politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » How people would feel if the government cancelled Brexit & Bri
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » How people would feel if the government cancelled Brexit & Britain stayed in the EU?
Interesting polling out today from YouGov which could just become increasingly important.
Comments
-
first to vote?0
-
Second like the referendum0
-
Third like UKIP on 24%0
-
Aroused 2
Dirty 5
Hungry 130 -
Delighted to have dodged May's deal, Betrayed because Brexit gets cancelled...0
-
What on earth? Russel-Moyle grabbed the mace. Couldn’t work out context from the clips. Anyone?0
-
Surely not, the continuity remainers assure us nothing will ever be problematic again once we remain. Note:This is totally not the same thing leavers making vague, overly simplified promises.
Frankly I'm surprised the betrayed and delighted figures are as low as they are, that should both encourage and discourage both sides.0 -
the 24% must also reflect the ageing Brexit demographic.
0 -
Remainers never advocate violence against Leavers........
https://twitter.com/theneweuropean/status/9267673080217108530 -
Russell-Moyle is a prick and I hope they ban him for the rest of the season
Trying to be funny or clever or meaningful but is as shallow as a raindrop and as thick as pigshit0 -
The guardian live feed describes what happennedMortimer said:What on earth? Russel-Moyle grabbed the mace. Couldn’t work out context from the clips. Anyone?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2018/dec/10/brexit-deal-vote-latest-theresa-may-ecj-government-says-ecj-ruling-irrelevant-because-uk-leaving-eu-anyway-politics-live
It doesn't spell out his motives but the implication is some sort of protest at MPs being denied a say?0 -
Befuddled 95
Miffed 45
Ennui 320 -
I think Brexit could be cancelled without riots.
0 -
Cabbages 21
Seaside 35
Llamas 420 -
I agree, though if it happens I hope those saying it will not be as bad as we think are right, but the more unacceptable it is, the lower the justification for a public vote.tyson said:
No deal is illegitimate in all but name...we cannot morally press ahead with something that our country is ill equipped for...kle4 said:
Yes it was. Remain warned everyone there could be huge chaos and disruption by leaving, and that it was a massive leap in the dark. It would be a perfectly legitimate outcome to no deal, especially since parliament agreed to it in legislative form in the event nothing else was agreed.chloe said:We need to revoke A50 and hold a referendum if MPs can’t ageee a deal. No deal was not on the ballot paper last time.
I don't want no deal, and I think parliament has failed to agree anything and thus a referendum is probably necessary, but there is nothing illegitimate about no deal, and we were warned something like this was possible, and parliament accepted it as well no matter how they bleat now about how horrible that would be.
0 -
24% is quite a big percentage to feel betrayed.
The totals for positive and negative reactions are 43% and 38% respectively, which is also interesting.
A not insignificant difference.
The extreme reactions seem to reflect our national politics, with somewhere around a quarter of the electorate at opposing poles.
0 -
I'm sure a place can be found for him in the Tower of London.PeterMannion said:Russell-Moyle is a prick and I hope they ban him for the rest of the season
Trying to be funny or clever or meaningful but is as shallow as a raindrop and as thick as pigshit0 -
Hmm... not sure what word I'd personally choose from that selection. Maybe "relieved", but also "uneasy".0
-
Ooooh, really deep and meaningful isn't he, the clever boy?IanB2 said:
The guardian live feed describes what happennedMortimer said:What on earth? Russel-Moyle grabbed the mace. Couldn’t work out context from the clips. Anyone?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2018/dec/10/brexit-deal-vote-latest-theresa-may-ecj-government-says-ecj-ruling-irrelevant-because-uk-leaving-eu-anyway-politics-live
It doesn't spell out his motives but the implication is some sort of protest at MPs being denied a say?
Er, no, he's a dick. Ban him for life0 -
Sorry Mike - I will have to disagree with you on this. cancelling it is the only safe option. Referendums can deliver the wring result e.g Cameron and 20160
-
Opposing poles hasn't helped from the beginning.Nigelb said:24% is quite a big percentage to feel betrayed.
The totals for positive and negative reactions are 43% and 38% respectively, which is also interesting.
A not insignificant difference.
The extreme reactions seem to reflect our national politics, with somewhere around a quarter of the electorate at opposing poles.
0 -
Disenchanted.0
-
"In any case the chances of Brexit just being cancelled are zilch. A u-turn like this really does require another vote."
To be provocative, does it? We are a Parliamentary democracy.
If Parliament won't vote for the deal which has been reached and doesn't want to let No Deal happen, then let it take a decision.
I worry that if a No-Deal Brexit goes through, even though Parliamentarians are against it and think it should not happen, and if it causes the sort of economic disruption we've been warned about, such a result would be just as corrosive of public belief in democracy and, indeed, the role of Parliament, as a revocation of Brexit. Voters will not blame themselves. They will blame MPs for having allowed something bad to happen even though they knew it was potentially harmful. They will blame those who misled them or those who used improper tactics to win the referendum. Etc etc.
There are no cost free easy options left. My feeling is that there will be a backlash from some group, whatever happens. I do wonder whether it might be better for Parliament to take the decision it feels is best for the nation and, if that means revoking Article 50, taking the consequences of that. It might, I realise, lead to a backlash from the Farages and Tommy Robinsons of this world but, maybe, best to face these people down rather than go along with a course of action you think deeply unwise.
There is a deal which could be accepted as @RichardTyndall (fpt) has pointed out. And if that were agreed, I could live with it.
If, OTOH, the choice is revocation, face down those who disagree and explain why you have done what you have done. If that means explaining that the referendum should not have been done or that the options were too vague or that the government adopted the wrong red lines and failed at negotiating a deal or that the sort of Brexit that was sold was unachievable or irreconcilable, so be it. Have a bit of courage.
Deal - and really do this - with some of the concerns which animated many leavers. Many of these will not be alleviated by Brexit but made worse. And some are (and always have been) within Britain's control. Level with voters. Be honest. Be brutally truthful. Speak some hard truths to the voters. And face down those who threaten violence or who have hidden agendas or ulterior motives.
But to refuse to do what you think best for the country because you are scared of the voters or because you feel that you have to intone "Will of the People" repeatedly as if we were some Ruritanian country in the 1930's is pathetic. It shames Parliament.0 -
Extra road to kick can down. Built swiftly, efficiently and comprehensively in just one day!
Other infrastructure, not so.0 -
Cyclefree FPT:
I worry that if a No-Deal Brexit goes through, even though Parliamentarians are against it and think it should not happen, and if it causes the sort of economic disruption we've been warned about, such a result would be just as corrosive of public belief in democracy and, indeed, the role of Parliament, as a revocation of Brexit. Voters will not blame themselves. They will blame MPs for having allowed something bad to happen even though they knew it was potentially harmful. They will blame those who misled them or those who used improper tactics to win the referendum. Etc etc.
There are no cost free easy options left. I do wonder whether it might be better for Parliament to take the decision it feels is best for the nation and, if that means revoking Article 50, taking the consequences of that. It might, I realise, lead to a backlash from the Farages and Tommy Robinsons of this world but, maybe, best to face these people down rather than go along with a course of action you think deeply unwise and still face a backlash.
Parliament can't revoke it - it's an executive power. I don't even think there's a majority in parliament for revocation. I think there's nearly a majority in parliament for forcing someone else to call it if they could so force them, but that's not the same thing at all on three fronts:
1) "nearly": John Rentoul tweeted today that the MPs were split No deal 127, Deal 207, Remain/ref 303.
2) "if they could force them" but Parliament can't force through the primary legislation needed to pull A50 or call a referendum
3) "someone else" This is the big one. Nobody wants to be That Guy. That Guy says "you were wrong last time. I haven't listened to you. You will vote again. The defeated option might even be on the ballot paper this time. The successful one (or at least your interpretation of it) might not be. This is more democratic than following the result of the first vote, because I might get what I want. I am prepared to put aside the most fundamental point of democracy - we vote and we implement votes - in order to get a second shot at this". That Guy, importantly, doesn't get elected.
After all, if you cut a swathe through the law to get to the devil, then when the last law was down, and the devil turned round on you, where would you hide then? Could you really stand upright in the winds that followed?0 -
I've never been a fan of that kind of 'look at me' protest. I get sometimes you need to draw attention, but I don't think the opposition as a whole, and many Tories, will have a problem getting across the message that they have been denied a say on withdrawing the vote, particularly with a news handy clip of Bercow saying that option would be discourteous to the house.IanB2 said:
The guardian live feed describes what happennedMortimer said:What on earth? Russel-Moyle grabbed the mace. Couldn’t work out context from the clips. Anyone?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2018/dec/10/brexit-deal-vote-latest-theresa-may-ecj-government-says-ecj-ruling-irrelevant-because-uk-leaving-eu-anyway-politics-live
It doesn't spell out his motives but the implication is some sort of protest at MPs being denied a say?
And yes, the whole Mace thing is silly anyway, but it's harmless trappings that add to the idiosyncrasies of our democratic processes, acting like a baby about it is not cool, you're not going to be the next Cromwell.0 -
Sweeping generalisations are never 100% correct.twistedfirestopper3 said:Remainers never advocate violence against Leavers........
https://twitter.com/theneweuropean/status/9267673080217108530 -
Yes, but it is clearly easier to justify not proceeding with one referendum if it's the voters making that choice in another.Cyclefree said:"In any case the chances of Brexit just being cancelled are zilch. A u-turn like this really does require another vote."
To be provocative, does it? We are a Parliamentary democracy.
If Parliament won't vote for the deal which has been reached and doesn't want to let No Deal happen, then let it take a decision.
I worry that if a No-Deal Brexit goes through, even though Parliamentarians are against it and think it should not happen, and if it causes the sort of economic disruption we've been warned about, such a result would be just as corrosive of public belief in democracy and, indeed, the role of Parliament, as a revocation of Brexit. Voters will not blame themselves. They will blame MPs for having allowed something bad to happen even though they knew it was potentially harmful. They will blame those who misled them or those who used improper tactics to win the referendum. Etc etc.
There are no cost free easy options left. My feeling is that there will be a backlash from some group, whatever happens. I do wonder whether it might be better for Parliament to take the decision it feels is best for the nation and, if that means revoking Article 50, taking the consequences of that. It might, I realise, lead to a backlash from the Farages and Tommy Robinsons of this world but, maybe, best to face these people down rather than go along with a course of action you think deeply unwise.
There is a deal which could be accepted as @RichardTyndall (fpt) has pointed out. And if that were agreed, I could live with it.
If, OTOH, the choice is revocation, face down those who disagree and explain why you have done what you have done. If that means explaining that the referendum should not have been done or that the options were too vague or that the government adopted the wrong red lines and failed at negotiating a deal or that the sort of Brexit that was sold was unachievable or irreconcilable, so be it. Have a bit of courage.
Deal - and really do this - with some of the concerns which animated many leavers. Many of these will not be alleviated by Brexit but made worse. And some are (and always have been) within Britain's control. Level with voters. Be honest. Be brutally truthful. Speak some hard truths to the voters. And face down those who threaten violence or who have hidden agendas or ulterior motives.
But to refuse to do what you think best for the country because you are scared of the voters or because you feel that you have to intone "Will of the People" repeatedly as if we were some Ruritanian country in the 1930's is pathetic. It shames Parliament.0 -
I am the 2%.
If a quarter of the country feels betrayed by a political move, that will find an outlet. Leavers have been in a feedback loop getting steadily more extreme. The 24% would not go quietly.0 -
creates a load of other problems unless there is overwhelming public support for such a course of actionBeverley_C said:Sorry Mike - I will have to disagree with you on this. cancelling it is the only safe option. Referendums can deliver the wring result e.g Cameron and 2016
0 -
This is a great post.Cyclefree said:"In any case the chances of Brexit just being cancelled are zilch. A u-turn like this really does require another vote."
To be provocative, does it? We are a Parliamentary democracy.
If Parliament won't vote for the deal which has been reached and doesn't want to let No Deal happen, then let it take a decision.
I worry that if a No-Deal Brexit goes through, even though Parliamentarians are against it and think it should not happen, and if it causes the sort of economic disruption we've been warned about, such a result would be just as corrosive of public belief in democracy and, indeed, the role of Parliament, as a revocation of Brexit. Voters will not blame themselves. They will blame MPs for having allowed something bad to happen even though they knew it was potentially harmful. They will blame those who misled them or those who used improper tactics to win the referendum. Etc etc.
There are no cost free easy options left. My feeling is that there will be a backlash from some group, whatever happens. I do wonder whether it might be better for Parliament to take the decision it feels is best for the nation and, if that means revoking Article 50, taking the consequences of that. It might, I realise, lead to a backlash from the Farages and Tommy Robinsons of this world but, maybe, best to face these people down rather than go along with a course of action you think deeply unwise.
There is a deal which could be accepted as @RichardTyndall (fpt) has pointed out. And if that were agreed, I could live with it.
If, OTOH, the choice is revocation, face down those who disagree and explain why you have done what you have done. If that means explaining that the referendum should not have been done or that the options were too vague or that the government adopted the wrong red lines and failed at negotiating a deal or that the sort of Brexit that was sold was unachievable or irreconcilable, so be it. Have a bit of courage.
Deal - and really do this - with some of the concerns which animated many leavers. Many of these will not be alleviated by Brexit but made worse. And some are (and always have been) within Britain's control. Level with voters. Be honest. Be brutally truthful. Speak some hard truths to the voters. And face down those who threaten violence or who have hidden agendas or ulterior motives.
But to refuse to do what you think best for the country because you are scared of the voters or because you feel that you have to intone "Will of the People" repeatedly as if we were some Ruritanian country in the 1930's is pathetic. It shames Parliament.0 -
I suspect had the referendum been on an 8 point scale like this poll, the results would have been similar... 20 per cent at either end who really give a toss; 60 in the middle who aren’t quite as fussed as JRM and Andrew Adonis believe. The binary choice both forced and allowed people to hover over the ballot paper and shrug before sticking their X wherever.
Maybe a third box marked “you lot decide.. that’s what we pay you for and you have researchers’n’shit so you can get it right” should be a prerequisite in future...0 -
also , betrayed or angry = 30%0
-
Nah, it'll be fine. As I was myself told, no one wants Brexit at all. Being a coward and a Bregretful soft leave deal supporter, I merely mumbled in reply that reasonably people might come to different conclusions on that score.AlastairMeeks said:I am the 2%.
If a quarter of the country feels betrayed by a political move, that will find an outlet. Leavers have been in a feedback loop getting steadily more extreme. The 24% would not go quietly.0 -
The Tory front bench looks incredibly tired and aged.0
-
There is also a timing issue here. To revoke A50 it probably needs to be done before March 28th 2019 and there isn't enough time left for a referendum to be called and completed.IanB2 said:
Yes, but it is clearly easier to justify not proceeding with one referendum if it's the voters making that choice in another.
I'm starting to think that the only way out of the mess we are going to find ourselves in is to revoke A50, for Parliament to suffer the consequences and for it all to start again 3 years hence when we know what we actually want to fix...0 -
I am genuinely surprised 'worried' is not on this list.0
-
Drowsy 11
Intoxicated 15
Horny 340 -
They may also reflect about half the Tory vote.....nielh said:the 24% must also reflect the ageing Brexit demographic.
0 -
Government is hard. Particularly minority government in a time of crisis beset by internal divisions. While I cannot say I have been particularly enthused by the quality of debate or focus of our politicians at this time, parliament has been pursuing its role in discussing big issues more than they often do.AndyJS said:The Tory front bench looks incredibly tired and aged.
0 -
I vote for incandescent. I'll decide later if with rage or with excitement.0
-
Yes - it would be easier. But sometimes, you know, if you are in a position of leadership and MPs are, they need to make hard decisions not outsource them to others. Or we can become like Switzerland and have referenda on bloody everything and get rid of MPs.IanB2 said:
Yes, but it is clearly easier to justify not proceeding with one referendum if it's the voters making that choice in another.Cyclefree said:
I worry that if a No-Deal Brexit goes through, even though Parliamentarians are against it and think it should not happen, and if it causes the sort of economic disruption we've been warned about, such a result would be just as corrosive of public belief in democracy and, indeed, the role of Parliament, as a revocation of Brexit. Voters will not blame themselves. They will blame MPs for having allowed something bad to happen even though they knew it was potentially harmful. They will blame those who misled them or those who used improper tactics to win the referendum. Etc etc.
There are no cost free easy options left. My feeling is that there will be a backlash from some group, whatever happens. I do wonder whether it might be better for Parliament to take the decision it feels is best for the nation and, if that means revoking Article 50, taking the consequences of that. It might, I realise, lead to a backlash from the Farages and Tommy Robinsons of this world but, maybe, best to face these people down rather than go along with a course of action you think deeply unwise.
There is a deal which could be accepted as @RichardTyndall (fpt) has pointed out. And if that were agreed, I could live with it.
If, OTOH, the choice is revocation, face down those who disagree and explain why you have done what you have done. If that means explaining that the referendum should not have been done or that the options were too vague or that the government adopted the wrong red lines and failed at negotiating a deal or that the sort of Brexit that was sold was unachievable or irreconcilable, so be it. Have a bit of courage.
Deal - and really do this - with some of the concerns which animated many leavers. Many of these will not be alleviated by Brexit but made worse. And some are (and always have been) within Britain's control. Level with voters. Be honest. Be brutally truthful. Speak some hard truths to the voters. And face down those who threaten violence or who have hidden agendas or ulterior motives.
But to refuse to do what you think best for the country because you are scared of the voters or because you feel that you have to intone "Will of the People" repeatedly as if we were some Ruritanian country in the 1930's is pathetic. It shames Parliament.
But the irony of MPs bleating about Parliamentary sovereignty and wanting to make laws instead of those pesky Europeans and then running away from the biggest decision they have to take.......0 -
Charles (previous thread)
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/tommy-robinsons-brexit-march_uk_5c0d2a31e4b0ab8cf6942c040 -
They tend to conveniently flip from lauding the will of the people to ignoring it as unnecessary or wrong depending on the issue.Cyclefree said:
But the irony of MPs bleating about Parliamentary sovereignty and wanting to make laws instead of those pesky Europeans and then running away from the biggest decision they have to take.......IanB2 said:
Yes, but it is clearly easier to justify not proceeding with one referendum if it's the voters making that choice in another.Cyclefree said:
I worry that if a No-Deal Brexit goes through, even though Parliamentarians are against it and think it should not happen, and if it causes the sort of economic disruption we've been warned about, such a result would be just as corrosive of public belief in democracy and, indeed, the role of Parliament, as a revocation of Brexit. Voters will not blame themselves. They will blame MPs for having allowed something bad to happen even though they knew it was potentially harmful. They will blame those who misled them or those who used improper tactics to win the referendum. Etc etc.
There are no cost free easy options left. My feeling is that there will be a backlash from some group, whatever happens. I do wonder whether it might be better for Parliament to take the decision it feels is best for the nation and, if that means revoking Article 50, taking the consequences of that. It might, I realise, lead to a backlash from the Farages and Tommy Robinsons of this world but, maybe, best to face these people down rather than go along with a course of action you think deeply unwise.
There is a deal which could be accepted as @RichardTyndall (fpt) has pointed out. And if that were agreed, I could live with it.
If, OTOH, the choice is revocation, face down those who disagree and explain why you have done what you have done. If that means explaining that the referendum should not have been done or that the options were too vague or that the government adopted the wrong red lines and failed at negotiating a deal or that the sort of Brexit that was sold was unachievable or irreconcilable, so be it. Have a bit of courage.
Deal - and really do this - with some of the concerns which animated many leavers. Many of these will not be alleviated by Brexit but made worse. And some are (and always have been) within Britain's control. Level with voters. Be honest. Be brutally truthful. Speak some hard truths to the voters. And face down those who threaten violence or who have hidden agendas or ulterior motives.
But to refuse to do what you think best for the country because you are scared of the voters or because you feel that you have to intone "Will of the People" repeatedly as if we were some Ruritanian country in the 1930's is pathetic. It shames Parliament.0 -
For those muttering darkly about Leavers rioting in the event of Brexit being cancelled, it's worth reflecting that the power to get people out on the street seems to rest mainly on the Remain side if recent marches are a guide.0
-
Sorry, but incandescent was banned by the EU. Have to use low energy bulbs these days.kle4 said:I vote for incandescent. I'll decide later if with rage or with excitement.
0 -
I'd feel
vindicated,
but weary.0 -
But the quality of debate has been so poor, positions so entrenched that there has been zero point to the debating/questioning. There is so little willingness to compromise, and so much determination to play politics rather than engage in meaningful contemplation.kle4 said:
Government is hard. Particularly minority government in a time of crisis beset by internal divisions. While I cannot say I have been particularly enthused by the quality of debate or focus of our politicians at this time, parliament has been pursuing its role in discussing big issues more than they often do.AndyJS said:The Tory front bench looks incredibly tired and aged.
Is this a perfect deal? No.
Was a perfect deal possible? No.
Is there any realistic prospect of a better deal? No.
Do we want to crash out without a deal? No.
Yet people are not facing that reality and pretending that their posturing will deliver something that doesn't exist.
It is all so infantile. And this isn't party political - all parties are indulging in pathetic posturing.0 -
Irked and peeved should both be on the list.0
-
The self destruction of the Tory party is not something that keeps me up at night, apart from toasting its downfall of course.MarqueeMark said:
They may also reflect about half the Tory vote.....nielh said:the 24% must also reflect the ageing Brexit demographic.
0 -
That was a joke by the way. I don't want to end up in the Tower myself.AndyJS said:
I'm sure a place can be found for him in the Tower of London.PeterMannion said:Russell-Moyle is a prick and I hope they ban him for the rest of the season
Trying to be funny or clever or meaningful but is as shallow as a raindrop and as thick as pigshit0 -
"I'm 4w but as bright as 40w with rage !" doesn't cut itSandyRentool said:
Sorry, but incandescent was banned by the EU. Have to use low energy bulbs these days.kle4 said:I vote for incandescent. I'll decide later if with rage or with excitement.
0 -
Brexit was still happening at the time. No matter how some were unhappy with the 'proper' nature of Brexit, it was happening and people knew that. If remain happens, people will have more to get furious about.Benpointer said:For those muttering darkly about Leavers rioting in the event of Brexit being cancelled, it's worth reflecting that the power to get people out on the street seems to rest mainly on the Remain side if recent marches are a guide.
Now as it happens I don't think there would be riot, I think it would just cause some protests and a big group of people justifiably giving up on politics altogether. But there are perhaps reasons people have not been feeling it necessary to march for something that was already on track.0 -
Godsdamit it. Screw it, no deal it is!SandyRentool said:
Sorry, but incandescent was banned by the EU. Have to use low energy bulbs these days.kle4 said:I vote for incandescent. I'll decide later if with rage or with excitement.
0 -
I think in reality you might get up to 50% ‘indifferent’. Much of the country is utterly bored with Brexit.
A handful of knuckle draggers will continue to threaten violence and make sinister gambits, but will be largely ignored.0 -
There are three immediate options available: proceed with deal, crash out or cancel A50. A second referendum would have to follow the cancellation of A50. I think cancelling A50 with the intention of never having a referendum or serious rethink would be unacceptable. A cancellation while we take stock and try to work out a tolerable Brexit, never actually to get there, is possible, I think.Cyclefree said:
To be provocative, does it? We are a Parliamentary democracy.
If Parliament won't vote for the deal which has been reached and doesn't want to let No Deal happen, then let it take a decision.
I worry that if a No-Deal Brexit goes through, even though Parliamentarians are against it and think it should not happen, and if it causes the sort of economic disruption we've been warned about, such a result would be just as corrosive of public belief in democracy and, indeed, the role of Parliament, as a revocation of Brexit. Voters will not blame themselves. They will blame MPs for having allowed something bad to happen even though they knew it was potentially harmful. They will blame those who misled them or those who used improper tactics to win the referendum. Etc etc.
There are no cost free easy options left. My feeling is that there will be a backlash from some group, whatever happens. I do wonder whether it might be better for Parliament to take the decision it feels is best for the nation and, if that means revoking Article 50, taking the consequences of that. It might, I realise, lead to a backlash from the Farages and Tommy Robinsons of this world but, maybe, best to face these people down rather than go along with a course of action you think deeply unwise.
There is a deal which could be accepted as @RichardTyndall (fpt) has pointed out. And if that were agreed, I could live with it.
If, OTOH, the choice is revocation, face down those who disagree and explain why you have done what you have done. If that means explaining that the referendum should not have been done or that the options were too vague or that the government adopted the wrong red lines and failed at negotiating a deal or that the sort of Brexit that was sold was unachievable or irreconcilable, so be it. Have a bit of courage.
Deal - and really do this - with some of the concerns which animated many leavers. Many of these will not be alleviated by Brexit but made worse. And some are (and always have been) within Britain's control. Level with voters. Be honest. Be brutally truthful. Speak some hard truths to the voters. And face down those who threaten violence or who have hidden agendas or ulterior motives.
But to refuse to do what you think best for the country because you are scared of the voters or because you feel that you have to intone "Will of the People" repeatedly as if we were some Ruritanian country in the 1930's is pathetic. It shames Parliament.0 -
52% disgruntled
48% gruntled0 -
That poll is a metaphor for the challenge of Brexit - whatever options are presented someone always thinks they have a better one.kle4 said:I vote for incandescent. I'll decide later if with rage or with excitement.
0 -
Is that an Andrew Bridgen quote? He strikes me as a four-watter.twistedfirestopper3 said:
"I'm 4w but as bright as 40w with rage !" doesn't cut itSandyRentool said:
Sorry, but incandescent was banned by the EU. Have to use low energy bulbs these days.kle4 said:I vote for incandescent. I'll decide later if with rage or with excitement.
0 -
You're right, there's been far far too much of that. But it helps with the verisimilitude which can allow me to dream they are engaging in contemplative debate.oxfordsimon said:
But the quality of debate has been so poor, positions so entrenched that there has been zero point to the debating/questioning. There is so little willingness to compromise, and so much determination to play politics rather than engage in meaningful contemplation.kle4 said:
Government is hard. Particularly minority government in a time of crisis beset by internal divisions. While I cannot say I have been particularly enthused by the quality of debate or focus of our politicians at this time, parliament has been pursuing its role in discussing big issues more than they often do.AndyJS said:The Tory front bench looks incredibly tired and aged.
Is this a perfect deal? No.
Was a perfect deal possible? No.
Is there any realistic prospect of a better deal? No.
Do we want to crash out without a deal? No.
Yet people are not facing that reality and pretending that their posturing will deliver something that doesn't exist.
It is all so infantile. And this isn't party political - all parties are indulging in pathetic posturing.0 -
Is this deal what people want? Nooxfordsimon said:
But the quality of debate has been so poor, positions so entrenched that there has been zero point to the debating/questioning. There is so little willingness to compromise, and so much determination to play politics rather than engage in meaningful contemplation.kle4 said:
Government is hard. Particularly minority government in a time of crisis beset by internal divisions. While I cannot say I have been particularly enthused by the quality of debate or focus of our politicians at this time, parliament has been pursuing its role in discussing big issues more than they often do.AndyJS said:The Tory front bench looks incredibly tired and aged.
Is this a perfect deal? No.
Was a perfect deal possible? No.
Is there any realistic prospect of a better deal? No.
Do we want to crash out without a deal? No.
Yet people are not facing that reality and pretending that their posturing will deliver something that doesn't exist.
It is all so infantile. And this isn't party political - all parties are indulging in pathetic posturing.
Will the deal makes us better off? No
Will the deal take back control? No
Is this the only way? No
Do we have to leave? No
0 -
Jonathan said:
Irked and peeved should both be on the list.
“Needing a second cup of strong tea. And a bloody *chocolate* digestive”0 -
FPT
Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?williamglenn said:
Cameron's deal was rejected. "Hard Remain" wasn't on the ballot.Richard_Tyndall said:
But Remain was and it was rejected.chloe said:We need to revoke A50 and hold a referendum if MPs can’t ageee a deal. No deal was not on the ballot paper last time.
0 -
0
-
We send Northern Ireland £250 million a week. Let's fund the NHS instead.0
-
Finally someone talks sense.Harris_Tweed said:Jonathan said:Irked and peeved should both be on the list.
“Needing a second cup of strong tea. And a bloody *chocolate* digestive”0 -
We should have a lottery every week, make 350 millionaires every week. Now that really would look good on the side of a bus.IanB2 said:We send Northern Ireland £250 million a week. Let's fund the NHS instead.
0 -
You are not cutting down the laws. You are upholding Parliamentary democracy. Parliament decides. Voters can then give their verdict at the next election.Drutt said:Cyclefree FPT:
I worry that if a No-Deal Brexit goes through, even though Parliamentarians are against it and think it should not happen, and if it causes the sort of economic disruption we've been warned about, such a result would be just as corrosive of public belief in democracy and, indeed, the role of Parliament, as a revocation of Brexit. Voters will not blame themselves. They will blame MPs for having allowed something bad to happen even though they knew it was potentially harmful. They will blame those who misled them or those who used improper tactics to win the referendum. Etc etc.
There are no cost free easy options left. I do wonder whether it might be better for Parliament to take the decision it feels is best for the nation and, if that means revoking Article 50, taking the consequences of that.
Parliament can't revoke it - it's an executive power. I don't even think there's a majority in parliament for revocation. I think there's nearly a majority in parliament for forcing someone else to call it if they could so force them, but that's not the same thing at all on three fronts:
1) "nearly": John Rentoul tweeted today that the MPs were split No deal 127, Deal 207, Remain/ref 303.
2) "if they could force them" but Parliament can't force through the primary legislation needed to pull A50 or call a referendum
3) "someone else" This is the big one. Nobody wants to be That Guy. That Guy says "you were wrong last time. I haven't listened to you. You will vote again. The defeated option might even be on the ballot paper this time. The successful one (or at least your interpretation of it) might not be. This is more democratic than following the result of the first vote, because I might get what I want. I am prepared to put aside the most fundamental point of democracy - we vote and we implement votes - in order to get a second shot at this". That Guy, importantly, doesn't get elected.
After all, if you cut a swathe through the law to get to the devil, then when the last law was down, and the devil turned round on you, where would you hide then? Could you really stand upright in the winds that followed?
And voters vote all the time for all sorts of things which don't get implemented. Manifestos are rarely implemented in full or at all. And governments do things which the voters did not first get a say on. That is what Parliamentary democracy is. If we believe in it, let's uphold it.
I am not against a second referendum. It may be a way to get out of this mess. I am just querying - partly for debate's sake - whether it is the only way.0 -
It would be better to extend A50 for a referendum and then cancel it afterwards if Remain wins, implementing the deal afterwards if deal winsFF43 said:
There are three immediate options available: proceed with deal, crash out or cancel A50. A second referendum would have to follow the cancellation of A50. I think cancelling A50 with the intention of never having a referendum or serious rethink would be unacceptable. A cancellation while we take stock and try to work out a tolerable Brexit, never actually to get there, is possible, I think.Cyclefree said:
To be provocative, does it? We are a Parliamentary democracy.
If Parliament won't vote for the deal which has been reached and doesn't want to let No Deal happen, then let it take a decision.
I worry that if a No-Deal Brexit goes through, even though Parliamentarians are against it and think it should not happen, and if it causes the sort of economic disruption we've been warned about, such a result would be just as corrosive of public belief in democracy and, indeed, the role of Parliament, as a revocation of Brexit. Voters will not blame themselves. They will blame MPs for having allowed something bad to happen even though they knew it was potentially harmful. They will blame those who misled them or those who used improper tactics to win the referendum. Etc etc.
There are no cost free easy options left. My feeling is that there will be a backlash from some group, whatever happens. I do wonder whether it might be better for Parliament to take the decision it feels is best for the nation and, if that means revoking Article 50, taking the consequences of that. It might, I realise, lead to a backlash from the Farages and Tommy Robinsons of this world but, maybe, best to face these people down rather than go along with a course of action you think deeply unwise.
There is a deal which could be accepted as @RichardTyndall (fpt) has pointed out. And if that were agreed, I could live with it.
If, OTOH, the choice is revocation, face down those who disagree and explain why you have done what you have
Deal - and really do this - with some of the concerns which animated many leavers. Many of these will not be alleviated by Brexit but made worse. And some are (and always have been) within Britain's control. Level with voters. Be honest. Be brutally truthful. Speak some hard truths to the voters. And face down those who threaten violence or who have hidden agendas or ulterior motives.
But to refuse to do what you think best for the country because you are scared of the voters or because you feel that you have to intone "Will of the People" repeatedly as if we were some Ruritanian country in the 1930's is pathetic. It shames Parliament.0 -
Do you respect democracy? NoJonathan said:
Is this deal what people want? Nooxfordsimon said:
But the quality of debate has been so poor, positions so entrenched that there has been zero point to the debating/questioning. There is so little willingness to compromise, and so much determination to play politics rather than engage in meaningful contemplation.kle4 said:
Government is hard. Particularly minority government in a time of crisis beset by internal divisions. While I cannot say I have been particularly enthused by the quality of debate or focus of our politicians at this time, parliament has been pursuing its role in discussing big issues more than they often do.AndyJS said:The Tory front bench looks incredibly tired and aged.
Is this a perfect deal? No.
Was a perfect deal possible? No.
Is there any realistic prospect of a better deal? No.
Do we want to crash out without a deal? No.
Yet people are not facing that reality and pretending that their posturing will deliver something that doesn't exist.
It is all so infantile. And this isn't party political - all parties are indulging in pathetic posturing.
Will the deal makes us better off? No
Will the deal take back control? No
Is this the only way? No
Do we have to leave? No0 -
I listened to IDS and his call to arms yesterday in the event of a second referendum. I have my tin hat and broom handle at the ready!Anazina said:I think in reality you might get up to 50% ‘indifferent’. Much of the country is utterly bored with Brexit.
A handful of knuckle draggers will continue to threaten violence and make sinister gambits, but will be largely ignored.0 -
Do you disrespect democracy through more democracy? NoMarqueeMark said:
Do you respect democracy? NoJonathan said:
Is this deal what people want? Nooxfordsimon said:
But the quality of debate has been so poor, positions so entrenched that there has been zero point to the debating/questioning. There is so little willingness to compromise, and so much determination to play politics rather than engage in meaningful contemplation.kle4 said:
Government is hard. Particularly minority government in a time of crisis beset by internal divisions. While I cannot say I have been particularly enthused by the quality of debate or focus of our politicians at this time, parliament has been pursuing its role in discussing big issues more than they often do.AndyJS said:The Tory front bench looks incredibly tired and aged.
Is this a perfect deal? No.
Was a perfect deal possible? No.
Is there any realistic prospect of a better deal? No.
Do we want to crash out without a deal? No.
Yet people are not facing that reality and pretending that their posturing will deliver something that doesn't exist.
It is all so infantile. And this isn't party political - all parties are indulging in pathetic posturing.
Will the deal makes us better off? No
Will the deal take back control? No
Is this the only way? No
Do we have to leave? No-1 -
That question was very confusingSunil_Prasannan said:FPT
Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?williamglenn said:
Cameron's deal was rejected. "Hard Remain" wasn't on the ballot.Richard_Tyndall said:
But Remain was and it was rejected.chloe said:We need to revoke A50 and hold a referendum if MPs can’t ageee a deal. No deal was not on the ballot paper last time.
0 -
It is not. They do not seem prepared to take that leap, however. Not yet at any rate. I almost wish we do not get a referendum (I see it as the most likely way out for all sides) just to see if they will, in the end, be prepared to say "I know what we all said, and what we legislated for, but this house is charged with the best interests of this country and we cannot do this. I am prepared to face the consequences of us making that decision'.Cyclefree said:
You are not cutting down the laws. You are upholding Parliamentary democracy. Parliament decides. Voters can then give their verdict at the next election.Drutt said:Cyclefree FPT:
I worry that if a No-Deal Brexit goes through, even though Parliamentarians are against it and think it should not happen, and if it causes the sort of economic disruption we've been warned about, such a result would be just as corrosive of public belief in democracy and, indeed, the role of Parliament, as a revocation of Brexit. Voters will not blame themselves. They will blame MPs for having allowed something bad to happen even though they knew it was potentially harmful. They will blame those who misled them or those who used improper tactics to win the referendum. Etc etc.
There are no cost free easy options left. I do wonder whether it might be better for Parliament to take the decision it feels is best for the nation and, if that means revoking Article 50, taking the consequences of that.
Parliament can't revoke it - it's an executive power. I don't even think there's a majority in parliament for revocation. I think there's nearly a majority in parliament for forcing someone else to call it if they could so force them, but that's not the same thing at all on three fronts:
1) "nearly": John Rentoul tweeted today that the MPs were split No deal 127, Deal 207, Remain/ref 303.
2) "if they could force them" but Parliament can't force through the primary legislation needed to pull A50 or call a referendum
3) "solowed?
And voters vote all the time for all sorts of things which don't get implemented. Manifestos are rarely implemented in full or at all. And governments do things which the voters did not first get a say on. That is what Parliamentary democracy is. If we believe in it, let's uphold it.
I am not against a second referendum. It may be a way to get out of this mess. I am just querying - partly for debate's sake - whether it is the only way.0 -
How many referenda would be necessary for Remain to admit defeat and move on?Jonathan said:
Do you disrespect democracy through more democracy? NoMarqueeMark said:
Do you respect democracy? NoJonathan said:
Is this deal what people want? Nooxfordsimon said:
But the quality of debate has been so poor, positions so entrenched that there has been zero point to the debating/questioning. There is so little willingness to compromise, and so much determination to play politics rather than engage in meaningful contemplation.kle4 said:
Government is hard. Particularly minority government in a time of crisis beset by internal divisions. While I cannot say I have been particularly enthused by the quality of debate or focus of our politicians at this time, parliament has been pursuing its role in discussing big issues more than they often do.AndyJS said:The Tory front bench looks incredibly tired and aged.
Is this a perfect deal? No.
Was a perfect deal possible? No.
Is there any realistic prospect of a better deal? No.
Do we want to crash out without a deal? No.
Yet people are not facing that reality and pretending that their posturing will deliver something that doesn't exist.
It is all so infantile. And this isn't party political - all parties are indulging in pathetic posturing.
Will the deal makes us better off? No
Will the deal take back control? No
Is this the only way? No
Do we have to leave? No
If they lost a second, would they call for a third? a fourth?0 -
We stop after the first referendum that decides between two propositions both of which we can actually do.oxfordsimon said:
How many referenda would be necessary for Remain to admit defeat and move on?Jonathan said:
Do you disrespect democracy through more democracy? NoMarqueeMark said:
Do you respect democracy? NoJonathan said:
Is this deal what people want? Nooxfordsimon said:
But the quality of debate has been so poor, positions so entrenched that there has been zero point to the debating/questioning. There is so little willingness to compromise, and so much determination to play politics rather than engage in meaningful contemplation.kle4 said:
Government is hard. Particularly minority government in a time of crisis beset by internal divisions. While I cannot say I have been particularly enthused by the quality of debate or focus of our politicians at this time, parliament has been pursuing its role in discussing big issues more than they often do.AndyJS said:The Tory front bench looks incredibly tired and aged.
Is this a perfect deal? No.
Was a perfect deal possible? No.
Is there any realistic prospect of a better deal? No.
Do we want to crash out without a deal? No.
Yet people are not facing that reality and pretending that their posturing will deliver something that doesn't exist.
It is all so infantile. And this isn't party political - all parties are indulging in pathetic posturing.
Will the deal makes us better off? No
Will the deal take back control? No
Is this the only way? No
Do we have to leave? No
If they lost a second, would they call for a third? a fourth?0 -
In a perfect world, perhaps. But choreographing that in the time available - particularly since A50 extension isn’t under our control - would be near impossible.IanB2 said:
It would be better to extend A50 for a referendum and then cancel it afterwards if Remain wins, implementing the deal afterwards if deal winsFF43 said:
There are three immediate options available: proceed with deal, crash out or cancel A50. A second referendum would have to follow the cancellation of A50. I think cancelling A50 with the intention of never having a referendum or serious rethink would be unacceptable. A cancellation while we take stock and try to work out a tolerable Brexit, never actually to get there, is possible, I think.Cyclefree said:
To be provocative, does it? We are a Parliamentary democracy.
If Parliament won't vote for the deal which has been reached and doesn't want to let No Deal happen, then let it take a decision.
There are no cost free easy options left. My feeling is that there will be a backlash from some group, whatever happens. I do wonder whether it might be better for Parliament to take the decision it feels is best for the nation and, if that means revoking Article 50, taking the consequences of that. It might, I realise, lead to a backlash from the Farages and Tommy Robinsons of this world but, maybe, best to face these people down rather than go along with a course of action you think deeply unwise.
There is a deal which could be accepted as @RichardTyndall (fpt) has pointed out. And if that were agreed, I could live with it.
If, OTOH, the choice is revocation, face down those who disagree and explain why you have done what you have
Deal - and really do this - with some of the concerns which animated many leavers. Many of these will not be alleviated by Brexit but made worse. And some are (and always have been) within Britain's control. Level with voters. Be honest. Be brutally truthful. Speak some hard truths to the voters. And face down those who threaten violence or who have hidden agendas or ulterior motives.
But to refuse to do what you think best for the country because you are scared of the voters or because you feel that you have to intone "Will of the People" repeatedly as if we were some Ruritanian country in the 1930's is pathetic. It shames Parliament.
0 -
Extending A50 requires unanimity of EU27 while we can cancel unilaterally. But you're right, if we cancel it will be hard to exit on any other turns than the current ones, which makes a pause for a better Brexit, rather than a possible Remain, difficult to execute.IanB2 said:
It would be better to extend A50 for a referendum and then cancel it afterwards if Remain wins, implementing the deal afterwards if deal winsFF43 said:There are three immediate options available: proceed with deal, crash out or cancel A50. A second referendum would have to follow the cancellation of A50. I think cancelling A50 with the intention of never having a referendum or serious rethink would be unacceptable. A cancellation while we take stock and try to work out a tolerable Brexit, never actually to get there, is possible, I think.
No easy answers.0 -
Depends if there is new information. We had about as much information in the last two years as we did between the first referendum (1975) and the second (2016).oxfordsimon said:
How many referenda would be necessary for Remain to admit defeat and move on?Jonathan said:
Do you disrespect democracy through more democracy? NoMarqueeMark said:
Do you respect democracy? NoJonathan said:
Is this deal what people want? Nooxfordsimon said:
But the quality of debate has been so poor, positions so entrenched that there has been zero point to the debating/questioning. There is so little willingness to compromise, and so much determination to play politics rather than engage in meaningful contemplation.kle4 said:
Government is hard. Particularly minority government in a time of crisis beset by internal divisions. While I cannot say I have been particularly enthused by the quality of debate or focus of our politicians at this time, parliament has been pursuing its role in discussing big issues more than they often do.AndyJS said:The Tory front bench looks incredibly tired and aged.
Is this a perfect deal? No.
Was a perfect deal possible? No.
Is there any realistic prospect of a better deal? No.
Do we want to crash out without a deal? No.
Yet people are not facing that reality and pretending that their posturing will deliver something that doesn't exist.
It is all so infantile. And this isn't party political - all parties are indulging in pathetic posturing.
Will the deal makes us better off? No
Will the deal take back control? No
Is this the only way? No
Do we have to leave? No
If they lost a second, would they call for a third? a fourth?
Let’s just get on with it.
0 -
Theresa May needs to survive until the end of February to last longer as PM than Spencer Percival, and to around June to overtake Gordon Brown.
No bets are being accepted on these possibilities at this time.0 -
Revoke A50, dissolve parliament and have an immediate GE, then take off and nuke the entire Westminster site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.0
-
There are some lovely buildings there, is there no other way?twistedfirestopper3 said:Revoke A50, dissolve parliament and have an immediate GE, then take off and nuke the entire Westminster site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.
Yeah right. If it were remain and no deal and no deal won, and we could do it, there's no way parliament would agree to it, nor would most of the peoples vote crowd. Remember the cry, let's have a people vote to stop brexit, that's the goal, not to decide between two propositions both which we can actually do.IanB2 said:
We stop after the first referendum that decides between two propositions both of which we can actually do.oxfordsimon said:
How many referenda would be necessary for Remain to admit defeat and move on?Jonathan said:
Do you disrespect democracy through more democracy? NoMarqueeMark said:
Do you respect democracy? NoJonathan said:
Is this deal what people want? Nooxfordsimon said:
But the quality of debate has been so poor, positions so entrenched that there has been zero point to the debating/questioning. There is so little willingness to compromise, and so much determination to play politics rather than engage in meaningful contemplation.kle4 said:
Government is hard. Particularly minority government in a time of crisis beset by internal divisions. While I cannot say I have been particularly enthused by the quality of debate or focus of our politicians at this time, parliament has been pursuing its role in discussing big issues more than they often do.AndyJS said:The Tory front bench looks incredibly tired and aged.
Is this a perfect deal? No.
Was a perfect deal possible? No.
Is there any realistic prospect of a better deal? No.
Do we want to crash out without a deal? No.
Yet people are not facing that reality and pretending that their posturing will deliver something that doesn't exist.
It is all so infantile. And this isn't party political - all parties are indulging in pathetic posturing.
Will the deal makes us better off? No
Will the deal take back control? No
Is this the only way? No
Do we have to leave? No
If they lost a second, would they call for a third? a fourth?0 -
How many elections are necessary for the Conservatives to accept they’re never going to win Oxford City Council and move on?oxfordsimon said:
How many referenda would be necessary for Remain to admit defeat and move on?Jonathan said:
Do you disrespect democracy through more democracy? NoMarqueeMark said:
Do you respect democracy? NoJonathan said:
Is this deal what people want? Nooxfordsimon said:
But the quality of debate has been so poor, positions so entrenched that there has been zero point to the debating/questioning. There is so little willingness to compromise, and so much determination to play politics rather than engage in meaningful contemplation.kle4 said:
Government is hard. Particularly minority government in a time of crisis beset by internal divisions. While I cannot say I have been particularly enthused by the quality of debate or focus of our politicians at this time, parliament has been pursuing its role in discussing big issues more than they often do.AndyJS said:The Tory front bench looks incredibly tired and aged.
Is this a perfect deal? No.
Was a perfect deal possible? No.
Is there any realistic prospect of a better deal? No.
Do we want to crash out without a deal? No.
Yet people are not facing that reality and pretending that their posturing will deliver something that doesn't exist.
It is all so infantile. And this isn't party political - all parties are indulging in pathetic posturing.
Will the deal makes us better off? No
Will the deal take back control? No
Is this the only way? No
Do we have to leave? No
If they lost a second, would they call for a third? a fourth?
If you believe in something you keep fighting.0 -
YouGov also have first preferences in a three-way referendum as:
Remain: 54%
Deal: 18%
No Deal: 28%0 -
Oof, the deal is so dead it is not even funny.williamglenn said:YouGov also have first preferences in a three-way referendum as:
Remain: 54%
Deal: 18%
No Deal: 28%0 -
What a stupid argument.oxfordsimon said:
How many referenda would be necessary for Remain to admit defeat and move on?Jonathan said:
Do you disrespect democracy through more democracy? NoMarqueeMark said:
Do you respect democracy? NoJonathan said:
Is this deal what people want? Nooxfordsimon said:
But the quality of debate has been so poor, positions so entrenched that there has been zero point to the debating/questioning. There is so little willingness to compromise, and so much determination to play politics rather than engage in meaningful contemplation.kle4 said:
Government is hard. Particularly minority government in a time of crisis beset by internal divisions. While I cannot say I have been particularly enthused by the quality of debate or focus of our politicians at this time, parliament has been pursuing its role in discussing big issues more than they often do.AndyJS said:The Tory front bench looks incredibly tired and aged.
Is this a perfect deal? No.
Was a perfect deal possible? No.
Is there any realistic prospect of a better deal? No.
Do we want to crash out without a deal? No.
Yet people are not facing that reality and pretending that their posturing will deliver something that doesn't exist.
It is all so infantile. And this isn't party political - all parties are indulging in pathetic posturing.
Will the deal makes us better off? No
Will the deal take back control? No
Is this the only way? No
Do we have to leave? No
If they lost a second, would they call for a third? a fourth?
Why don’t we find out?0 -
Absolutely brilliant . That’s so funny and great to see a fellow Aliens fan !twistedfirestopper3 said:Revoke A50, dissolve parliament and have an immediate GE, then take off and nuke the entire Westminster site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.
0 -
If reversing Brexit can be met with equanimity and no violence, why not a hard UK/Ireland border?Benpointer said:For those muttering darkly about Leavers rioting in the event of Brexit being cancelled, it's worth reflecting that the power to get people out on the street seems to rest mainly on the Remain side if recent marches are a guide.
0 -
Best of three? Having had two already.oxfordsimon said:
How many referenda would be necessary for Remain to admit defeat and move on?Jonathan said:
Do you disrespect democracy through more democracy? NoMarqueeMark said:
Do you respect democracy? NoJonathan said:
Is this deal what people want? Nooxfordsimon said:
But the quality of debate has been so poor, positions so entrenched that there has been zero point to the debating/questioning. There is so little willingness to compromise, and so much determination to play politics rather than engage in meaningful contemplation.kle4 said:
Government is hard. Particularly minority government in a time of crisis beset by internal divisions. While I cannot say I have been particularly enthused by the quality of debate or focus of our politicians at this time, parliament has been pursuing its role in discussing big issues more than they often do.AndyJS said:The Tory front bench looks incredibly tired and aged.
Is this a perfect deal? No.
Was a perfect deal possible? No.
Is there any realistic prospect of a better deal? No.
Do we want to crash out without a deal? No.
Yet people are not facing that reality and pretending that their posturing will deliver something that doesn't exist.
It is all so infantile. And this isn't party political - all parties are indulging in pathetic posturing.
Will the deal makes us better off? No
Will the deal take back control? No
Is this the only way? No
Do we have to leave? No
If they lost a second, would they call for a third? a fourth?
The thing is Leavers told us 'you lost, suck it up' and for the most part we did. We were assured by Davis and Johnson how easy it would all be, but here we are some 90 days before we leave and we have a diabolical deal before us that even Leavers don't like! To cap it all no one, NO ONE has made any preparation for a no deal which Mrs May says is our only other option. And you think we are being unreasonable?0 -
Not a good analogy - the Conservatives there are presumably not fighting to nullify the results of the last election so the winners do not take up their seats at all.El_Capitano said:
How many elections are necessary for the Conservatives to accept they’re never going to win Oxford City Council and move on?oxfordsimon said:
How many referenda would be necessary for Remain to admit defeat and move on?Jonathan said:
Do you disrespect democracy through more democracy? NoMarqueeMark said:
Do you respect democracy? NoJonathan said:
Is this deal what people want? Nooxfordsimon said:
But the quality of debate has been so poor, positions so entrenched that there has been zero point to the debating/questioning. There is so little willingness to compromise, and so much determination to play politics rather than engage in meaningful contemplation.kle4 said:
Government is hard. Particularly minority government in a time of crisis beset by internal divisions. While I cannot say I have been particularly enthused by the quality of debate or focus of our politicians at this time, parliament has been pursuing its role in discussing big issues more than they often do.AndyJS said:The Tory front bench looks incredibly tired and aged.
Is this a perfect deal? No.
Was a perfect deal possible? No.
Is there any realistic prospect of a better deal? No.
Do we want to crash out without a deal? No.
Yet people are not facing that reality and pretending that their posturing will deliver something that doesn't exist.
It is all so infantile. And this isn't party political - all parties are indulging in pathetic posturing.
Will the deal makes us better off? No
Will the deal take back control? No
Is this the only way? No
Do we have to leave? No
If they lost a second, would they call for a third? a fourth?
If you believe in something you keep fighting.
I don't regard there as anything inherently wrong with arguing for another vote, democracy is democracy, but it is not the same as fighting the next regularly scheduled election.0 -
Frasmotic: 52%
Anaspeptic: 38%
Pericombobulated: 89%0 -
You can guarantee there would be people demanding a 3rd (to rejoin), at the end of the transition period in 2022.oxfordsimon said:
If they lost a second, would they call for a third? a fourth?
0 -
A second vote is not 'more democracy', otherwise a third vote would be more democratic than that, and so on. It's nonsense. Democracy is (1) having votes (2) implementing them.Jonathan said:
Do you disrespect democracy through more democracy? NoMarqueeMark said:
Do you respect democracy? NoJonathan said:
Is this deal what people want? Nooxfordsimon said:
But the quality of debate has been so poor, positions so entrenched that there has been zero point to the debating/questioning. There is so little willingness to compromise, and so much determination to play politics rather than engage in meaningful contemplation.kle4 said:
Government is hard. Particularly minority government in a time of crisis beset by internal divisions. While I cannot say I have been particularly enthused by the quality of debate or focus of our politicians at this time, parliament has been pursuing its role in discussing big issues more than they often do.AndyJS said:The Tory front bench looks incredibly tired and aged.
Is this a perfect deal? No.
Was a perfect deal possible? No.
Is there any realistic prospect of a better deal? No.
Do we want to crash out without a deal? No.
Yet people are not facing that reality and pretending that their posturing will deliver something that doesn't exist.
It is all so infantile. And this isn't party political - all parties are indulging in pathetic posturing.
Will the deal makes us better off? No
Will the deal take back control? No
Is this the only way? No
Do we have to leave? No
If you are prepared to put aside those central tenets of in pursuit of your goals, what business do you have in Parliament, or in any democracy? What else, what other mainstays of civil society, are you willing to sacrifice to get your way?0 -
If the voters elected Mr Blobby but then Tinky Winky showed up at Parliament then maybe they would be fighting to nullify the result?kle4 said:
Not a good analogy - the Conservatives there are presumably not fighting to nullify the results of the last election so the winners do not take up their seats at all.El_Capitano said:
How many elections are necessary for the Conservatives to accept they’re never going to win Oxford City Council and move on?oxfordsimon said:
How many referenda would be necessary for Remain to admit defeat and move on?Jonathan said:
Do you disrespect democracy through more democracy? NoMarqueeMark said:
Do you respect democracy? NoJonathan said:
Is this deal what people want? Nooxfordsimon said:
But the quality of debate has been so poor, positions so entrenched that there has been zero point to the debating/questioning. There is so little willingness to compromise, and so much determination to play politics rather than engage in meaningful contemplation.kle4 said:
Government is hard. Particularly minority government in a time of crisis beset by internal divisions. While I cannot say I have been particularly enthused by the quality of debate or focus of our politicians at this time, parliament has been pursuing its role in discussing big issues more than they often do.AndyJS said:The Tory front bench looks incredibly tired and aged.
Is this a perfect deal? No.
Was a perfect deal possible? No.
Is there any realistic prospect of a better deal? No.
Do we want to crash out without a deal? No.
Yet people are not facing that reality and pretending that their posturing will deliver something that doesn't exist.
It is all so infantile. And this isn't party political - all parties are indulging in pathetic posturing.
Will the deal makes us better off? No
Will the deal take back control? No
Is this the only way? No
Do we have to leave? No
If they lost a second, would they call for a third? a fourth?
If you believe in something you keep fighting.
I don't regard there as anything inherently wrong with arguing for another vote, democracy is democracy, but it is not the same as fighting the next regularly scheduled election.
0 -
A small anecdote ... or why I stopped voting for the LibDems.
The LibDems wanted some traffic calming measures installed in some side-roads in a place I lived.
They caused a small plebiscite to be held in the affected streets.
Unhappily for the LibDems, the result of the plebiscite was that most of the residents didn’t want the traffic calming measures.
The LibDems at that time controlled the council, so they ignored the result of the plebiscite and installed the traffic calming measures anyhow.
When the local councillor came round for re-election, I explained why I was not voting for him.
“Oh, I am pleased he said, it’s such a little thing. You’ll come round by next time”.
The ward is now free of LibDem councillors.0 -
Sausage!grabcocque said:Frasmotic: 52%
Anaspeptic: 38%
Pericombobulated: 89%0 -
With everything that's happened over recent years I think we all need to take polls with a hefty pinch of salt - though, FWIW, you tot up the positive and negative reactions and you get what (I believe) the right/wrong tracker has been coming out with for some time: a lead for Remain, but not a vast one.
Nor does a crude set of figures like this tell us how those surveyed voted last time, whether they've changed their minds, and how likely they would be to vote again.
My take on a second referendum is as follows:
1. It'll be a mass bloodletting exercise that will make referendum Mk.1 look tame by comparison. By the time it's over the current situation - two warring camps that detest one another, with the rest of the population stuck inbetween either trying to ignore it or wishing to God it would stop - will be ten times worse
2. It is unlikely to generate a decisive result, one way or another, and nor will it settle any arguments. Given that it's obvious that a negotiated deal can only be done with the EU on terms that are advantageous to it and keep us closely aligned to its system, only a Hard Brexit can provide any resolution to this endless dispute - except, if there is a Hard Brexit decision then Parliament still won't implement it. And nobody will be stupid enough to trust this Parliament to implement it, either
3. Consequently, the next General Election will probably be the third referendum by proxy, anyway - so why not just cut the crap and skip straight to the election?0 -
One in five people still support the deal, whether out of some sort of pity, ironic detachment, severe psychosis, or masochistic contrarianism is unclear.kle4 said:
Oof, the deal is so dead it is not even funny.williamglenn said:YouGov also have first preferences in a three-way referendum as:
Remain: 54%
Deal: 18%
No Deal: 28%
Possibly all of the above.0 -
Bayonet it. [After showing previous quotes]kle4 said:
Godsdamit it. Screw it, no deal it is!SandyRentool said:
Sorry, but incandescent was banned by the EU. Have to use low energy bulbs these days.kle4 said:I vote for incandescent. I'll decide later if with rage or with excitement.
0 -
How the hell are we in the crazy position of being held to ransom by TM for something that parliament clearly doesn't want and only 18 per cent of the public support?williamglenn said:YouGov also have first preferences in a three-way referendum as:
Remain: 54%
Deal: 18%
No Deal: 28%0
