11 hours ago, AlexRich said:

It looks like the ERG are listening to the “theme from MASH”, “suicide is painless” and will vote down May’s deal, an error of historic proportions. So tomorrow no deal gets thrown out and Parliament takes control. 

 

These clowns, who claim to want to leave the EU, by their actions, will ensure we have either the softest of Brexits or none whatsoever. Every strategic manoeuvre they get involved in is an abject failure.

 

Make sure you’ve all got plenty of popcorn in the house, and some tissues for those of a sensitive demeanour. 

I think the ERG was right to vote down May's "deal" because it wasn't Brexit and was even worse than staying in the EUSSR. Better to live to fight another day than surrender now. Even if we eventually end up staying it is better than May's deal.

so it appears a lot of people in the UK want a second referendum (the 1st one was a misleading joke) but some brexiters say no second referendum, they have a democracy and the first referendum should go forward, people should not vote a second time for the same thing, people don't have the right to change their minds....now we have TM having the first meaningful vote REJECTED by a vast majority, since she didn't like the outcome she asked for a second meaningful vote, AGAIN REJECTED and maybe she will ask for a third one....why did she ask for the second one?  Humm because she wanted the MP's to change their mind, if so why didn't she want the second referendum from the people of the UK, let me guess,  because the UK people can not/should not change their mind only the MP's can/should.... funny democracy

14 hours ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

Complete nonsense. Did you get that from the big book of chemtrails?

 

 

 

 

 

Here's your nonsense. Only the Norwegians were listened to without repeat question. The Irish and Danish voted twice. The French and Dutch were just ignored. 

 

http://oxfordre.com/politics/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.001.0001/acrefore-9780190228637-e-503

37 minutes ago, Mavideol said:

so it appears a lot of people in the UK want a second referendum (the 1st one was a misleading joke) but some brexiters say no second referendum, they have a democracy and the first referendum should go forward, people should not vote a second time for the same thing, people don't have the right to change their minds....now we have TM having the first meaningful vote REJECTED by a vast majority, since she didn't like the outcome she asked for a second meaningful vote, AGAIN REJECTED and maybe she will ask for a third one....why did she ask for the second one?  Humm because she wanted the MP's to change their mind, if so why didn't she want the second referendum from the people of the UK, let me guess,  because the UK people can not/should not change their mind only the MP's can/should.... funny democracy

The huge difference is that TM informed Parliament of the negotiations for Brexit and they didnt accept , she then went back to the E.U. for further discussions and again they were unacceptable .

   They were two different proposals and the referendum question is still the same question .

   M.P's can change their minds on two different proposals , but voters cannot change their mind on their vote for Brexit

On 3/12/2019 at 9:45 AM, dick dasterdly said:

Yes, I too am looking forward to learning exactly how the agreement has been amended.  Not that it matters much from my POV, as the agreement is BRINO plus paying 39 bn for the privilege!

 

Lidington says it "confirms the EU cannot try to "trap" the United Kingdom in the Irish backstop indefinitely" - which means precisely nothing as of course the eu would deny trying to "trap" the uk into staying indefinitely....

"Lidington says it "confirms the EU cannot try to "trap" the United Kingdom in the Irish backstop indefinitely" - which means precisely nothing as of course the eu would deny trying to "trap" the uk into staying indefinitely...."

 

I apologise for 'tooting my own horn' - but can't resist pointing out that I was right!

28 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Here's your nonsense. Only the Norwegians were listened to without repeat question. The Irish and Danish voted twice. The French and Dutch were just ignored. 

 

http://oxfordre.com/politics/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.001.0001/acrefore-9780190228637-e-503

Like I said: nonsense. Where is the proof for the assertion made? 

36 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Here's your nonsense. Only the Norwegians were listened to without repeat question. The Irish and Danish voted twice. The French and Dutch were just ignored. 

 

http://oxfordre.com/politics/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.001.0001/acrefore-9780190228637-e-503

You are fighting an uphill battle there. As often with some posters their high intelligence, fails to comprehend the basic concept of reading the facts. A term I would use is intellectually challenged or in less PC times 'thick as ship'.

Edited March 13, 20197 yr by Laughing Gravy

23 hours ago, Justin Side said:

What a sad bunch of friends you have.

Thanks for reminding me why I no longer live there.

 

Not really. It is called freedom of choice.

 

Chilean wine is very good as are most other new world wines are.

36 minutes ago, sanemax said:

The huge difference is that TM informed Parliament of the negotiations for Brexit and they didnt accept , she then went back to the E.U. for further discussions and again they were unacceptable .

   They were two different proposals and the referendum question is still the same question .

   M.P's can change their minds on two different proposals , but voters cannot change their mind on their vote for Brexit

and that's the democracy.... DO AS I SAY DON'T DO AS I DO

15 minutes ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

Like I said: nonsense. Where is the proof for the assertion made? 

JAG's "assertion" was that: When the result was no, they were told to have another referendum.

 

Two countries have had their referendum results ignored, one was accepted and 2 of them were required to revote. I have given you the listing of reruns that proves JAG to be correct. Deny all you want but that's it. 

6 minutes ago, billd766 said:

Not really. It is called freedom of choice.

 

Chilean wine is very good as are most other new world wines are.

Try Sunrise! Always a good drop.

Just now, nauseus said:

JAG's "assertion" was that: When the result was no, they were told to have another referendum.

 

Two countries have had their referendum results ignored, one was accepted and 2 of them were required to revote. I have given you the listing of reruns that proves JAG to be correct. Deny all you want but that's it. 

You have posted a list of referendums. You haven’t given any proof for your assertions. Deny all you want but that’s it. 

13 minutes ago, Laughing Gravy said:

You are fighting an uphill battle there. As often with some posters their high intelligence, fails to comprehend the basic concept of reading the facts. A term I would use is intellectually challenged or in less PC times 'thick as ship'.

Yes, there are some sturdy hulls in the remain camp. But not made from good old English Oak unfortunately.

Just now, welovesundaysatspace said:

You have posted a list of referendums. You haven’t given any proof for your assertions. Deny all you want but that’s it. 

Read the list carefully and you can see the repeats plus no votes which were subsequently ignored.

 

Your echo chamber is not very effective. 

7 minutes ago, Mavideol said:

and that's the democracy.... DO AS I SAY DON'T DO AS I DO

No, they are two different things .

The British public voted for their choice , now the M.P.s are voting for their choice .

The M.P's are being given their choices at different stages due to ongoing negotiations

All rather academic now.

12 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Read the list carefully and you can see the repeats plus no votes which were subsequently ignored.

 

Your echo chamber is not very effective. 

Don’t be childish. Where is your proof that those countries were told and requested to have another referendum? Your list just shows that they held referendums. I could as well claim every four years aliens tell the UK to hold a general election, and then show you a list of all general elections. 

 

Fact is: Only those countries themselves can hold a referendum. There is no one that has legal authority to tell or request them to do so. Stick to the truth please. 

31 minutes ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

Don’t be childish. Where is your proof that those countries were told and requested to have another referendum? Your list just shows that they held referendums. I could as well claim every four years aliens tell the UK to hold a general election, and then show you a list of all general elections. 

 

Fact is: Only those countries themselves can hold a referendum. There is no one that has legal authority to tell or request them to do so. Stick to the truth please. 

If a country has had more than one referendum on the same question, then it is fair to surmise that the people of that country were requested to vote on it again, is it not? General elections are not referendums and not relevant to this discussion or topic. Of course governments have authority to hold referendums and request people to vote in them - if individuals choose note to vote, then that is their right - right? 

14 minutes ago, nauseus said:

If a country has had more than one referendum on the same question, then it is fair to surmise that the people of that country were requested to vote on it again, is it not? General elections are not referendums and not relevant to this discussion or topic. Of course governments have authority to hold referendums and request people to vote in them - if individuals choose note to vote, then that is their right - right? 

The picture says it all when talking to wolves

 

Just now, Laughing Gravy said:

The picture says it all when talking to wolves

 

+1

57 minutes ago, nauseus said:

If a country has had more than one referendum on the same question, then it is fair to surmise that the people of that country were requested to vote on it again, is it not?

1. If I’m not mistaken, (at least some of) those countries didn’t have a referendum on the same question but on different agreements presented to them. 

 

2. Either way, what the poster claimed was that “countries (...) were told to have another referendum (...) - very European.” I.e. someone external, the “European”, somehow forced them into a referendum. That’s obviously <deleted>. Even if he was actually referring to the electorate it would be <deleted> because they can only be asked to vote, not told to do it. 

 

If the poster just didn’t use the right words and actually meant that the countries had another referendum and/or the electorate was asked to participate in another referendum, then I am happy to agree to that. 

 

 

26 minutes ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

1. If I’m not mistaken, (at least some of) those countries didn’t have a referendum on the same question but on different agreements presented to them. 

 

2. Either way, what the poster claimed was that “countries (...) were told to have another referendum (...) - very European.” I.e. someone external, the “European”, somehow forced them into a referendum. That’s obviously <deleted>. Even if he was actually referring to the electorate it would be <deleted> because they can only be asked to vote, not told to do it. 

 

If the poster just didn’t use the right words and actually meant that the countries had another referendum and/or the electorate was asked to participate in another referendum, then I am happy to agree to that. 

 

 

You can look at the list I provided and make your own mind up. No need to respond.

4 hours ago, sanemax said:

No, they are two different things .

The British public voted for their choice , now the M.P.s are voting for their choice .

The M.P's are being given their choices at different stages due to ongoing negotiations

That is seriously unfair.We get only one vote at the referendum as do all the MPs and then the buggers get to vote again and again on all the various amendments the way THEY want to vote which is not necessarily the way the constituents vote.

 

It is about time that we borrowed some French revolutionary justice. 

 

Line up the chairs, get the grannies knitting, roll out the tumbrils and sharpen Madame la Guillotine for the next election.

Just now, billd766 said:

That is seriously unfair.We get only one vote at the referendum as do all the MPs and then the buggers get to vote again and again on all the various amendments the way THEY want to vote which is not necessarily the way the constituents vote.

 

It is about time that we borrowed some French revolutionary justice. 

 

Line up the chairs, get the grannies knitting, roll out the tumbrils and sharpen Madame la Guillotine for the next election.

The French revolution was not a plot hatched by the hyper wealthy then swallowed and followed by the masses.

3 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The French revolution was not a plot hatched by the hyper wealthy then swallowed and followed by the masses.

Let them eat cake.

 

Vogie is a lot smarter than you as he has what you seem to lack.

 

A sense of humour.

Edited March 13, 20197 yr by billd766
Added extra text