Britons would now vote to stay in EU, want second referendum: poll

[melvinmelvin]

1 minute ago, Grouse said:

Tomorrow U.K. Time ????

a host of amendments tabled?

 

 

[brewsterbudgen]

We had pollsters predicting remain last time and they got it wrong.

And maybe they'll get it wrong again. Let's have the referendum and find out.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

[welovesundaysatspace]

Apart from all the polls: what do people actually think is a likely outcome?

 

May’s deal will not make it until Wednesday, so we can exclude that. But then what? 

 

(1/3) Parliament will have to decide between a no-deal Brexit and revoking A50. They’re scared of both options so they will want to have some assurance aka a referendum. 

 

(2/3) Should there be a vote of no confidence and a GE, it will be interesting to see what parties will campaign for and against. Should they not articulate a clear position (ie. either remain or no-deal or one of the other options from the EU-menu) but chose to be vague or promise castles in the sky again, the same mess will repeat itself. 

 

It will be interesting to see whether the EU27 will agree on an extension of A50 in such case or let the UK revoke A50. 

 

(3/3) A third option would be an extension of A50, but we can assume that the EU27 will only agree to that if the situation materially changes so that an extension makes sense, aka a referendum.  

 

- - - 

 

The problem is that there is no clear majority for something, only people who are against everything else. This, of course, is a direct result of a referendum that didn’t ask for a clear majority and was open for lots of interpretation and false promises, leading to a situation where everyone feels entitled for what he wants. 

[Grouse]

9 minutes ago, melvinmelvin said:

a host of amendments tabled?

 

 

The order of the amendments will be important. I trust Bercow will handle that! I shall stay up all night with my Monkey Shoulder to sustain me...

[Grouse]

9 minutes ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

Apart from all the polls: what do people actually think is a likely outcome?

 

May’s deal will not make it until Wednesday, so we can exclude that. But then what? 

 

(1/3) Parliament will have to decide between a no-deal Brexit and revoking A50. They’re scared of both options so they will want to have some assurance aka a referendum. 

 

(2/3) Should there be a vote of no confidence and a GE, it will be interesting to see what parties will campaign for and against. Should they not articulate a clear position (ie. either remain or no-deal or one of the other options from the EU-menu) but chose to be vague or promise castles in the sky again, the same mess will repeat itself. 

 

It will be interesting to see whether the EU27 will agree on an extension of A50 in such case or let the UK revoke A50. 

 

(3/3) A third option would be an extension of A50, but we can assume that the EU27 will only agree to that if the situation materially changes so that an extension makes sense, aka a referendum.  

 

- - - 

 

The problem is that there is no clear majority for something, only people who are against everything else. This, of course, is a direct result of a referendum that didn’t ask for a clear majority and was open for lots of interpretation and false promises, leading to a situation where everyone feels entitled for what he wants. 

In which case the status quo ante is clearly the solution. 

 

 

Great riff!

Edited January 14, 2019 by Grouse

[vogie]

14 minutes ago, brewsterbudgen said:

And maybe they'll get it wrong again. Let's have the referendum and find out.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
 

Yes have another vote just for the losers.

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

2 minutes ago, vogie said:

Yes have another vote just for the losers.

 

 

So the democratic process came to a shuddering halt on the morning of the referendum result?!

 

Of course it did not.

 

You are afraid of the now better informed electorate.

[vogie]

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

So the democratic process came to a shuddering halt on the morning of the referendum result?!

 

Of course it did not.

 

You are afraid of the now better informed electorate.

If a democratic vote has not been enacted on in the first place by definition you are trying to overturn democracy and would in turn make the people who follow your logic......dictators.

 

[Chomper Higgot]

5 minutes ago, vogie said:

If a democratic vote has not been enacted on in the first place by definition you are trying to overturn democracy and would in turn make the people who follow your logic......dictators.

 

Not an argument against a second vote.

 

Refer to ‘the now better informed electorate’.

 

Over turning ill informed decisions by means of a vote is not overturning democracy.

 

It is the democratic process at work.

 

The democratic process did not come to a shuddering halt on the morning of the referendum result.

[vogie]

6 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Not an argument against a second vote.

 

Refer to ‘the now better informed electorate’.

 

Over turning ill informed decisions by means of a vote is not overturning democracy.

 

It is the democratic process at work.

 

The democratic process did not come to a shuddering halt on the morning of the referendum result.

The electorate were well informed at the time of the referendum, all the losers are doing is trying to justify another vote to finally get their own way, if I had tried those tactics with my mother she would have slapped the back of my head.

 

"Democratic process at work" don't make me laugh, democracy has not been carried out, it just comes across as a load of petulant children who are crying because they havn't got their own way, and they'll scream and they'll scream till they make themselves sick.????

[GarryP]

20 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Not an argument against a second vote.

 

Refer to ‘the now better informed electorate’.

 

Over turning ill informed decisions by means of a vote is not overturning democracy.

 

It is the democratic process at work.

 

The democratic process did not come to a shuddering halt on the morning of the referendum result.

So now that the US electorate is better informed about muggins and what it means to have him as POTUS, they should hold a new election now? It doesn't work like that does it? 

[Chomper Higgot]

4 minutes ago, vogie said:

The electorate were well informed at the time of the referendum, all the losers are doing is trying to justify another vote to finally get their own way, if I had tried those tactics with my mother she would have slapped the back of my head.

 

"Democratic process at work" don't make me laugh, democracy has not been carried out, it just comes across as a load of petulant children who are crying because they havn't got their own way, and they'll scream and they'll scream till they make themselves sick.????

Whatever the electorates state of being informed was at the time of the referendum, it has become more informed of the real consequences since. 

 

Your arguments regarding 'petulant children' cut both ways.

 

 

A second referendum is now being widely discussed, and is gaining support both major political parties. 

 

 

Your arguments against applying more democracy to resolve a parliamentary impasse are perhaps rooted in your obvious disdain for the 'Democratic Process'.

 

 

[Grouse]

15 minutes ago, vogie said:

The electorate were well informed at the time of the referendum, all the losers are doing is trying to justify another vote to finally get their own way, if I had tried those tactics with my mother she would have slapped the back of my head.

 

"Democratic process at work" don't make me laugh, democracy has not been carried out, it just comes across as a load of petulant children who are crying because they havn't got their own way, and they'll scream and they'll scream till they make themselves sick.????

If you are saying that leavers were fully informed at the time you do understand what that implies? ????

 

I, for one, have learnt many things which I had not known or had not understood previously.

[Grouse]

12 minutes ago, GarryP said:

So now that the US electorate is better informed about muggins and what it means to have him as POTUS, they should hold a new election now? It doesn't work like that does it? 

A) It's not a constitutional issue

 

B) Another election coming soon anyway

[evadgib]

8 hours ago, 7by7 said:

That would exclude @evadgib's favourite Facebook source Pat Condell; an Irish immigrant born in Dublin, and the aforementioned Yaxley-Lennon whose parents were both Irish immigrants.

Your rants would be equally enjoyable in 'Max Headroom' mode but you'll need to brush up a bit re accuracy before giving it a try...????

Quote

I am NOT on Facebook. All Facebook accounts in my name are fake.

From http://patcondell.com/

[brewsterbudgen]

15 minutes ago, GarryP said:

So now that the US electorate is better informed about muggins and what it means to have him as POTUS, they should hold a new election now? It doesn't work like that does it? 

Not now, but next year.  If we leave the EU it will be very difficult to re-join.  Far better to make an informed decision now.

[Chomper Higgot]

16 minutes ago, GarryP said:

So now that the US electorate is better informed about muggins and what it means to have him as POTUS, they should hold a new election now? It doesn't work like that does it? 

You don't seem to understand the difference between a US election and a British advisory referendum. 

 

I'm not sure TVF is the place to fix the gap in your understanding. 

[Chomper Higgot]

1 minute ago, brewsterbudgen said:

Not now, but next year.  If we leave the EU it will be very difficult to re-join.  Far better to make an informed decision now.

A particular issue is the UK enjoys a raft of concessions and refunds from the EU that will not be back on the table at anytime in the future. 

 

The UK's membership of the EU is not only better than any deal the UK will get from the EU during Brexit, it is the best deal the UK will ever get from the EU.

[vogie]

Just now, Grouse said:

If you are saying that leavers were fully informed at the time you do understand what that implies? ????

 

I, for one, have learnt many things which I had not known or had not understood previously.

Yes it implies that the electorate made the right decision on the day of the referendum.

And whilst I concede you know how Parliament works, you seem to have problems in realising how it worked on the referendum result, or maybe just too obstinate to admit it.????

[Grouse]

3 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

A particular issue is the UK enjoys a raft of concessions and refunds from the EU that will not be back on the table at anytime in the future. 

 

The UK's membership of the EU is not only better than any deal the UK will get from the EU during Brexit, it is the best deal the UK will ever get from the EU.

And it's a better deal than any other EU country gets!

[Grouse]

2 minutes ago, vogie said:

Yes it implies that the electorate made the right decision on the day of the referendum.

And whilst I concede you know how Parliament works, you seem to have problems in realising how it worked on the referendum result, or maybe just too obstinate to admit it.????

Obstinate? Moi?

 

I am NOT obstinate!

[vogie]

23 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Whatever the electorates state of being informed was at the time of the referendum, it has become more informed of the real consequences since. 

 

Your arguments regarding 'petulant children' cut both ways.

 

 

A second referendum is now being widely discussed, and is gaining support both major political parties. 

 

 

Your arguments against applying more democracy to resolve a parliamentary impasse are perhaps rooted in your obvious disdain for the 'Democratic Process'.

 

 

It seems to me that your interpretation of democracy is when it goes your own way. Would that be a fair assumption.

[evadgib]

11 hours ago, Basil B said:

Have not got a hour to to review the Andrew Marr Show, could you be more pacific?  

See bottom of post.

[GarryP]

15 minutes ago, Grouse said:

A) It's not a constitutional issue

 

B) Another election coming soon anyway

True but the vote is in. They do not get the chance to change their vote during the current term. They must wait for the term to be completed before getting another opportunity to vote, i.e. a different election. 

 

What I am trying to say, rather unsuccessfully, is that the vote must be respected or the vote is meaningless. Later, say 5 years down the road if there is a movement to rejoin, then hold another referendum to see if there is support for rejoining (assuming the EU is open to that). 

 

I told myself I would not get involved in this subject as it has no impact on me at all. Foolish me.   

[evadgib]

30 minutes ago, brewsterbudgen said:

Not now, but next year.  If we leave the EU it will be very difficult to re-join.  Far better to make an informed decision now.

Without major reform they will likely implode before that became a possibility but if UK were daft enough to give it a try they'd hoover us up like an angler fish.

Edited January 14, 2019 by evadgib

[vogie]

 

Where they stand ahead of the vote

Telegraph: no deal
The Sun: no deal
Spectator: no deal
Daily Mail: May’s deal
Mail on Sunday: May’s deal 
Times: May’s deal
FT: May’s deal 
Express: May’s deal
Guido: May’s deal 
Mirror: election
Guardian: second ref 
Indy: second ref

[Spidey]

19 minutes ago, vogie said:

It seems to me that your interpretation of democracy is when it goes your own way. Would that be a fair assumption.

Well, that's clearly your interpretation.

 

1st referendum was voted on by an ill informed public. 2nd referendum will be voted on by a much better informed public. 

 

Democracy in action.

 

Your fear of a 2nd referendum is clearly based on the fact that this time the public will vote with their heads rather than an irrational xenophobia, buried deep in their hearts by the right wing press.

[Chomper Higgot]

28 minutes ago, vogie said:

It seems to me that your interpretation of democracy is when it goes your own way. Would that be a fair assumption.

In so much as having a right to Campaign, speak up, demonstrate, write to the elected government, hold and express views were I believe the wrong direction is being followed.

 

Yes, that would be correct.

 

I certainly do not believe any vote suspends the democratic process.

 

Edited January 14, 2019 by Chomper Higgot

[vogie]

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

In so much as having a right to Campaign, speak up, demonstrate, write to the elected government, hold and express views were I believe the wrong direction is being followed.

 

Yes, that would be correct.

What you seem to fail to understand is that by overturning a democratic decision is far from being democratic, democracy doesn't always mean getting it all your own way.

[Sir Dude]

The poll/referendum for the creation of the Welsh Assembly was in favour by just 0.3%...but of course, nobody questions the legitimacy of that vote or demanded a second go at the outcome. 

Edited January 14, 2019 by Sir Dude