy and percentages... it doesn’t need a 4% switch fella to change a 4% gap, but we know how you are with numbers


Ps. On topic, you keep saying “you can’t ignore the vote” .... it’s not people ignoring the vote, it’s people saying that if that vote now looks to be the wrong decision or there is a feeling/poll/information available that the people think it is wrong, then it is perfectly acceptable in a democracy to ask the people again.

One question I have though is if we did vote again and hypotheticallly it was suddenly a remain win, what would the implications be with us and the EU? Do we just stay and carry on as if it was June 2016, or would we face legal bills and costs for what has been happening over the last 2 years. Would we also be in a bad position in terms of EU future discussions? They’d all want to stop us getting anything we wanted in the future.

Oh and Farage would probably reappear

 

[Beddy]

Ah Beddy and percentages... it doesn’t need a 4% switch fella to change a 4% gap, but we know how you are with numbers


Ps. On topic, you keep saying “you can’t ignore the vote” .... it’s not people ignoring the vote, it’s people saying that if that vote now looks to be the wrong decision or there is a feeling/poll/information available that the people think it is wrong, then it is perfectly acceptable in a democracy to ask the people again.

One question I have though is if we did vote again and hypotheticallly it was suddenly a remain win, what would the implications be with us and the EU? Do we just stay and carry on as if it was June 2016, or would we face legal bills and costs for what has been happening over the last 2 years. Would we also be in a bad position in terms of EU future discussions? They’d all want to stop us getting anything we wanted in the future.

Oh and Farage would probably reappear

In truth fats...... I was trying to get over that the original vote is not invalid or out of date. Hence the current negotiations.
I agree a lot of people may have changed their minds. But in my view that is because of the turmoil in getting what they originally voted for.
We have left it to the polititions to get on with it. Now if parliament rejects what she has proposed now that is a different question granted.
I understand from people that know a lot more than me about politics than me. For the referendom to be referred for re-vote. A new act of parliament would be needed........or some such.......
However I agree that it will cost the country more money if we decided we should stay.......personally I think I might emigrate if that were to happen the turmoil from that would make the current turmoil look like child’s play.......

 

[Schad]

Remaining would absolutely have its costs, including undermining the UK's credibility for years within that body. There are no clean options left, and sometimes the best choice is to go hat in hand and admit that you really ****ed up.

 

[Brinkworth Saint]

Ah Beddy and percentages... it doesn’t need a 4% switch fella to change a 4% gap, but we know how you are with numbers


Ps. On topic, you keep saying “you can’t ignore the vote” .... it’s not people ignoring the vote, it’s people saying that if that vote now looks to be the wrong decision or there is a feeling/poll/information available that the people think it is wrong, then it is perfectly acceptable in a democracy to ask the people again.

One question I have though is if we did vote again and hypotheticallly it was suddenly a remain win, what would the implications be with us and the EU? Do we just stay and carry on as if it was June 2016, or would we face legal bills and costs for what has been happening over the last 2 years. Would we also be in a bad position in terms of EU future discussions? They’d all want to stop us getting anything we wanted in the future.

Oh and Farage would probably reappear

And demands for a third referendum would come as night follows day. The other issue is if we did proceed along this route, what would the questions be? Can’t see much consensus on that alone!

 

[West Kent Saint]

And demands for a third referendum would come as night follows day. The other issue is if we did proceed along this route, what would the questions be? Can’t see much consensus on that alone!

Not necessarily. First vote was blind for most people. I know that can be contested by hard brexiteers. Second vote, whatever people want to call it, will/should at least reflect what we now know, hence people being better informed and therefore democratic.

 

[fatletiss]

In truth fats...... I was trying to get over that the original vote is not invalid or out of date. Hence the current negotiations.
I agree a lot of people may have changed their minds. But in my view that is because of the turmoil in getting what they originally voted for.
We have left it to the polititions to get on with it. Now if parliament rejects what she has proposed now that is a different question granted.
I understand from people that know a lot more than me about politics than me. For the referendom to be referred for re-vote. A new act of parliament would be needed........or some such.......
However I agree that it will cost the country more money if we decided we should stay.......personally I think I might emigrate if that were to happen the turmoil from that would make the current turmoil look like child’s play.......

The first vote is definitely not invalid. The people voted and spoke.

 

[shoot_spiderman]

Not necessarily. First vote was blind for most people. I know that can be contested by hard brexiteers. Second vote, whatever people want to call it, will/should at least reflect what we now know, hence people being better informed and therefore democratic.

I think you all need to forget about this 2nd referendum option. It just isn't going to happen because ...

They aren't going to say the 1st vote was undemocratic or flawed in any way so they can't include Remain, it could only be different flavours of Leave

They can't include Renegotiate as an option as it doesn't mean anything and rather leads you into needing another one when you have negotiated, which really can't happen

The options therefore can only be the MAY Deal or NO Deal and I think that the only option that would unite all sides, for different reasons, is NOT having a referundum on that basis

Teresa May realises that the only option we have is to fudge a deal that gets us away from the disaster of NO Deal and gives us time to sort out the multitude of complex and divisive issues that can't be agreed in such a short timescale. It's not ideal, but in a scenario where there is no ideal solution you have to be pragmatic.

For the Brexiteers it still means we are leaving and for the country maybe we can avoid the NO Deal meltdown
Surely, the only reason the people believe a NO Deal is acceptable is because Rees-Mogg etc say the MAY Deal is Remainers trying to avoid it rather than than trying to give us more time to do it as best as we can, which is clearly untrue, whatever she is attempting it isn't to stay in without any representation

 

[ChilcoSaint]

I think you all need to forget about this 2nd referendum option. It just isn't going to happen because ...

They aren't going to say the 1st vote was undemocratic or flawed in any way so they can't include Remain, it could only be different flavours of Leave

They can't include Renegotiate as an option as it doesn't mean anything and rather leads you into needing another one when you have negotiated, which really can't happen

The options therefore can only be the MAY Deal or NO Deal and I think that the only option that would unite all sides, for different reasons, is NOT having a referundum on that basis

Teresa May realises that the only option we have is to fudge a deal that gets us away from the disaster of NO Deal and gives us time to sort out the multitude of complex and divisive issues that can't be agreed in such a short timescale. It's not ideal, but in a scenario where there is no ideal solution you have to be pragmatic.

For the Brexiteers it still means we are leaving and for the country maybe we can avoid the NO Deal meltdown
Surely, the only reason the people believe a NO Deal is acceptable is because Rees-Mogg etc say the MAY Deal is Remainers trying to avoid it rather than than trying to give us more time to do it as best as we can, which is clearly untrue, whatever she is attempting it isn't to stay in without any representation

The Draft Agreement isn’t acceptable to many sections of the UK for many different reasons, most notably the future of Northern Ireland. Those Tory frontbenchers trying to change it won’t have any success because the EU are done negotiating. Remain is now the only option which is achievable which won’t ruin the UK both economically and socially for the next generation or more. The politicians just have to find a way to make it happen.

Going back to @Beddytare’s argument about the referendum being binding, have you never heard of unacceptable laws being repealed? Different times, different situation, but remember the Poll Tax?

 

[VocalMinority]

I’m not trying to tell you what you are thinking........I just have different view to how I think democracy works. It really doesn’t matter how I voted or you for that matter. A vote was taken and you can’t ignore it. No political party can. You were saying earlier how that vote was out of date. Truly it is not....hence why they are negotiating based on the original vote.
You mentioned general elections ....well we had one didn’t we.......now they have got to get on with the job in hand. That’s the politions job......... if they call another one so be it.
But calling another general election is not going to end this matter. It still has to be dealt with. Europe was never going to make it easy for us to leave. They are frightened if they do a lot of others will follow. The Dutch for one.......Austria is another Greece is another and the Italians just to name a few. So there is a lot more riding on this than perhaps you think.
There is no doubt no matter which way things go from now there is bound to be controversy either way. If they decide the people should vote on the deal. Then let’s vote....... but on the deal nothing else. Then if the people vote that down they have to try and renegotiate I guess ......but what ever the government comes up with not all are going to agree. That I guess is human nature........
The one thing we all can agree the whole saga is a bloody mess............

You haven't offered a single reason to say it is still representative other than I am ignoring the referendum result because it's what I want. Which i know I'm not. I've even come up with the most fair solution the the 3 main sides from the referendum that I believe will sort out many of the troubles while your solution is to ignore it.

From your shallow responses I would say I've put in a lot more analysis to the result of the referendum and between us if if there is anyone ignoring the result because it's what they want it would be you.

Given all the work I've put it is a really a personal insult to say I'm ignoring it which is why I'm getting annoyed.

 

[ImpSaint]

You must log in or register to see media

If there's a General Election there's a very good chance that Labour won't get in. If the Tories win (still ahead in the opinion polls) the ERG nutters will take it as a mandate for a no-deal Brexit and we're economically done for (apart from the cheap citrus fruit which will, no doubt, be a great solace in the dark days to come).

Can't Labour see that saying "yes, we'll let the population have a final say on the deal" will kill off much of the poison inside their party? They don't have to whip people (even Jezzer) to support remaining. Offering the vote gets them off the hook. And probably gets them plenty of votes.

Vin

It will lose them many more than it will gain. Most remainer Tories won't vote Labour and will mostly still vote Tory even though they hate the idea of leaving. The reverse is not true. Most Labour leavers that gave Corbyn the benefit of doubt over Labour's position will vote Tory just for Brexit. I don't think people realise this.#

I could be wrong (but don;t think I am.)

 

[ImpSaint]

Yes, but it'll never get through Parliament. So we need to deal with the world as it is, not as we wish it to be. Which, tragically, looks like no deal is a-comin'.



Once the stock and money markets start to react to the prospect of No Deal being likely, it'll concentrate minds of MPs wonderfully.

No amount of sculpting public opinion could cope with the anger people will feel when MINI shuts down for a month (their plan for the start of No Deal) followed by a collapse in sales when a 10% tariff is applied to their exports. Or when we start to run out of isotopes for cancer treatment (so deeply technical a problem that I bet there isn't a Brexiter MP who understands it). Or medicines. Or the government requisitioning ferries to guarantee food supplies. Or troops being used to guarantee food supplies. Or the Police being put on alert for public disturbances. Or a hard border between Northern and Southern Ireland. Relying on a WTO court that will not be quorate (again, no-one on the Brexit side cares about this) by the end of 2019. Flight cancellations (again for deeply technical reasons about plane maintenance personnel, too detailed for the ERG to care about - they just say it'll be fine).

These are all consequences outlined in the government's own planning documents. Not "project fear" but in the government's own assessment of the impact of a No Deal exit. And these are just a subset. They don't include a mass flight of capital out of London. Or the M26 lorry park plans.

But don't worry, citrus fruit will be cheap*.




So, even our dozy MPs will wake up when No Deal is the only option remaining. Even they will be scared of what's coming. So extending Article 50 and holding a referendum (thus passing the hot potato back to the UK population) will suddenly look very enticing.

Vin

* ©Imps

* You don't understand my points r.e. cheap food. Food prices are cheap for all of us (you and me) because labour in that market has had wages kept low. Positives for you and people who focus on "cost of living." Negatives for people like me who get ignored for these jobs because we are "too expensive."

Not a problem you think because benefits and top ups have replaced wages and thus we still benefit form that cheap food.

Why would Citrus fruit be cheaper after leaving? Would we be importing from Morocco instead of Spain? Or just not charging tariffs on Spanish Oranges?

 

[ImpSaint]

The other thing about a leadership contest is that if May is defeated, she obviously has to resign as PM, but then the Queen has to send for someone who can command a majority in the HoC. Without the DUP/SNP/Lib Dem’s, or a coalition with Labour, who might that be?

You are assuming the DUP would not come back on board with a new Tory leader. Also assuming that this will be a long drawn out thing rather than be an immediate 2 horse race. It is the "pragmatic" remain Tory MPs that are talking about flooding the number of candidates. The leave side are talking about putting up 1 candidate to get straight to a member's vote.

 

[ImpSaint]

That would be a massive problem, if the only thing the public could vote for was her deal or no deal.
But I wouldn’t put it past her right wing colleagues pushing for a vote on that basis.

They might push for that but you have to get that through parliament as well. Thus IF a new referendum legislation were to be put to the house it would most definitely have to have some option for "remain."

Most likely as suggested a 1st, 2nd preference type. Maybe 4 options:

1 This deal
2 No deal
3 EEA
4 Remain.

I think EEA or No deal would win once 2nd preferences were counted.

 

[ImpSaint]

did we do a Brexit vote on here in 2016?

Now we're all fully in the know (not) if we did one now what would the the options be apart from IN or OUT?

It is still 4000 for remain and just me for leave. Nothing has changed there

 

[ImpSaint]

It looks, going by this, that even at this desperate hour, May was trying to set up a deal that would seriously damage/undermine the Labour election manifesto.
Party before people. Always.

You must log in or register to see media

May? Funny how now it is May in control of negotiations and not the EU. This is EU policy. State Aid has to be approved by EU at the moment.

 

[ImpSaint]

Your entire argument is based on your belief of what other people are thinking. people who willlknow what they are thinking a damn sight better than you do. that type of argument is never going to convince somebody.

I'm sorry, but the government can ignore a vote. its very easy,. they just don't do anything. so now that arguments been proven to be factually wrong. what have you got? nothing.

i was hoping you would at least say try and look at if from the other side. because i have done so as the american gun control has this exact issue. they need a super majority to enforce gun controls. should every american with a gun be forced to sell it and ged rid in a decision that could be overturned the next day? i had a hard think about it but my answer is no. americans need to have a firm decision before making the choice that will have a large affect on hundreds of millions of americans that cant easily be undone. so i think america is right that they need a supermajority to change their gun control laws. i think it is too high but thats another matter.

same goes here.

so i am not ignoring the vote i have thought long and hard about it researching the problem in other countries even before coming up with a solution while you are burying your head in the sand relying on an argument that is clearly not even true, especially to me when youre trying to tell me what im thinking!

While you are correct that the referendum was no legally binding it ignores that every politician campaigning for remain made a huge point of "If you vote leave there is no going back."

Every house in the country also received a leaflet that stated "This is your choice. The government WILL implement what you decide."

There is no vagueness there. It doesn't say it is our chance to voice an opinion and they will decide if it is right or not. It doesn't say Tory government, just government so it doesn't matter if the government changes.

So legally, yes they can ignore it however then those who bang on about the leave argument being based on lies become the biggest liars as they renege on their own promises stated at every debate several times by virtually all of them and published over and over again. Not just Tories, not just Cameron. All of them Clegg, Sturgeon, Chukka etc. They all stated this was a one off and no going back.

 

[ImpSaint]

Not necessarily. First vote was blind for most people. I know that can be contested by hard brexiteers. Second vote, whatever people want to call it, will/should at least reflect what we now know, hence people being better informed and therefore democratic.

But what if people changed their mind in 2 years based on the new arrangment with the EU after deciding now to remain. Surely once people saw that and IF public opinion had changed we should have a 3rd referendum to see if the public were happy with the new "punishment for the naughty boy" arrangement we would have with the EU.

Then 2 years later when the next negotiation was handled terribly we could go back for No4 and see if we wanted a "severe punishment for a very very naughty boy" remain deal. We could go on forever because "IF public opinion changes.........."

 

[fatletiss]

The whole debacle has a touch of the Laurel and Hardy about it.

 

[SaintinSerbia]

and just me for leave

AND MY MUM!

 

[SaintinSerbia]

granted, she is one sandwich short of a picnic!