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

[brucec64]

EVERY  comment is based on RACE
 
Which makes you what ?
 
.

Not every comment on race is racist. If i call you a moron, does that make me a moronist? Maybe, but thats not the point...

Sent from my SM-N950U1 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Grouse]

41 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Corbyn is anti everything

 

He managed to fail an education degree from North London poly.

 

I'm sure he's a very nice man but totally unsuitable for prime minister.

 

He is actually an insult to two short planks

 

We NEED  a credible leader for Labour. Have they no intellectuals anymore? Where are our statesmen?

So who would you propose Chomper?

[aright]

20 hours ago, aright said:

Certainly. This from a previous post of mine.

 

No mention of a moribund, unaccountable, bureaucratic union who have made a pigs ear of the migrant crisis.

No mention of a Union which imposes punitive tariffs on third world countries, as a consequence, denying them profitable access to a market which would make their lives better and our food cheaper, all in order to artificially protect high EU food prices.

No mention of the beneficial effect of the Euro to Germany to the detriment of others in the Eurozone. What happened to all for one and one for all?

No mention of unemployment, corruption, waste, and bailouts in contravention of Maastricht treaty rules. (Ireland -85bill E, Portugal 78bill, Spain 41bill and God knows how much to Greece)

No mention of German and other freeloaders who aren't prepared to pay the 2% support for the defense  provided by NATO but in Germany's case found millions of euros to give Russia to build a gas pipeline into Germany and managed to get preferential deals on oil prices denied other EU countries in contravention of EU rules.

No mention of dissatisfaction in the EU as evidenced by a surge in right wing parties.

No mention of Martin Selmayr whose career and promotion is indicative of everything that is wrong with the proto-Fascist EU.

 

9 minutes ago, Grouse said:

We're not in the bloody Euro!

 

How many more times???

I know. It was a response to the above.

[chang50]

2 hours ago, sandyf said:

No chance whatsoever of a 2nd referendum, any referendum would be a new referendum.

Surely it would be a 3rd EU related referendum after 1975 and 2016?

[My Thai Life]

20 hours ago, aright said:

o mention of a moribund, unaccountable, bureaucratic union who have made a pigs ear of the migrant crisis.

No mention of a Union which imposes punitive tariffs on third world countries, as a consequence, denying them profitable access to a market which would make their lives better and our food cheaper, all in order to artificially protect high EU food prices.

No mention of the beneficial effect of the Euro to Germany to the detriment of others in the Eurozone. What happened to all for one and one for all?

No mention of unemployment, corruption, waste, and bailouts in contravention of Maastricht treaty rules. (Ireland -85bill E, Portugal 78bill, Spain 41bill and God knows how much to Greece)

No mention of German and other freeloaders who aren't prepared to pay the 2% support for the defense  provided by NATO but in Germany's case found millions of euros to give Russia to build a gas pipeline into Germany and managed to get preferential deals on oil prices denied other EU countries in contravention of EU rules.

No mention of dissatisfaction in the EU as evidenced by a surge in right wing parties.

No mention of Martin Selmayr whose career and promotion is indicative of everything that is wrong with the proto-Fascist EU.

Wow, an excellent post, and spoken with true feeling, but not venom.

Please don't get me started with how the CAP rescued La France, at the expense of unsustainable imbalances, and obscene waste while "half" the world [minor hyperbole] was starving to death.

Edited August 20, 2018 by My Thai Life

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, Grouse said:

So who would you propose Chomper?

I don’t propose anyone, rather I’ll settle for a couple of observations.

 

If we listen to the complaints of Leave supporters and remove the ‘scape goating’, so by example recognise the shortage of housing, low wages, failing services, abysmal public transport, under funded welfare, social care and street crime then put aside blaming the EU or immigrants we are left with U.K. problems that need fixing by U.K. politics and U.K. policies.

 

Now keep those problems in mind and instead of writing Corbyn off, listen to his proposals and his policies.

 

He is addressing all the problems and the legitimate complaints Brexit supporters and many Remain supporters raise, but without using the EU or immigrants as a scapegoat.

 

Corbyn’s proposals are a threat to very wealthy and very powerful interests in the U.K. 

Which is precisely why we are all encouraged to write him off as a leader without listening to his proposals.

 

I’m not sure Corbyn can overcome the 

media campaigns being run against him, but I firmly believe his proposals to rebalance the economy in favour of the many rather than in favour of the very few are exactly the cure for both the causes of Brexit and for the problems of ordinary people.

 

I also believe the U.K. can not afford to fund healthcare, welfare, pensions, policing, education etc and Brexit.

 

The choice seems straight forward to me, fix the UK by rebalancing the distribution of rewards in British society or do Brexit and hand more of the nations wealth to the already wealthy at the cost of public services for the rest of the nation.

[My Thai Life]

Corbyn is a natural Leaver because of his commitment to state intervention in the economy, which I personally don't disagree with - up to a point. Keynesianism good, beyond that not so good in the UK.

 

There are many things I personally like about Corbyn, but he is unelectable, despite his overwhelming support within the Labour Party. I liked Michael Foot, but he was never going to cut it either, for some of the same reasons that Corbyn won't, ever, at the national level.

 

Blair would have been a perfect saviour for Labour and Remain at this point in time. But no one will ever trust him again, and rightly so.

 

 

 

 

Edited August 20, 2018 by My Thai Life

[mommysboy]

2 hours ago, Grouse said:

Corbyn is anti everything

 

He managed to fail an education degree from North London poly.

 

I'm sure he's a very nice man but totally unsuitable for prime minister.

 

He is actually an insult to two short planks

 

We NEED  a credible leader for Labour. Have they no intellectuals anymore? Where are our statesmen?

 

I don't think anyone, not even his rivals, would regard Corbyn as thick.

 

I'd say he is the only real statesman on offer! 

 

 

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

1 minute ago, My Thai Life said:

Corbyn is a natural Leaver because of his commitment to state intervention in the economy, which I personally don't disagree with - up to a point. Keynesianism good, beyond that not so good in the UK.

 

There are many things I personally like about Corbyn, but he is unelectable, despite his overwhelming support within the Labour Party. I liked Michael Foot, but he was never going to cut it either, for some of the same reasons that Corbyn won't, ever, at the national level.

 

Blair would be a perfect saviour for Labour and Remain at this point in time. But no one will ever trust him again, and rightly so.

 

 

 

 

I agree, but I think Corbyn has to face a choice, back social and economic reform or do Brexit and lose the funding for social and economic reform.

 

Like you I doubt Corbyn can be elected, but I believe the challenge he faces is to overcome the media campaigns against him.

[mommysboy]

7 minutes ago, My Thai Life said:

Corbyn is a natural Leaver because of his commitment to state intervention in the economy, which I personally don't disagree with - up to a point. Keynesianism good, beyond that not so good in the UK.

 

There are many things I personally like about Corbyn, but he is unelectable, despite his overwhelming support within the Labour Party. I liked Michael Foot, but he was never going to cut it either, for some of the same reasons that Corbyn won't, ever, at the national level.

 

Blair would be a perfect saviour for Labour and Remain at this point in time. But no one will ever trust him again, and rightly so.

 

 

 

 

Corbyn is very popular with the youth.  Comparisons with Foot are only accurate up to a point.  He is a truly radical politiician, and one with conviction.  The last election showed that he can cut muster at the polls.

 

The masses are increasingly poor.  If Labour do get in to power it will be more of a protest vote against the present administration- surely the worst ever and most particularly lacking any heft or conviction.

 

Ironically, it is the Labour core support that might be his undoing.

 

In the run up to the elections, the media had to be even handed.  When people listened to what he said, his popularity soared.

Edited August 20, 2018 by mommysboy

[melvinmelvin]

2 hours ago, Grouse said:

So who would you propose Chomper?

who?

personification of elections aint healthy in the long run

 

vote for political parties and their policy rather than the party leader

 

dont fall into the same trap as us has fallen into

[dunroaming]

Calling a referendum was an enormous mistake.  Responding to Farage was an enormous mistake.  An enormous mistake because it has emphasised the  rift that exists in Britain and makes it harder to ever to heal that rift, no matter what happens over Brexit.  If it goes through then the remainers will spend years saying I told you so even on things that don't relate to Brexit at all.  Same will go if there is a final vote and Brexit is overturned.  The Brexiteers will blame any future woes on staying in the EU.  That is not a criticism of either side because both would be equally guilty of it.

 

With both scenarios there is nothing to bring the country together, the vitriol is more caustic now than ever.  The fallout from Brexit will go on for years and Britain is far worse off because of it.  

[3NUMBAS]

its the remainer press stiring trouble again .george osborn and the guardian and independant and their chums trying to thwart brexit but they can huf and puff but it wont happen..a democratic vote was for leave or stay and thats it folks

[brewsterbudgen]

its the remainer press stiring trouble again .george osborn and the guardian and independant and their chums trying to thwart brexit but they can huf and puff but it wont happen..a democratic vote was for leave or stay and thats it folks

Until the next one!

Sent from my SM-G930F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[dunroaming]

16 minutes ago, 3NUMBAS said:

its the remainer press stiring trouble again .george osborn and the guardian and independant and their chums trying to thwart brexit but they can huf and puff but it wont happen..a democratic vote was for leave or stay and thats it folks

Yes I get that but the problem is that people seem to want to have a say on the deal that is agreed.  You really cannot rely on people to just shut up and agree to any old tosh that May decides is right for them. 

 

The Brexiteers are but not that other lot, disgraceful behaviour!

[melvinmelvin]

 

come March next year I see 4 possible scenarios

 

1 brexit no deal

2 brexit deal (good or not good)

3 art. 50 action and Brexit called off, UK remains in EU as before

4 prolongation of the art 50 negotiating phase

 

which one will it be?

dunno

do the bookies have views on this?

 

 

 

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, melvinmelvin said:

who?

 

personification of elections aint healthy in the long run

 

 

 

vote for political parties and their policy rather than the party leader

 

 

 

dont fall into the same trap as us has fallen into

 

I believe my response was asking people to forget the personality ( or what we are told about the personality ) and examine his policies.

[melvinmelvin]

9 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I believe my response was asking people to forget the personality ( or what we are told about the personality ) and examine his policies.

yes - but grouse, whom I responded to, is still chasing the who, which I do not agree with

[Stupooey]

22 minutes ago, dunroaming said:

Calling a referendum was an enormous mistake.  Responding to Farage was an enormous mistake.  An enormous mistake because it has emphasised the  rift that exists in Britain and makes it harder to ever to heal that rift, no matter what happens over Brexit.  If it goes through then the remainers will spend years saying I told you so even on things that don't relate to Brexit at all.  Same will go if there is a final vote and Brexit is overturned.  The Brexiteers will blame any future woes on staying in the EU.  That is not a criticism of either side because both would be equally guilty of it.

 

With both scenarios there is nothing to bring the country together, the vitriol is more caustic now than ever.  The fallout from Brexit will go on for years and Britain is far worse off because of it.  

Cameron called the referendum because he was positive Remain would win, and because of that no thought was given its terms of reference. Major changes to constitutions in almost any walk of life require a solid majority, such as 2/3 of the vote or 50% of the electorate. Simple majorities will always lead to problems if the result is close and therefore not decisive. Again, no thought was given as to who should be eligible to vote. The Scottish independence referendum allowed 16 year olds to vote, and they probably have more right to decide the long-term future of their country than 96 year olds. In fact, the House of Lords tried to amend the Referendum Bill to change the voting age, but it was rejected by the Commons on the grounds of cost, again presumably because they thought the result was a foregone conclusion. Thought was also given to allowing UK citizens who had been working in the EU for more than 15 years to vote, but again no action was taken even though they would be more affected by a negative vote than most.

Unfortunately politicians believe that people vote for their policies, whereas in truth many (in some elections most) people cast negative votes, as is regularly revealed by exit polls. The problem with the EU Referendum vote was it gave people too many different ways in which to cast a negative vote.

As a matter of interest, how many of you who voted (or would have voted) to leave can honestly say that you expected to receive a higher share of the vote (I won't say 'win'!)?

[Stupooey]

5 hours ago, melvinmelvin said:

yes,

i wrote about that in another thread long time ago

 

high time uk cabinet starts to do smth re omc

 

 

in the eu-uk negotiations things might fall in place in the 11th hour,

has happened before

however, i do not see  that happening re the omc membership

 

time to start the omc wagon

unless the current monty pyton show is aiming at a non brexit

 

Excuse my ignorance, but I had to Google 'OMC'. I note that they are a New Zealand rock band who had a hit with the song 'How Bizarre'. I can see the connection to Brexit, if not to your post.

I also note that, coincidentally, OMC is the Spanish for WTO, but of course that would have no relevance on an English language forum. How bizarre!

[melvinmelvin]

2 minutes ago, Stupooey said:

Excuse my ignorance, but I had to Google 'OMC'. I note that they are a New Zealand rock band who had a hit with the song 'How Bizarre'. I can see the connection to Brexit, if not to your post.

I also note that, coincidentally, OMC is the Spanish for WTO, but of course that would have no relevance on an English language forum. How bizarre!

and french and french being the reference lingo

 

[dunroaming]

2 hours ago, melvinmelvin said:

 

come March next year I see 4 possible scenarios

 

1 brexit no deal

2 brexit deal (good or not good)

3 art. 50 action and Brexit called off, UK remains in EU as before

4 prolongation of the art 50 negotiating phase

 

which one will it be?

dunno

do the bookies have views on this?

 

Well as they are the only possible scenarios I would think that you have a good chance of one of them being correct!  But you do make a good point because here we are approaching September and nobody has a clue which option will be taken.  It could be any of them.

[sandyf]

14 hours ago, chang50 said:

Surely it would be a 3rd EU related referendum after 1975 and 2016?

"EU related" has no meaning. The significant factor is the wording on the ballot paper, something that many choose to ignore.

[My Thai Life]

I read in The Guardian yesterday that a hypothetical 2nd referendum could include 3 options:

 

> no deal

> May's deal

> remain.

 

Hmm, that would split the leave vote, and would never be accepted.

 

This is what I mean when I say a 2nd referendum would be an operational nightmare. Never mind the constitutional, legal and political nightmares that I have also alluded to.

 

 

[sandyf]

11 hours ago, melvinmelvin said:

 

come March next year I see 4 possible scenarios

 

1 brexit no deal

2 brexit deal (good or not good)

3 art. 50 action and Brexit called off, UK remains in EU as before

4 prolongation of the art 50 negotiating phase

 

which one will it be?

dunno

do the bookies have views on this?

 

No 1 is a non starter. No 4 would have to be initiated to keep essential agreements in place until new deals are agreed. 

Beginning to look like the outcome - a panic transition period.

[sandyf]

5 minutes ago, My Thai Life said:

I read in The Guardian yesterday that a hypothetical 2nd referendum could include 3 options:

 

> no deal

> May's deal

> remain.

 

Hmm, that would split the leave vote, and would never be accepted.

 

This is what I mean when I say a 2nd referendum would be an operational nightmare. Never mind the constitutional, legal and political nightmares that I have also alluded to.

 

 

There is no "May's deal" as yet, so cannot be an option. 

It was hinted last week that she is about to concede on the 4 freedoms, should that happen and her proposals are accepted, it becomes a different ball game.

[My Thai Life]

1 minute ago, sandyf said:

There is no "May's deal" as yet, so cannot be an option. 

Hey don't shoot me, shoot The Guardian journalist that wrote the piece.

 

There have been several hints and winks from both sides (UK and EU), and forum members tend to see the hints that support their desired outcome, and ignore the others. "A nudge is as good as a wink to a blind horse."

[bristolboy]

28 minutes ago, My Thai Life said:

I read in The Guardian yesterday that a hypothetical 2nd referendum could include 3 options:

 

> no deal

> May's deal

> remain.

 

Hmm, that would split the leave vote, and would never be accepted.

 

This is what I mean when I say a 2nd referendum would be an operational nightmare. Never mind the constitutional, legal and political nightmares that I have also alluded to.

 

 

What constitutional and legal nightmares would there be? The referendum was advisory. It had no legal force. As for a legal nightmare, what would that be? If the EU allows cancellation of the article 50 process, what is the problem. As for the 2nd referendum, just stipulate that if no proposal gets a majority, the top 2 get voted on. Seems simple enough. As for a political nightmare, that seems to be the way Brexit is currently heading. Keep in mind that parliament is going to have to approve whatever form of Brexit the government negotiates.

Edit: Actually, a more elegant proposal already exists. A vote for first and second choices. That way, the proposal that gets the least votes is eliminated and the second choices of voters who supported it are distributed accordingly.

Edited August 21, 2018 by bristolboy

[tebee]

11 hours ago, melvinmelvin said:

 

come March next year I see 4 possible scenarios

 

40% 1 brexit no deal

5%   2 brexit deal (good or not good)

25% 3 art. 50 action and Brexit called off, UK remains in EU as before

30% 4 prolongation of the art 50 negotiating phase

 

which one will it be?

dunno

do the bookies have views on this?

 

 

My guess ! (percentage chance of each )

 

But a lot can happen before then 

 

And there are 2 no deal possibilities - no deal, no deal -or no trade deal, but with a transition and some participation/recognition of EU agencies

[My Thai Life]

Just now, bristolboy said:

What constitutional and legal nightmares would there be? The referendum was advisory.

You keep on saying this, and others keep on saying the opposite. I'll let you and your adversaries punch that one out.

 

I am not an expert on British Parliamentary history or the history of referenda in the UK. And I suspect you are not either. Do you know of any precedent for a 2nd referendum prior to the enactment of a 1st referendum? If so, please let us know.

 

There's ample scope for litigation just in the two points above, never mind the rest of the brexit smorgasbord should it come to a 2nd referendum. Which it won't.