EU Referendum

[Hacker Khan]

http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/polit...vernment-for-letting-them-vote-20160627109858

Warning, Socket Rocket will do his nut when he reads this...

 

[User62651]

Over 1.2 million more people wanted to leave so I would say that's a majority.

We have to now man up and press on and leave the EU, the sooner the better I say.

Who is we? Do you not think the vote needed to go the same way over the 4 parts of the UK? If all voted Brexit then crack on but they didn't. That should have been set out at the start imo. 2 of the 4 areas voted separately so there is no mandate for all the UK, just for England and Wales, pushing forward now with Brexit divides and could split the UK up. Maybe it ends up like that but these issues need to be ironed out before the UK rushes into this. legally a referendum is not like an election, the result of it does not have to be enacted.
Cameron bailed as he won't sign article 50, whomoever does sign article 50 to get this moving is a dead duck, that's whey they're all keeping their heads down, whomever sticks their head above the trench is going to lose it, tactics have gone badly wrong for all wannabee PM's as no-one wants to do this (at government level). Farage would but he's not a player.

This will rumble on and I also wouldn't be surprised if Brexit doesn't happen.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Every single option should be on the table and discussed right now

Nothing missed - if a deal can be brokered for the good of the country then do it

But what ever happens the experts should be fully involved in finding the best way forward for us as a nation - the vote has happened and people gave their say - IMO that doesn't mean we remove straight away without a thought - sorry but there is far too much at risk for the future for that to be done without proper discussion between the appropiate people

If a deal can be done that allows the UK to stay within the EU and for the benefit of the U.K. And its neighbour's then IMO a majority would be up for that - if that means a second vote then so what - far better to make sure of things and to ensure the country follows the right path for its citizens as a whole - it's clear that some won't want that and want the UK to remove itself immediately - regardless of how practical that is .

Surely the correct move forward is what's best for the country

 

[SocketRocket]

Who is we? Do you not think the vote needed to go the same way over the 4 parts of the UK? If all voted Brexit then crack on but they didn't. That should have been set out at the start imo. 2 of the 4 areas voted separately so there is no mandate for all the UK, just for England and Wales, pushing forward now with Brexit divides and could split the UK up. Maybe it ends up like that but these issues need to be ironed out before the UK rushes into this. legally a referendum is not like an election, the result of it does not have to be enacted.
Cameron bailed as he won't sign article 50, whomoever does sign article 50 to get this moving is a dead duck, that's whey they're all keeping their heads down, whomever sticks their head above the trench is going to lose it, tactics have gone badly wrong for all wannabee PM's as no-one wants to do this (at government level). Farage would but he's not a player.

This will rumble on and I also wouldn't be surprised if Brexit doesn't happen.

It was a UK referendum, not an individual nation one. I think we all knew that and it disingenuous and opportunist to suggest otherwise.

 

[SocketRocket]

Every single option should be on the table and discussed right now

Nothing missed - if a deal can be brokered for the good of the country then do it

But what ever happens the experts should be fully involved in finding the best way forward for us as a nation - the vote has happened and people gave their say - IMO that doesn't mean we remove straight away without a thought - sorry but there is far too much at risk for the future for that to be done without proper discussion between the appropiate people

If a deal can be done that allows the UK to stay within the EU and for the benefit of the U.K. And its neighbour's then IMO a majority would be up for that - if that means a second vote then so what - far better to make sure of things and to ensure the country follows the right path for its citizens as a whole - it's clear that some won't want that and want the UK to remove itself immediately - regardless of how practical that is .

Surely the correct move forward is what's best for the country

Fair comment but whatever arrangement is made it must include the UK being separated from the EU politically.

 

[SocketRocket]

http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/polit...vernment-for-letting-them-vote-20160627109858

Warning, Socket Rocket will do his nut when he reads this...

SocketRocket cares not a tosh what the Dailymash posts. He has explained what he thinks about the way you manipulate it for your own agenda though.

Oh! nearly forgot. Grow Up :thup:

 

[Foxholer]

...
I think Corben is one of the very few politicians I believe tells the truth.

Politicans on all sides are not exactly improving their image to the public currently, its all opportunism and manouvering for self gain, rather than the country's gain it seems. I hope Corben sticks to his guns and tells that shadow cabinet rabble where to get off, done nothing wrong imo except be honest, he didn't call the referendum. Refreshingly normal honest human being Corben, particularly for a politician.
....

Unfortunately, that means he's likely to be a poor politician!

And that appears to have been demonstrated by his rather inept showing showing during the 'campaign' - or did the media simply ignore him!

I think Benn was actually correct in his statement - the result of which was inevitable!

 

[Hobbit]

Who is we? Do you not think the vote needed to go the same way over the 4 parts of the UK? If all voted Brexit then crack on but they didn't. That should have been set out at the start imo. 2 of the 4 areas voted separately so there is no mandate for all the UK, just for England and Wales, pushing forward now with Brexit divides and could split the UK up. Maybe it ends up like that but these issues need to be ironed out before the UK rushes into this. legally a referendum is not like an election, the result of it does not have to be enacted.
Cameron bailed as he won't sign article 50, whomoever does sign article 50 to get this moving is a dead duck, that's whey they're all keeping their heads down, whomever sticks their head above the trench is going to lose it, tactics have gone badly wrong for all wannabee PM's as no-one wants to do this (at government level). Farage would but he's not a player.

This will rumble on and I also wouldn't be surprised if Brexit doesn't happen.

Corbyn as a leader should reflect his party. As a back bencher he could have his mini crusades and push his fringe agendas with the likes of Hamas. As a leader he should be a team captain. Unfortunately, the A-team don't want him, and picking the B-team won't win an election.

 

[Val]

Every single option should be on the table and discussed right now

Nothing missed - if a deal can be brokered for the good of the country then do it

But what ever happens the experts should be fully involved in finding the best way forward for us as a nation - the vote has happened and people gave their say - IMO that doesn't mean we remove straight away without a thought - sorry but there is far too much at risk for the future for that to be done without proper discussion between the appropiate people

If a deal can be done that allows the UK to stay within the EU and for the benefit of the U.K. And its neighbour's then IMO a majority would be up for that - if that means a second vote then so what - far better to make sure of things and to ensure the country follows the right path for its citizens as a whole - it's clear that some won't want that and want the UK to remove itself immediately - regardless of how practical that is .

Surely the correct move forward is what's best for the country

I agree with the sentiment but the bottom line is this, the UK wide electorate voted to leave the EU and that has to be respected regardless of the fallout that it entails, no second vote and no deal to remain regardless of how attractive it may mean. The democtratic process has to be respected. If we do deals and don't come out it makes a mockery of the referendum.

 

[sawtooth]

Depends on what you class as a majority. More than voted the other way then yes. A sizeable proportion of the electorate then no. You can compare it to the Muirfield election to not allow women, in that case a majority by one definition voted yes to it but it did not pass.

But I agree the rules are the rules and technically we should just man up and reap what we sow to a certain extent.

Over 50% yes.

It really didn't matter if it was 1 vote or 10M votes difference in the case of this referendum.

Like you say rules are rules and we can't go changing them now afterwards because we didn't get what we wanted.

If England lose against Iceland tonight maybe we should ask for a rematch? It won't happen and neither will another EU referendum. 😬

We should take our time and do it right of course but the will of the people must prevail.

 

[Val]

Who is we? Do you not think the vote needed to go the same way over the 4 parts of the UK? If all voted Brexit then crack on but they didn't. That should have been set out at the start imo. 2 of the 4 areas voted separately so there is no mandate for all the UK, just for England and Wales, pushing forward now with Brexit divides and could split the UK up. Maybe it ends up like that but these issues need to be ironed out before the UK rushes into this. legally a referendum is not like an election, the result of it does not have to be enacted.
Cameron bailed as he won't sign article 50, whomoever does sign article 50 to get this moving is a dead duck, that's whey they're all keeping their heads down, whomever sticks their head above the trench is going to lose it, tactics have gone badly wrong for all wannabee PM's as no-one wants to do this (at government level). Farage would but he's not a player.

This will rumble on and I also wouldn't be surprised if Brexit doesn't happen.

We is the United Kingodom as one, the vote was as one and has to be respected as one. That is democracy.

 

[Val]

FTFY

Quite a few have already come out and noted they voted that way but didn't actually​ want to leave. Messr's Johnson and Gove share the feeling I believe.

Doesn't matter now though, the result was pretty clear.

 

[Foxholer]

Corbyn as a leader should reflect his party. As a back bencher he could have his mini crusades and push his fringe agendas with the likes of Hamas. As a leader he should be a team captain. Unfortunately, the A-team don't want him, and picking the B-team won't win an election.

I have distinct doubts about whether the A-team was ever likely to win an election!

Though more and more UK elections have become 'presidential' with a the leaders slugging it out, with occasional assistance from 'assistants' like (Shadow) Chancellors. In that respect, Corbyn has been pretty poor. Now could well be an excellent time to ditch him, which, though the only real replacement I can see is Yvette Cooper - all the others seem too light-weight to me!

 

[User62651]

Over 50% yes.

If England lose against Iceland tonight maybe we should ask for a rematch? It won't happen and neither will another EU referendum. 

Yeah but a bunch of overpaid premadonnas having a little sulk before they get back to doing their shampoo adverts is hardly the same thing as the economy crashing and millions of ordinary people losing jobs and rights and access for them and their kids to careers and colleges across Europe.
This was an anti-austerity protest vote to give Cameron a kicking, is it clear from the Brexit big guns response they don't have a clue and it was all about vying for PM, little to do with the EU, needs to be at least a second vote to reaffirm the view. You dont screw up future generations futures because ignoring a referendum is seen by some as opportunistic or disingenous.

Government have governed recklessly, HM should come in and void this whole thing as Head of State, put Cameron and Johnson in the stocks outside the Tower of London for a good public pelting.

 

[Fyldewhite]

I have distinct doubts about whether the A-team was ever likely to win an election!

Though more and more UK elections have become 'presidential' with a the leaders slugging it out, with occasional assistance from 'assistants' like (Shadow) Chancellors. In that respect, Corbyn has been pretty poor. Now could well be an excellent time to ditch him, which, though the only real replacement I can see is Yvette Cooper - all the others seem too light-weight to me!

I agree. Dysfunctional and not fit for purpose at the moment and I can't see labour becoming electable any time soon. As well as splitting the country this vote has massively split the labour heartlands. I can see the Libdems doing very well at the next election if they set their stall out properly. Similar to what happened in Scotland with the SNP last time. If they do, Labour may be effectively finished.

 

[MegaSteve]

Renewed calls for a third runway at Heathrow this morning...

Apparently the biggest hindrance to UK growth was not the way old folk voted, last Thursday, but lack of runways in the south east...

BTW remainers 'experts' predicted the third runway scheme being kaiboshed due to exit vote...

 

[jp5]

If England lose against Iceland tonight maybe we should ask for a rematch? It won't happen and neither will another EU referendum. 😬

If the game was won in unfair circumstances there is precedent for a replay, as I'm sure you remember!

 

[GB72]

Whilst I am not trying to contest the results of the referendum, I do think that agreement should be reached to put the whole process on hold. I am not proposing ignoring the vote, I just think that now is the time for caution.
To me the whole process was rushed. Each of the 2 ‘parties’ in the campaign should have been asked to draw up manifesto documents with detailed plans for what would happen in the event of each outcome and with spending proposals for any savings that were made on EU membership costs. Instead both sides relied on hypothesis, rhetoric and crowd pleasing slogans.
What we have now is a position whereby nobody knows what to dp now. Frighteningly similar to the wars in the Gulf, everyone knew what result they wanted but had no idea what to do when they got it.
To push on now with no leadership, no defined policy and no idea what to do would be madness. Surely now is the time to say that the people have spoken, they have given a policy that has to be followed through by this or successive governments but that now firm plans have to be put in place to work out how and when this is actually going to happen.
Worryingly it appears that both sides assumed that the other one would have a plan in place should the Brexit vote win and neither did. On that point I would have thought it would have been sensible for Cammeron to announce that he would resign in the event of defeat so that it was clear that someone else would have to pick up the pieces once the result was known.

 

[Deleted Member 1156]

Brilliant piece, nails it. And how depressing our new reality is.

No it's not, it's one journalist's opinion.

OK the future may be a bit uncertain but rather than doom and gloom we should be optimistic that we have a chance to create something better. If that doesn't happen then fair enough, then it's time for the doom and gloom. But this is going to be a long slow process not an overnight success.

Bit like golf lessons, sometimes you have to go backwards to move forwards :thup:

 

[Hacker Khan]

Whilst I am not trying to contest the results of the referendum, I do think that agreement should be reached to put the whole process on hold. I am not proposing ignoring the vote, I just think that now is the time for caution.
To me the whole process was rushed. Each of the 2 ‘parties’ in the campaign should have been asked to draw up manifesto documents with detailed plans for what would happen in the event of each outcome and with spending proposals for any savings that were made on EU membership costs. Instead both sides relied on hypothesis, rhetoric and crowd pleasing slogans.
What we have now is a position whereby nobody knows what to dp now. Frighteningly similar to the wars in the Gulf, everyone knew what result they wanted but had no idea what to do when they got it.
To push on now with no leadership, no defined policy and no idea what to do would be madness. Surely now is the time to say that the people have spoken, they have given a policy that has to be followed through by this or successive governments but that now firm plans have to be put in place to work out how and when this is actually going to happen.
Worryingly it appears that both sides assumed that the other one would have a plan in place should the Brexit vote win and neither did. On that point I would have thought it would have been sensible for Cammeron to announce that he would resign in the event of defeat so that it was clear that someone else would have to pick up the pieces once the result was known.

How can the stay campaign have come up with detailed plans for any savings made from coming out of the EU? If they would have won we would pretty much have carried on as normal, nothing would have changed, no stock market shocks etc etc. So why they needed a plan to pretty much carry on as before is a bit unclear to me.

It was obvious that if we came out there would be massive political and economic turmoil. So surely it those that were promoting this option should have some answers now, instead of the vacuum we are getting? The stayers are gone, they no longer make the decisions.

Plus if any side had bothered making any detailed plans you know as well as me what would have been said about them. Scaremongering by so called experts, and then people would have mostly ignored them.