11 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

I disagree there are problems with another vote, the referendum genie is out and there are consequences to that.

 

There is no legitimate reason to deny a vote on a final deal that does not include a remain option.

 

I'm not ignoring anything, I just disagree with your stance that there cannot be another vote.

 

The brexiteers are free to present their case in any such campaign.

So having one referendum means it is immediately legitimate to have a referendum for every single issue in which a section of the public calls for one. And so why wasn't this the case in 1975 after the first referendum on the EU? Where was the genie then?

 

And again, regarding the problems i raised with another vote, your only response is, "i disagree". I think we have established that fact already. Until you can offer a single reason why you disagree, besides "i disagree", there's obviously no further debate to be had.

Some bickering posts and replies have been removed

2 hours ago, rixalex said:

So having one referendum means it is immediately legitimate to have a referendum for every single issue in which a section of the public calls for one. And so why wasn't this the case in 1975 after the first referendum on the EU? Where was the genie then?

 

And again, regarding the problems i raised with another vote, your only response is, "i disagree". I think we have established that fact already. Until you can offer a single reason why you disagree, besides "i disagree", there's obviously no further debate to be had.

The referendum route has been chosen and the consequences are here. If an issue is to be put to the referendum once then there is no reason to deny it again. 

 

I disagree with here being no more votes because that is anti democratic authoritarianism. 

 

If people want a vote I cannot see why they should be denied one. 

Edited October 1, 20187 yr by Bluespunk

15 hours ago, Bluespunk said:

The referendum route has been chosen and the consequences are here. If an issue is to be put to the referendum once then there is no reason to deny it again. 

 

I disagree with here being no more votes because that is anti democratic authoritarianism. 

 

If people want a vote I cannot see why they should be denied one. 

Debating with you on this topic is like debating with a loop tape. Ignoring all opposing points made, refusing to even acknowledge or address them, and simply repeating the same few lines in a mantra like fashion.

 

Former WTO chief Pascal Lamy defines different brexit models quite nicely.

 

Brexit is a political decision and it is going to happen, there is no doubt about it. Britain is going to build a border. Economic the effects depends how strong the border will be. 

 

 

Can I select a news item headline that shows a positive factual Leaving EU on this site ? Maybe it doesn’t fit an agenda Brexit-central.com Leave means Leave !


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

1 hour ago, rixalex said:

Debating with you on this topic is like debating with a loop tape. Ignoring all opposing points made, refusing to even acknowledge or address them, and simply repeating the same few lines in a mantra like fashion.

 

That’s because nothing you say gives me any reason to change my view. 

2 hours ago, Bluespunk said:

That’s because nothing you say gives me any reason to change my view. 

I'm not asking you to change your point of view.

 

Just give reasoning for disagreeing that goes beyond just, "i disagree".

The referendum route has been chosen and the consequences are here. If an issue is to be put to the referendum once then there is no reason to deny it again. 
 
I disagree with here being no more votes because that is anti democratic authoritarianism. 
 
If people want a vote I cannot see why they should be denied one. 

The people wanted a vote,we had one,it was to leave. So stop going on and on ,live with it

Sent from my SM-A720F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

1 hour ago, rixalex said:

I'm not asking you to change your point of view.

 

Just give reasoning for disagreeing that goes beyond just, "i disagree".

I have.

 

Just read my posts.

 

No one has the right to deny another the right to call for another vote or have a remain option on any vote on a final deal.

 

Brexit's consequences are clearer and people have the right to call for another vote.

 

Only anti-democrats would deny them this.

59 minutes ago, ivor bigun said:

The people wanted a vote,we had one,it was to leave. So stop going on and on ,live with it

Sent from my SM-A720F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

Could not agree less.

 

One vote does not preclude another.

1 minute ago, Bluespunk said:

I have.

 

Just read my posts.

 

No one has the right to deny another the right to call for another vote or have a remain option on any vote on a final deal.

 

Brexit's consequences are clearer and people have the right to call for another vote.

 

Only anti-democrats would deny them this.

OK, when i state one of my reasons for objecting to another referendum as being it puts us in a far weakened position in which the EU can offer the crummiest deal possible, knowing that there is a safe-guard of a referendum on the way, rather than replying "i disagree", is it possible for you to offer some reasoning?

 

For example,

 

"I disagree. I don't think the EU will have us over a barrel because...."

 

Or

 

"I agree. The EU will have us over a barrel but i don't think that matters because..."

8 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

I have.

 

Just read my posts.

 

No one has the right to deny another the right to call for another vote or have a remain option on any vote on a final deal.

 

Brexit's consequences are clearer and people have the right to call for another vote.

 

Only anti-democrats would deny them this.

 

what does call for mean?

 

arrange a referendum

or

campaign / argue for a referendum?

 

what is this? arranging a referendum or campaigning for a referendum?

 

14 minutes ago, rixalex said:

OK, when i state one of my reasons for objecting to another referendum as being it puts us in a far weakened position in which the EU can offer the crummiest deal possible, knowing that there is a safe-guard of a referendum on the way, rather than replying "i disagree", is it possible for you to offer some reasoning?

 

For example,

 

"I disagree. I don't think the EU will have us over a barrel because...."

 

Or

 

"I agree. The EU will have us over a barrel but i don't think that matters because..."

Exactly.

 

But it doesn't have to be so complicated.  As has been pointed out numerous times, the referendum result should be respected - and then those with an opposing point of view are free to form another party that causes enough concerns (ala UKIP) that forces another referendum.

Having said this, I don't trust politicians as far as I can throw them - so think another referendum on the 'agreed deal' is a a good idea.

 

As long as it is restricted to:-

1) leave immediately

2) accept agreed deal

 

This would concentrate politicians (on both sides) minds very clearly on coming to a reasonable deal.

5 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

Exactly.

 

But it doesn't have to be so complicated.  As has been pointed out numerous times, the referendum result should be respected - and then those with an opposing point of view are free to form another party that causes enough concerns (ala UKIP) that forces another referendum.

 

There should be enough "People's Vote" Tories, and it's now Labour policy, to just vote down the Brexit "deal" in parliament and force a General Election.  No need for a new party.

59 minutes ago, rixalex said:

OK, when i state one of my reasons for objecting to another referendum as being it puts us in a far weakened position in which the EU can offer the crummiest deal possible, knowing that there is a safe-guard of a referendum on the way, rather than replying "i disagree", is it possible for you to offer some reasoning?

 

For example,

 

"I disagree. I don't think the EU will have us over a barrel because...."

 

Or

 

"I agree. The EU will have us over a barrel but i don't think that matters because..."

I really don't care what negotiating position the UK finds itself in as a result of allowing the people a vote on their future.

 

Those calling for another vote or a vote on a final deal that allows in option have every right to do so.

 

There is no justification for denying their rights to do so.

1 hour ago, melvinmelvin said:

 

what does call for mean?

 

arrange a referendum

or

campaign / argue for a referendum?

 

what is this? arranging a referendum or campaigning for a referendum?

 

Read the OP.

2 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

I really don't care what negotiating position the UK finds itself in as a result of allowing the people a vote on their future.

 

Why don't you care?

8 minutes ago, rixalex said:

Why don't you care?

Because it is not as important as allowing people a final say on any deal.

 

It is not as important as allowing people the right to call for a final vote.

Edited October 2, 20187 yr by Bluespunk

36 minutes ago, brewsterbudgen said:

 

There should be enough "People's Vote" Tories, and it's now Labour policy, to just vote down the Brexit "deal" in parliament and force a General Election.  No need for a new party.

Dick Dasterdly's point about the forming of a new party was on the basis of the referendum result having been respected. In other words, we leave the EU. Once that has happened, Ken Clark, Tony Blair, Anna Soubry, John Major, Michael Heseltine and all the rest, can form their UKNIP party and fight to rejoin.

3 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

Because it is not as important as allowing people a final say on any deal.

 

It is not as important as allowing people the right to call for a final vote.

So you do accept that it undermines and weakens the UK's negotiating position?

4 minutes ago, rixalex said:

So you do accept that it undermines and weakens the UK's negotiating position?

I just don't care about that.

 

The denial of the right to have a say or even call for a say in any final deal is what matters.

4 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

I just don't care about that.

 

The denial of the right to have a say or even call for a say in any final deal is what matters.

 

Not expecting any coherent or meaningful response, but what denial to "have a say"? Wasn't there a referendum? And further, is what you advocate the right to call for another referendum or actually having one?

38 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

Read the OP.

 

the OP does not use the term - this

the OP does not use the lingo - call for

 

10 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

I just don't care about that.

 

The denial of the right to have a say or even call for a say in any final deal is what matters.

I don't think anyone has said that people can't call for something. It's a free society and you can call for what you like, providing it's within the law.

 

So you accept that having a vote undermines and weakens Britain's negotiating position, but you don't care, because the rights of those who want to overturn the referendum outweighs the rights of those who voted to leave, and want Brexit to work, and who were promised that is what the country would do, if they won.

 

OK. All clear.

36 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Not expecting any coherent or meaningful response, but what denial to "have a say"? Wasn't there a referendum? And further, is what you advocate the right to call for another referendum or actually having one?

I have never called for a vote on anything, just rejecting the claims by authoritarian voices there can not be another vote.

26 minutes ago, melvinmelvin said:

 

the OP does not use the term - this

the OP does not use the lingo - call for

 

Now, you've got this far...what is the OP about?

13 minutes ago, rixalex said:

I don't think anyone has said that people can't call for something. It's a free society and you can call for what you like, providing it's within the law.

 

So you accept that having a vote undermines and weakens Britain's negotiating position, but you don't care, because the rights of those who want to overturn the referendum outweighs the rights of those who voted to leave, and want Brexit to work, and who were promised that is what the country would do, if they won.

 

OK. All clear.

People have said there cannot be another vote and that leaving is the only option.

 

I accept nothing you say I do in paragraph 2. I have not voiced any opinion on them.

 

I have just stated my opinion on denying the rights of others to call for another vote.

Voted remain. Big mistake. Now I want to leave, whatever the cost. EU commission is a bunch of unelected thugs.