Tony Blair warns British voters: time is running out to stop Brexit folly

[oldhippy]

1 minute ago, sambum said:

So when do you FINALLY accept the will of the people?

Once every four years.

 

[sanemax]

17 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

Hmm, while I do appreciate sarcasm, you know I sometimes get the feeling, that is the official brexiteer line, only since they won though, that is. 

What do you suggest, should there be a best out of three, or should they vote every week, until the vote goes in favour of whom you voted for ?

[sambum]

4 minutes ago, oldhippy said:

Once every four years.

 

Once?

[cookieqw]

merchant banker Blair should just <deleted>

[Bluespunk]

12 minutes ago, sambum said:

So when do you FINALLY accept the will of the people?

Me?

 

I’ve always said brexit was stupid, but I accepted the outcome of the vote. 

 

I’ve never called for another vote. 

 

I just support the right for one to occur. 

 

And the right for people to call for one, especially as the result was so close. 

[Bluespunk]

13 minutes ago, sanemax said:

What do you suggest, should there be a best out of three, or should they vote every week, until the vote goes in favour of whom you voted for ?

I suggest that citizens of a democratic country have the right to call for another vote. 

 

Why do you oppose this so?

[oldhippy]

1 minute ago, sambum said:

Once?

Yes, once every four years.

And inbetween, the voters will just have to accept the decisions of the parliament that they elected.

Not happy? Vote them out next election.

Referenda only create an illusion of democracy.

The result is determined by the question that is asked, and as somebody else said, how often are we going to have a referendum? Every time when the public opinion changes?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[sambum]

3 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

Me?

 

I’ve always said brexit was stupid, but I accepted the outcome of the vote. 

 

I’ve never called for another vote. 

 

I just support the right for one to occur. 

 

And the right for people to call for one, especially as the result was so close. 

I didn't mean you specifically - maybe I should have  said "one"!

[sambum]

1 minute ago, oldhippy said:

Yes, once every four years.

And inbetween, the voters will just have to accept the decisions of the parliament that they elected.

Not happy? Vote them out next election.

Referenda only create an illusion of democracy.

The result is determined by the question that is asked, and as somebody else said, how often are we going to have a referendum? Every time when the public opinion changes?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I was being a trifle facetious! 

 

And re referendums, I get your/somebody else's drift, but how do you decide when public opinion changes? By having a referendum? 

[transam]

5 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

I suggest that citizens of a democratic country have the right to call for another vote. 

 

Why do you oppose this so?

So if folk don't like a government that was voted IN then you think there should be another vote to perhaps fix their dislike...?

 

[Bluespunk]

10 minutes ago, sambum said:

I didn't mean you specifically - maybe I should have  said "one"!

Really?

 

Didn't seem that way. However if you say so. 

 

If there was another vote, I’d say it should take place when all the negotiations have ended, when the full deal and the consequences of it are made clear.

 

Then the final decision on should the U.K. stay or go can be made, in light of all the facts and consequences. 

 

But, as I say...I’ve not called for another vote...

[Bluespunk]

4 minutes ago, transam said:

So if folk don't like a government that was voted IN then you think there should be another vote to perhaps fix their dislike...?

 

That’s fairly radical thinking there, Mr POTY. 

 

Do you know, it sounds almost...dare I say...democratic. 

 

?

[oldhippy]

4 minutes ago, sambum said:

I was being a trifle facetious! 

 

And re referendums, I get your/somebody else's drift, but how do you decide when public opinion changes? By having a referendum? 

There is no need to find out whether or not the public opinion has changed. Just sweat out the rest of the four years.

Let the elected MPs worry about changes in the public opinion.

 

[transam]

2 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

That’s fairly radical thinking there, Mr POTY. 

 

Do you know, it sounds almost...dare I say...democratic. 

 

?

I for one am totally against deals to form a government when there is no winner, but that is allowed instead of holding another election until there is a winner. Brexit had a winner, end of story... 

[oldlakey]

1 hour ago, oldhippy said:

I studied macro economics - in Dutch.

And in the several languages that I speak, sometimes it is f, sometimes it is ph.

I don't see why it matters.

 

 

Excellent reply SIR, they dont like it up them

[oldhippy]

Let's not forget the reason why the brexit referendum was organised......

 

A rather clownish PM hoped to hang on to his job thanks to this referendum.

Big Mistake!

[Bluespunk]

4 minutes ago, transam said:

I for one am totally against deals to form a government when there is no winner, but that is allowed instead of holding another election until there is a winner. Brexit had a winner, end of story... 

No, not the end at all. 

 

There are still those expressing their opinion and desire for another vote, as they have every right to do so. 

 

And as the brexiteers would no doubt have also done so. 

 

It’s how a free and fair democracy works. 

[oldlakey]

1 hour ago, sambum said:

So, (and I am not being deliberately argumentative in this comment) IF there was another vote, and the great British public voted to stay, would those who voted for Brexit not have the democratic right to call for another vote as the "score" would then stand at one each?

Its the best of one, lets leave it at that shall we, like it or not

[oldhippy]

1 minute ago, Bluespunk said:

No, not the end at all. 

 

There are still those expressing their opinion and desire for another vote, as they have every right to do so. 

 

And as the brexiteers would no doubt have also done so. 

 

It’s how a free and fair democracy works. 

A free and fair democracy works through general elections, not through referenda.

 

[transam]

2 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

No, not the end at all. 

 

There are still those expressing their opinion and desire for another vote, as they have every right to do so. 

 

And as the brexiteers would no doubt have also done so. 

 

It’s how a free and fair democracy works. 

So why does the UK have a government that was NOT voted in if what you say should happen...?

[Bluespunk]

Just now, transam said:

So why does the UK have a government that was NOT voted in if what you say should happen...?

It was voted in. 

 

It is a tory minority government, acting in collaboration with another party, elected under the same system. 

 

It is perfectly valid under the uk electoral system.

[oldlakey]

1 hour ago, Bluespunk said:

No, it’s called a democracy. 

 

It’s a thing where people can vote, change their minds and vote again. 

Every five years or whatever in a GE yes

[sambum]

14 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

Really?

 

Didn't seem that way. However if you say so. 

 

If there was another vote, I’d say it should take place when all the negotiations have ended, when the full deal and the consequences of it are made clear.

 

Then the final decision on should the U.K. stay or go can be made, in light of all the facts and consequences. 

 

But, as I say...I’ve not called for another vote...

Actually, it's not like you to take things personally, but obviously in this case you have - it was not meant, and the "however, if you say so" comment indicates that you think otherwise.

 

My opinion on this matter differs from yours, and as I  said in an earlier post, we will have to agree to disagree, but I'm not going to call for a referendum on the matter!

[Bluespunk]

Just now, oldlakey said:

Every five years or whatever in a GE yes

Wow! 

 

I never knew that!!! 

[oldlakey]

Just now, Bluespunk said:

Wow! 

 

I never knew that!!! 

That was obvious

[Bluespunk]

2 minutes ago, sambum said:

Actually, it's not like you to take things personally, but obviously in this case you have - it was not meant, and the "however, if you say so" comment indicates that you think otherwise.

 

My opinion on this matter differs from yours, and as I  said in an earlier post, we will have to agree to disagree, but I'm not going to call for a referendum on the matter!

Sorry, but I can only interpret your posts as they appear. 

[transam]

1 minute ago, Bluespunk said:

It was voted in. 

 

It is a tory minority government, acting in collaboration with another party, elected under the same system. 

 

It is perfectly valid under the uk electoral system.

No it wasn't voted in by the people.....It is a FIX....

 

Brexit WAS voted in by the PEOPLE....

[Bluespunk]

1 minute ago, oldlakey said:

That was obvious

You’d think they’d have mentioned it during my politics degree course, eh...

[Bluespunk]

Just now, transam said:

No it wasn't voted in by the people.....It is a FIX....

 

Brexit WAS voted in by the PEOPLE....

No, both were voted in, by the people. 

 

 

And both can be changed by another vote. 

 

That’s democracy. 

[oldlakey]

Just now, Bluespunk said:

You’d think they’d have mentioned it during my politics degree course, eh...

Perhaps they did, I find it pays to pay attention at all times