Brexit - or Article 50: the Phoenix!

[Jamesbrown]

The idea isn't to "cancel" the result. It is to confirm the result is still wanted.

Re/ #2 if you can honestly believe that further negotiation will provide equivalent/same benefits from the EU then I don't know where you have been for the past 3 years. We are currently members with a significant number of opt outs. We're not going to ever be outside with the beneficial opt-ins we currently enjoy. I also wish I could share your optimism with potential benefits we will negotiate with non-EU countries, however I am not sure we will be in a particularly strong position


They absolutely have. The leave campaign was built on the rhetoric of 'easiest deal in history', People were sold what they wanted to be sold. Norwegian / Switzerland deals were mentioned to get the more moderate people on side. For the anti immigration people we had promises that immigration was going to stop. People were told the EU needs us more than we need them and so we would get an amazing deal which would be better than now etc. etc. This deal has no similarities to these promises, so what about those people who have changed their minds in the light of new facts?

Nobody has changed their minds, nobody knows anything different, nothing has changed, no new facts.
You ride on fallacies, fantasy’s and posting twaddle to justify a second referendum. The whole “people have changed their minds” bull is so two years ago.

Just be honest. Tell us you don’t like the result and want it changed by any means possible to end your pathetic tears.

 

[chrisd]

The flyer sent out by the government wasn't legal text. David Cameron lied to you to win votes, the referendum was advisory and held in bad faith. He made a promise that was completely irresponsible for a load of reasons we’ve gone over for the last three years and more, and which still can’t be resolved to anyone’s satisfaction.

You seem to be forgetting the "project Fear" campaign which had even more lies. The promise can easily be resolved to leaver satisfaction, just accept the democratic principal and get the job done by the end of October.

 

[Tashyboy]

Ave I missed owt 😳

 

[drdel]

Single Transferable Vote. It really isn't that complicated.

I'm afraid it is.

If you've studied how 'large number' statistics and 'standard' error margins work you'll realise that progressive systems like 'transferable votes' are incredibly difficult to design without introducing inequality. The EU has such a system and they're always trying to tweak it !!

 

[patricks148]

You seem to be forgetting the "project Fear" campaign which had even more lies. The promise can easily be resolved to leaver satisfaction, just accept the democratic principal and get the job done by the end of October.

I'm not sure there was a bigger lie that the bus with 39million a day to the NHS TBH

 

[Blue in Munich]

Single Transferable Vote. It really isn't that complicated.

We all know that Remain would scream blue murder when they have the most votes in the first round only to see it disappear when votes are reallocated. And that’s without the next whine that people didn’t know how it worked and ticked the wrong box.

Why is it that Remain can not accept the result of the Referendum?

 

[drdel]

Ave I missed owt 😳

Nope...

 

[woody69]

Nobody has changed their minds, nobody knows anything different, nothing has changed, no new facts.
You ride on fallacies, fantasy’s and posting twaddle to justify a second referendum. The whole “people have changed their minds” bull is so two years ago.

Just be honest. Tell us you don’t like the result and want it changed by any means possible to end your pathetic tears.

Are you capable of having a discussion without ad hominem attacks?

If nobody has changed their minds, nothing has changed then what is the harm in asking the question?

 

[chrisd]

I'm not sure there was a bigger lie that the bus with 39million a day to the NHS TBH

But it was well known that the numbers on the bus were incorrect before anyone popped to the polling station. Nigel Farage had made it clear that the message was wrong and disassociated himself from the promise but that the NHS would still benefit from the savings from the EU levy. Also I don't think the bus promised £39m A DAY !!

 

[woody69]

We all know that Remain would scream blue murder when they have the most votes in the first round only to see it disappear when votes are reallocated. And that’s without the next whine that people didn’t know how it worked and ticked the wrong box.

Why is it that Remain can not accept the result of the Referendum?

Nonsense and so what if they did. It would be a legally binding referendum asking the correct question

 

[Foxholer]

The idea isn't to "cancel" the result. It is to confirm the result is still wanted.
...

Yeah, Right!

...
Re/ #2 if you can honestly believe that further negotiation will provide equivalent/same benefits from the EU then I don't know where you have been for the past 3 years. We are currently members with a significant number of opt outs. We're not going to ever be outside with the beneficial opt-ins we currently enjoy. I also wish I could share your optimism with potential benefits we will negotiate with non-EU countries, however I am not sure we will be in a particularly strong position

I'm certain some sort of trade deal WILL be negotiated, as it's of benefit to both UK and EU to do so.
I can't stop you from being a pessimist!

...
They absolutely have. The leave campaign was built on the rhetoric of 'easiest deal in history', People were sold what they wanted to be sold. Norwegian / Switzerland deals were mentioned to get the more moderate people on side. For the anti immigration people we had promises that immigration was going to stop. People were told the EU needs us more than we need them and so we would get an amazing deal which would be better than now etc. etc. This deal has no similarities to these promises, so what about those people who have changed their minds in the light of new facts?

Nor can I stop gullible folk from being gullible!

We were repeatably told the Referendum was a 'once only' choice and that 'We will implement the result'. There was even an overwhelmingly positive in Parliament to do so! To do anything else now would be a travesty!

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Nick Ferrari on LBC often uses the 'divorce' analogy when arguing against circumstances changing supporting a case for a confirmatory referendum.

His analogy has it that a couple decides to divorce - and that's it. They divorce. End of. They go their own ways.

But that is not it. A couple decide to divorce and their solicitors work with the couple to agree a divorce settlement, and once that is agreed and the couple review the agreement the couple then proceed with their divorce. Or they don't. Because it is quite possible that during the settlement negotiations the couple realise the error or their ways - perhaps through pleadings from any children, or when they look at the impact of their separating on themselves; their family; their friends - and in looking at all of that, they decide that it's just not worth it - perhaps that the reasons for initiating the divorce were mistaken or petty - whatever. In any case. A couple who decide to divorce, and initiate divorce proceedings, are not required to go through with it. Circumstances might change; they might change their minds; and they might just decide to call it off and stay together.

Ferrari's analogy just doesn't work.

 

[patricks148]

But it was well known that the numbers on the bus were incorrect before anyone popped to the polling station. Nigel Farage had made it clear that the message was wrong and disassociated himself from the promise but that the NHS would still benefit from the savings from the EU levy. Also I don't think the bus promised £39m A DAY !!

so it was a lie none the less, what where the bigger lies s told by remain?

 

[woody69]

You seem to be forgetting the "project Fear" campaign which had even more lies. The promise can easily be resolved to leaver satisfaction, just accept the democratic principal and get the job done by the end of October.

The Leave campaign ran on a compendium of blatant lies and the Remain campaign lolled about as if they were on the beach and made vague, grandiose statements about catastrophic economic damage, were we to leave.

The referendum question was blunt, crude and lacking in detail, as if it had been designed to appeal to people's knee-jerk reactions and prejudices. The campaign of one side was demonstrably false and founded in bigotry, full of curved bananas and photographs of Syrians. The campaign of the other side was incompetent and limp, full of hubris and laziness.

The referendum decided nothing that could guide a government in policy terms. We just voted to butt out and left the interpretation of what that meant to warring factions in the Conservative party. What kind of way is that to make a decision that will affect us for generations?

 

[Hobbit]

Nonsense. The next referendum would have 2 or possibly 3 detailed propositions, any one of which would require no more analysis: Johnson's Deal, Remain, or possibly No Deal (though that's the one thing Parliament have agreed on). The referendum would be binding, and the result implemented the next day. The law would mandate it.

We now know what Brexit means. Even with the govt refusing to publish its assessment of this deal we know it will make the UK worse off, rather than providing "exactly the same benefits" as promised by the Leave team.

Democracy demands that we simply check what the current will of the people is. There is no 'being fair to the majority' argument when we don't know what the majority want.

You could argue that, "It would be fair to all of those who voted leave. They won. They should get their “victory” as it were. That’s what they were promised", but that wasn't the deal, that was the spin. The deal, as was legally established at the time and afterward, was that it was a glorified opinion poll. The government informally promised to implement the result, which has caused all manner of confusion ever since.

But its fairness or otherwise is irrelevant to this conversation. We can Remain and then leave later if we change our minds about it. We can’t Leave and then decide to rejoin. That decision will be out of our hands.

The Leave/Remain decision is not symmetrical, which is why similarly irreversible decisions virtually always require more than a simple majority, and require absolute clarity uncomplicated by the type of different interpretations Brexit is subject to, and the fact that many of them are not for us to determine anyway.

Democracy is not something you do once and then the same people and policies rule forever. That’s dictatorship. With democracy, you re-test public opinion whenever circumstances have changed and, in the case of elections, at regular intervals.

What a load of utter rubbish.

Democracy; raise a proposition, vote on the proposition, enact the result of the vote. Without all 3 there is no democracy.

The original vote; all the info was out there for everyone to look for. The choice on the ballot paper was leave or remain.

The spin; don't forget to include all the Remain politicians who said a vote to leave was a vote to leave the Single market and the customs union. The choice was as clear as day.

Your comment; "We can Remain and Leave later." How about enacting the result of the vote, which was turned into a law, and Leaving and then deciding to rejoin later.

Your comment; "We can't leave and decide to rejoin." Oh for god's sake stop it. The EU have said time and again the door will always been open to rejoin. Ah yes, but that doesn't suit the rubbish you're spouting...

I'm all for remaining, and leaving (including the 3 years rubbish we've experienced) has cost me a fortune. The future here in Spain for many, especially the elderly, is full of uncertainty and increased costs. I'd vote Remain again in a heart beat but at least lets have the debate with honesty on all sides.

 

[drdel]

Nonsense and so what if they did. It would be a legally binding referendum asking the correct question

It is very plain to see that those wanting a second vote are those unhappy with the first. I'd just like a bit of honesty: the simple underlying aim is to reverse the result by hook or by crook.

You seem to continually ignore the truth that any new vote will be biased because there is no correct question(s) to a binary choice on whether the UK stays within the EU or leaves - the Electoral Committee spent a lot of time and money on 'experts' to come up with the original questions. The issue still crystallises to the same dichotomy.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1184018750565244928

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

so it was a lie none the less, what where the bigger lies s told by remain?

Bearing in mind that the £350m a week was a misrepresentation of a known fact - as opposed to a prediction that did not come to pass. Anyone who predicts anything knows that there is uncertainty associated with any prediction - and that uncertainty can increase or decrease in accordance with events subsequent to the initial prediction being made - and these events in themselves having associated uncertainty as to their existence, timing, effect on the eventual state affairs etc. And so the Gov of the BoE applied measures to mitigate the impact of the vote - the effectiveness of these measures being unknown prior to them being applied. As it happens the measures were successful in mitigating the impact - at least in the short term. And hence such as an Emergency Budget was not required.

 

[woody69]

What a load of utter rubbish.

Democracy; raise a proposition, vote on the proposition, enact the result of the vote. Without all 3 there is no democracy.

The original vote; all the info was out there for everyone to look for. The choice on the ballot paper was leave or remain.

The spin; don't forget to include all the Remain politicians who said a vote to leave was a vote to leave the Single market and the customs union. The choice was as clear as day.

Your comment; "We can Remain and Leave later." How about enacting the result of the vote, which was turned into a law, and Leaving and then deciding to rejoin later.

Your comment; "We can't leave and decide to rejoin." Oh for god's sake stop it. The EU have said time and again the door will always been open to rejoin. Ah yes, but that doesn't suit the rubbish you're spouting...

I'm all for remaining, and leaving (including the 3 years rubbish we've experienced) has cost me a fortune. The future here in Spain for many, especially the elderly, is full of uncertainty and increased costs. I'd vote Remain again in a heart beat but at least lets have the debate with honesty on all sides.

Thanks for the reply, but I am not sure why do you have to be so aggressive?

Yes, the EU have said that the door will be open for us to rejoin, but the terms of that membership will almost certainly not be nothing like we have today and just because we ask to rejoin and they are saying we can now, it isn't in our hands is it? We'll be asking to rejoin the club and the club are the ones who decide the terms of that membership. We don't get to walk away, say "sorry we made a mistake" in 10 years time and then go back to how it all is. We will almost certainly have to make concessions.

Also, what you have said regarding democracy, is not the definition of democracy.

 

[woody69]

It is very plain to see that those wanting a second vote are those unhappy with the first. I'd just like a bit of honesty: the simple underlying aim is to reverse the result by hook or by crook.

You seem to continually ignore the truth that any new vote will be biased because there is no correct question(s) to a binary choice on whether the UK stays within the EU or leaves - the Electoral Committee spent a lot of time and money on 'experts' to come up with the original questions. The issue still crystallises to the same dichotomy.

It is very plain to see that those not wanting a second vote are unhappy that the original decision may be overturned. I'd just like a bit of honesty: the simple underlying aim is to prevent a reverse of the result by hook or by crook.

I'm not sure what you mean when you say I "continually ignore the truth that any new vote will be biased". You made that statement. Perhaps you can tell me, why a single transferable vote with the various options would be in any way biased