UK voters should make final Brexit decision if talks with EU collapse: poll

[Stupooey]

36 minutes ago, Jip99 said:

 

 

I like this guy - he speaks unequivocally. What a shame he wasn't a Brexiteer.

 

Remainers need to listen to this - Leavers need to just ourselves EXACTLY what Cameron promised. PROMISED!

 

In/Out, once in a generation, no further referendums, out means out.

 

A real statesman.

 

 

This speech was aimed at the EU whilst he was still negotiating with them. As I've just said, Cameron never believed the Referendum vote would go the way it did, which meant he made all sorts of stupid promises - as of course did the Leave campaigners; I hate to bring up the bus again, but it is the obvious example that everyone knows, but would they have dared pull that stunt if they thought they were going to "win"?

If he had meant what he said, he would have made it a binding referendum, not one which gave 'wiggle room' if the vote was not decisive.

Why else did Cameron resign?

 

Edited November 14, 2018 by Stupooey
Posted when incomplete

[nontabury]

30 minutes ago, Jip99 said:

 

 

I like this guy - he speaks unequivocally. What a shame he wasn't a Brexiteer.

 

Remainers need to listen to this - Leavers need to just ourselves EXACTLY what Cameron promised. PROMISED!

 

In/Out, once in a generation, no further referendums, out means out.

 

A real statesman.

 

 

 

 100% clear, so why do the remoaners, think it was complicated, and that the British people did not know they were voting for a complete break.

  Could it possible because the vote did not go their way.

 

 

 

[damascase]

20 minutes ago, rixalex said:

Which in no way answers to the point i was making. We were talking about Westminster making bad decisions versus the EU making them.

If a British person, living in Britain, dislikes a decision taken by the EU, how exactly does that person make their feelings known to the EU and get them to reconsider?
 

Well, how about make their feelings know to the elected UK politicians that took part in the deliberations and voted?

[Stupooey]

58 minutes ago, Jip99 said:

 

 

Claptrap.

 

The biggest turnout in recent history - I think even the dumbest Remoaners can manage to tick Leave or Remain.

 

 

I accept that the Scots would just vote on their own agenda - that hardly favoured Leave, did it ?

 

 

"We lost because of complacency!"

 

 

I have heard it all now - the bottom of the barrel has been reached.

Paragraph 1 - Claptrap

Paragraph 2 - irrelevant, but you just can't resist getting in that <removed>, can you?

Paragraph 3 - irrelevant again, but the Scots voted the way they did because, with their own Parliament, they know where the decisions are made that effect their everyday lives, and it sure ain't Brussels.

Paragraph 4 - not what I said, despite the parentheses, but it did have a bearing on the result.

Paragraph 5 - "Bottom of the barrel"? You've clearly not read the previous 8000-odd posts.

[Stupooey]

35 minutes ago, rixalex said:

 

Says the person who uses a range of spurious reasons to discredit an actual vote that took place in which the results are absolutely known as fact, whilst at the same time, using a number of hypotheticals, speculations, and polls (shown in recent history to be wildly inaccurate at times), to draw conclusions which are stated with complete certainty about what would happen were there another vote now.

It really does take the biscuit to get lectured on democracy by people trying to subvert it.



Sent from my SM-G610F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

I take it you are referring to my previous post regarding the demographic split of the 2016 vote. If you don't believe the published statistics (confirmed by many different sources) then stop me now. Otherwise please tell me where my figures are invalid.

Based on the age groups of Brexit voters, and certified mortality statistics by age group, about 900,000 Leave voters will no longer be alive by March 2019. Unless you know differently.

Between June 2016 and 2019, over 2,000,000 18-20 year olds will have become eligible to have their opinions counted. If their opinions and habits were similar to their 2016 predecessors (not guaranteed, I know, but there again no reason to assume otherwise), then about 64% would turn out to vote, and about 75% of those would back Remain (the polls say 83%, but I don't trust them either). Unless you know differently.

Based on just these statistics (no hypotheticals, speculations or polls), if all other 2016 voters repeated their vote, and all 2016 non-voters abstained again, then by March 2019 Remainers would outnumber Leavers, unless you know differently. 

By which definition of democracy would that justify leaving the EC on that date? How am I trying to subvert it?

[nontabury]

7 minutes ago, Stupooey said:

I take it you are referring to my previous post regarding the demographic split of the 2016 vote. If you don't believe the published statistics (confirmed by many different sources) then stop me now. Otherwise please tell me where my figures are invalid.

Based on the age groups of Brexit voters, and certified mortality statistics by age group, about 900,000 Leave voters will no longer be alive by March 2019. Unless you know differently.

Between June 2016 and 2019, over 2,000,000 18-20 year olds will have become eligible to have their opinions counted. If their opinions and habits were similar to their 2016 predecessors (not guaranteed, I know, but there again no reason to assume otherwise), then about 64% would turn out to vote, and about 75% of those would back Remain (the polls say 83%, but I don't trust them either). Unless you know differently.

Based on just these statistics (no hypotheticals, speculations or polls), if all other 2016 voters repeated their vote, and all 2016 non-voters abstained again, then by March 2019 Remainers would outnumber Leavers, unless you know differently. 

By which definition of democracy would that justify leaving the EC on that date? How am I trying to subvert it?

You forgot to add in, all those Immigrants who after 5 yrs ,will now be entitled to vote in any future elections. 

How do you think a vote would go, if the voters had to show proof that at least one of their parents/ grandparents were a citizen of the U.K. in 1955,1965 or even 1975 the year we were conned into joining a trading block.

 

[Stupooey]

10 minutes ago, nontabury said:

You forgot to add in, all those Immigrants who after 5 yrs ,will now be entitled to vote in any future elections. 

How do you think a vote would go, if the voters had to show proof that at least one of their parents/ grandparents were a citizen of the U.K. in 1955,1965 or even 1975 the year we were conned into joining a trading block.

 

How about going back to 400AD before those pesky Anglo-Saxons arrived from Germany? It makes about as much sense as your suggestion.

[melvinmelvin]

as I have understood what I have read re deal,

 

UK will remain in CU for now, this is kinda a stopgap measure to ensure a seamless environment for NI

 

negotiations will continue with a view to sort this permanently

 

+++++

I read this as : they failed to find an acceptable NI scheme combined with a full Brexit

hence, the proposed CU stopgap measure

 

ææææææææ

 

am, not impressed

 

[melvinmelvin]

2 hours ago, melvinmelvin said:

as I have understood what I have read re deal,

 

UK will remain in CU for now, this is kinda a stopgap measure to ensure a seamless environment for NI

 

negotiations will continue with a view to sort this permanently

 

+++++

I read this as : they failed to find an acceptable NI scheme combined with a full Brexit

hence, the proposed CU stopgap measure

 

ææææææææ

 

am, not impressed

 

 

I see on the news now that the government has OKed the deal

it is now available in the public domain

 

will be presented to Parliament on Thursday

 

(presentations in Brussels late Wednesday)

 

if sessions in parliament are broadcasted - some entertainment to stream later today

 

++++

 

there was a joke here earlier re pint of In and pint of Out

half 'n half should be available in parliament pubs as of Thursday

 

 

[SheungWan]

Let's see now which Hard Brexiteers here fall into line and which come out as backstabbers. No prizes. And no prizes either for which Hard Left loons will ally with the Hard Brexiteers calling to bring down the Government.

[beautifulthailand99]

16 hours ago, kwilco said:

So how about it Rees Mogg?

 

 "Jacob Rees-Mogg, saying that this deal will make the UK “not a vassal state but a slave state”, when the words he was looking for were, “Sorry. This is my fault.” independant

 

Potentially in till 2099 - is the eurocent dropping with the Brexit boneheads we ain't coming out ! Theresa May all the way.....

 

 

[kwilco]

New study reveals the chances of successful Brexit....

 

[kwilco]

7 hours ago, nontabury said:

You forgot to add in, all those Immigrants who after 5 yrs ,will now be entitled to vote in any future elections. 

How do you think a vote would go, if the voters had to show proof that at least one of their parents/ grandparents were a citizen of the U.K. in 1955,1965 or even 1975 the year we were conned into joining a trading block.

 

At least you admit you can be conned....I guess like most marks, you are unable to tell a con when you see one.

Edited November 14, 2018 by kwilco

[Grouse]

As always, The Economist is right

 

https://www.economist.com/britain/2018/11/14/the-case-for-another-vote-on-brexit-is-gaining-strength

[Grouse]

I am trying to work out if the new deal offers something for everybody or nothing for anyone.

 

I think May has worked hard to come up with a way forward that may be the least damaging possible.

 

Particularly pleased to see the DUP with their collective noses out of joint (mind you, they were out of joint anyway)

 

Corbyn has also been wrong footed. 

 

Interesting times indeed!

[melvinmelvin]

 

I see in msm that DUP says very bad deal, Farage says historically bad

 

Chief lady in Scotland says as bad as can be

then she adds smth that puzzles me,

 

this deal takes Scotland out of SM (fine, it is supposed to do that)

whilst NI for all practical purposes will remain in SM ??????????????

 

can anyone explain how she figure what she says in the last line ?

 

[welovesundaysatspace]

Impressed how patient and generous the EU is with the UK.

 

After the U.K. always got her special treatment, then tried to blackmail everyone for even more special treatment, showed everyone the middle finger but couldn’t get her shit together for 2+ years, she now gets another two or so years to pack her bag and stand on her own feed. Hopefully this time she will use the time better.

 

All the resources spent on entertaining the spoiled brat and her mid-life crisis could as well have been spent on important matters. Let her deal with the Irish conflict herself, we could have said; after all, that’s what the Brexiteers wanted: closed borders. But then Ireland is a member state and the club cares about its members. 

 

I still hope the U.K. uses to time to think everything through again and apply for an EU membership. After all, it is clear now that the U.K. people don’t want to leave but are held as hostage by a radical minority and their manipulated referendum. 

[Grouse]

13 minutes ago, melvinmelvin said:

 

I see in msm that DUP says very bad deal, Farage says historically bad

 

Chief lady in Scotland says as bad as can be

then she adds smth that puzzles me,

 

this deal takes Scotland out of SM (fine, it is supposed to do that)

whilst NI for all practical purposes will remain in SM ??????????????

 

can anyone explain how she figure what she says in the last line ?

 

Backstop is that NI essentially remains in EU. This what angers DUP. Remainder of U.K. Will remain closely aligned. Scotland WILL want the same.

[melvinmelvin]

35 minutes ago, Grouse said:

As always, The Economist is right

 

https://www.economist.com/britain/2018/11/14/the-case-for-another-vote-on-brexit-is-gaining-strength

 

hmmmm,

 

also interesting to observe how TMs language has changed somewhat,

now, as far as I understand,  she says

 

you can choose between my deal - no deal or no Brexit.

 

[melvinmelvin]

40 minutes ago, Grouse said:

As always, The Economist is right

 

https://www.economist.com/britain/2018/11/14/the-case-for-another-vote-on-brexit-is-gaining-strength

 

good read,

 

also worth noting that TMs language re deal has changed, she now says,

 

you can choose between my deal, no deal or no Brexit

 

[Grouse]

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/files/draft-agreement-withdrawal-united-kingdom-great-britain-and-northern-ireland-european-union-and-european-atomic-energy-community-agreed-negotiators-level-14-november-2018_en

 

 

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/756378/14_November_Outline_Political_Declaration_on_the_Future_Relationship.pdf

 

read all about it!

Edited November 15, 2018 by Grouse

[melvinmelvin]

15 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Backstop is that NI essentially remains in EU. This what angers DUP. Remainder of U.K. Will remain closely aligned. Scotland WILL want the same.

OK,

I haven't bothered to really look into what they call backstop,

I do not favor stopgap measures in large scale deals.

 

No wonder EU characterizes the deal as complicated.

 

[rixalex]

9 hours ago, Stupooey said:

I take it you are referring to my previous post regarding the demographic split of the 2016 vote. If you don't believe the published statistics (confirmed by many different sources) then stop me now. Otherwise please tell me where my figures are invalid.

Based on the age groups of Brexit voters, and certified mortality statistics by age group, about 900,000 Leave voters will no longer be alive by March 2019. Unless you know differently.

Between June 2016 and 2019, over 2,000,000 18-20 year olds will have become eligible to have their opinions counted. If their opinions and habits were similar to their 2016 predecessors (not guaranteed, I know, but there again no reason to assume otherwise), then about 64% would turn out to vote, and about 75% of those would back Remain (the polls say 83%, but I don't trust them either). Unless you know differently.

Based on just these statistics (no hypotheticals, speculations or polls), if all other 2016 voters repeated their vote, and all 2016 non-voters abstained again, then by March 2019 Remainers would outnumber Leavers, unless you know differently. 

By which definition of democracy would that justify leaving the EC on that date? How am I trying to subvert it?

As discussed at the time, your speculations focus on those at the top of the ladder (ie those who have died) and those at the bottom (ie those who have come of voting age), whilst completely ignoring vote shifting that must surely have occurred in the middle age group, assuming that the premise of your argument about people being more inclined to support leave as they get older, holds water.

 

Anyway, at the end of the way, it is all just speculation that will always remain just that until the day there is another vote, so largely a waste of time discussing. The 2016 referendum is the most accurate gauge of public opinion we have to go on. The result was "leave". Doing anything other than that is not democratic, and you know it. Can you imagine had the Scots voted to leave the union and two years hence they still hadn't, and there were discussions about half leaving or perhaps having another vote? The uproar would be almighty. Leavers have been incredibly patient and shown a lot more willingness for compromise than i'm sure would have been the case had remain won, and were leavers two years later still droning on about whether people had changed their minds and whether or not we needed another vote to confirm we really wanted to remain.

[kwilco]

So we get to stay in the CU but without any say and our workers can't work there any more.......... only a complete moron could suggest that is an improvement

[kwilco]

2 hours ago, Grouse said:

I am trying to work out if the new deal offers something for everybody or nothing for anyone.

 

I think May has worked hard to come up with a way forward that may be the least damaging possible.

 

Particularly pleased to see the DUP with their collective noses out of joint (mind you, they were out of joint anyway)

 

Corbyn has also been wrong footed. 

 

Interesting times indeed!

Corbyn has 2 left political feet anyway

[Stupooey]

43 minutes ago, rixalex said:

As discussed at the time, your speculations focus on those at the top of the ladder (ie those who have died) and those at the bottom (ie those who have come of voting age), whilst completely ignoring vote shifting that must surely have occurred in the middle age group, assuming that the premise of your argument about people being more inclined to support leave as they get older, holds water.

 

Anyway, at the end of the way, it is all just speculation that will always remain just that until the day there is another vote, so largely a waste of time discussing. The 2016 referendum is the most accurate gauge of public opinion we have to go on. The result was "leave". Doing anything other than that is not democratic, and you know it. Can you imagine had the Scots voted to leave the union and two years hence they still hadn't, and there were discussions about half leaving or perhaps having another vote? The uproar would be almighty. Leavers have been incredibly patient and shown a lot more willingness for compromise than i'm sure would have been the case had remain won, and were leavers two years later still droning on about whether people had changed their minds and whether or not we needed another vote to confirm we really wanted to remain.

 

All indications show that relatively few people have changed their minds since 2016, if anything there has been a small shift to Remain, particularly amongst Labour voters in the North of England, but I was prepared to ignore this - I prefer facts over speculation. Your argument that people have changed their opinion as they have aged can be countered by a similar argument about the educational level demographic: over the last two years many people have attained educational qualifications, so would be more likely to shift their vote to Remain. Both arguments are somewhat tenuous, but equally valid.

 

Arguing about what would have happened after a narrow Remain majority is not comparable, as this was never a zero-sum equation. The effect of leaving on people's everyday lives was always going to be far greater than simply maintaining the status quo, which is one reason many think that a simple majority was not sufficient for such a momentous decision.

 

Even the most ardent Leavers admit there would be pain and suffering in the short term after Brexit,  and any prediction of the long term result is pure speculation.

Edited November 15, 2018 by Stupooey
Spelling mistake

[sandyf]

I fail to see why so many leavers are moaning, they are getting what they wanted or have they forgotten what was on the ballot paper.

Leavers went into the referendum without any plan whatsoever and now they are complaining about the plan that has materialised, something that we will all have to live with. There was only ever one realistic plan and they do not want that either, just want to overturn what doesn't suit them.

It is fairly obvious that not all leavers have the same outlook, which confirms the point that the 52% did not all vote for the same thing.

 

Come this time next year, I wonder how many of the 17 million will be wishing they had thought a bit more about how they should vote.

[CanterbrigianBangkoker]

12 minutes ago, Stupooey said:

but I was prepared to ignore this - I prefer facts over speculation.

 

 Clearly!

 

Arguing for a totally speculative shift in public opinion (as there is no concrete way to confirm or deny any shift in opinion on a national level without another national ref.!) - whilst simultaneously ignoring the reality of the result in 2016 - a fact, no?

 

You couldn't make this stuff up. 

 

- 'the educational level demographic: over the last two years many people have attained educational qualifications, so would be more likely to shift their vote to Remain.'

Throw in a spurious, condescending remark for good measure, why don't ya? ????

Edited November 15, 2018 by CanterbrigianBangkoker

[bristolboy]

58 minutes ago, rixalex said:

As discussed at the time, your speculations focus on those at the top of the ladder (ie those who have died) and those at the bottom (ie those who have come of voting age), whilst completely ignoring vote shifting that must surely have occurred in the middle age group, assuming that the premise of your argument about people being more inclined to support leave as they get older, holds water.

 

Anyway, at the end of the way, it is all just speculation that will always remain just that until the day there is another vote, so largely a waste of time discussing. The 2016 referendum is the most accurate gauge of public opinion we have to go on. The result was "leave". Doing anything other than that is not democratic, and you know it. Can you imagine had the Scots voted to leave the union and two years hence they still hadn't, and there were discussions about half leaving or perhaps having another vote? The uproar would be almighty. Leavers have been incredibly patient and shown a lot more willingness for compromise than i'm sure would have been the case had remain won, and were leavers two years later still droning on about whether people had changed their minds and whether or not we needed another vote to confirm we really wanted to remain.

Nigel Farage wants second referendum if Remain campaign scrapes narrow win

 

Nigel Farage warns today he would fight for a second referendum on Britain in Europe if the remain campaign won by a narrow margin next month.

The Ukip leader said a small defeat for his leave camp would be “unfinished business” and predicted pressure would grow for a re-run of the 23 June ballot.

Farage told the Mirror: “In a 52-48 referendum this would be unfinished business by a long way. If the remain campaign win two-thirds to one-third that ends it.”

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/nigel-farage-wants-second-referendum-7985017

[My Thai Life]

36 minutes ago, Stupooey said:

Even the most ardent Leavers admit there would be pain and suffering in the short term after Brexit,  and any pr3diction of the long term result is pure speculation.

There's plenty of pain and suffering in the EU right now - look at the EU youth unemployment figures for example (I posted them a while back), and in the world in general, including the UK of course.

 

Nevertheless, everyone recognises that major change creates major upheaval, they're synonyms aren't they. But even if I were living in the UK, I would experience no pain or suffering in the short term, even in the event of no deal, but I won't try to speak for others.

 

But sadly, very few remainers, ardent or otherwise, recognise the damage that is being done to the nation-state by the EU's project of ever-closer union. Mommysboy is the only remainer on this site (as far as I've read the posts) who has presented any nuanced view of the EU at all;  the rest is largely propaganda, often unsupported (and very often abusive).

 

Long term economics outlooks are always speculative, though "pure speculation" is an overstatement, not only for the UK and the EU, but also the world at large. However, the short to mid term outlook for the EU is not good, potentially disastrous according no numerous analysts - I've posted several links about this.

 

Self-determination, particularly in trade policy, is the goal of Brexit, not short-term security. Obviously May has reneged on her election manifesto in that regard (as have Labour), and on her Lancaster House speech.

 

The next few months will be interesting for all of us ????

 

Edited November 15, 2018 by My Thai Life