New UK PM must put Brexit plan to second referendum - Labour's Corbyn

[Reigntax]

Just now, Bluespunk said:

There is nothing in the british system of democracy that precludes a vote on any final deal. 

What part of the vote is over don't you understand ?

[Bluespunk]

Just now, Reigntax said:

The people have exercised their rights. They decided.

The vote was completed 3 years ago. It's over, finished, completed.

The consequences are not crystal clear. No one knows how successful it will be. Everyone is just making the case to support their opinions. 

The consequences of brexit are very clear. Just google for reports on such. 

 

There is absolutely no reason there cannot be a vote on any final deal. 

 

If parliament decides there should be one, then it will happen. 

 

Nothing is decided. 

 

Nothing is finished. 

 

Nothing is completed. 

[Bluespunk]

5 minutes ago, Reigntax said:

What part of the vote is over don't you understand ?

Please direct me to the aspect of British democratic procedures that explicitly state there can be no vote on a final deal.

Edited July 9, 2019 by Bluespunk

[Reigntax]

Just now, Bluespunk said:

The consequences of brexit are very clear. Just google for reports on such. 

 

There is absolutely no reason there cannot be a vote on any final deal. 

 

If parliament decides there should be one, then it will happen. 

 

Nothing is decided. 

 

Nothing is finished. 

 

Nothing is completed. 

The highest representation of the people of the UK have spoken and made their decision, the people themselves There is no higher court of appeal.

 

A second referendum would do more damage to the Democratic system that exists than any damage caused by Brexits. If in any case that does occur.

[Bluespunk]

1 minute ago, Reigntax said:

The highest representation of the people of the UK have spoken and made their decision, the people themselves There is no higher court of appeal.

 

A second referendum would do more damage to the Democratic system that exists than any damage caused by Brexits. If in any case that does occur.

A vote on any final deal would serve democracy. 

 

Brexit has been negotiated and the deal is in place. 

 

Let the people decide whether they wish to accept it or not. 

[Reigntax]

2 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

Please direct me to the aspect of British democratic procedures that explicitly state there can be no vote on a final deal.

No you are making a mockery out of your understanding of "democratic" and "law"

I suggest rather than ask me to to explicitly explain where a second vote can occur, that you search where a majority decision can be ignored.

[Bluespunk]

Just now, Reigntax said:

No you are making a mockery out of your understanding of "democratic" and "law"

I suggest rather than ask me to to explicitly explain where a second vote can occur, that you search where a majority decision can be ignored.

Right, so there is no reason there cannot be a vote on a final deal. 

 

Thought so. 

[Reigntax]

Just now, Bluespunk said:

A vote on any final deal would serve democracy. 

 

Brexit has been negotiated and the deal is in place. 

 

Let the people decide whether they wish to accept it or not. 

They decided. It's over.

The minority didn't win. The majority won.

The minority are upset they lost. Same with every vote.

It's over. 

[Reigntax]

Just now, Bluespunk said:

Right, so there is no reason there cannot be a vote on a final deal. 

 

Thought so. 

Idiot

[Bluespunk]

1 minute ago, Reigntax said:

They decided. It's over.

The minority didn't win. The majority won.

The minority are upset they lost. Same with every vote.

It's over. 

Not until the final deal is accepted and passed by parliament is anything over. 

 

It makes perfect sense to ask the people on how they feel about that deal and ask them if they wish to accept or reject it. 

 

I shall refrain from responding to the post of yours that followed the one I quote here. 

[Loiner]

Right, so there is no reason there cannot be a vote on a final deal. 

There will never be another referendum, especially on Brexit or its details. They screwed up so badly in their estimation of the last one’s result. They won’t let that happen again even if they think they are sure of a result in their favour.
No matter what LAB or the EU or the traitorous CON MPs call for, it won’t happen because they just cannot be sure enough.

[Bluespunk]

1 minute ago, Loiner said:

There will never be another referendum, especially on Brexit or its details. They screwed up so badly in their estimation of the last one’s result. They won’t let that happen again even if they think they are sure of a result in their favour.
No matter what LAB or the EU or the traitorous CON MPs call for, it won’t happen because they just cannot be sure enough.

That may be the case, but it still does not rule out a vote on any final deal nor should people be denied the right to call for such a vote.

 

Neither should they be condemned for doing so. 

[vogie]

3 hours ago, beautifulthailand99 said:

^{The British people voted to have 27 baht to the pound now let them have it. Got a new low today not long to go. Missus complained when I transferred 3mill at 42  - but what if it goes up she whinged. Don't worry I said trust in the British people after all you trusted to marry me and move to the UK. #bringonBrexit} 

Most of the British people don't even know that the baht is the currency in Thailand, and most are not bothered.

[vogie]

3 hours ago, Bluespunk said:

No, any further vote on a final deal, where the consequences of brexit are crystal clear, is very sensible idea. 

 

I support the right of those citizens resident in the U.K. to call for such a vote.  

Only the losers want another vote.

 

I support the rights of the winners to have their democratic decision fulfilled.

[nontabury]

3 hours ago, Bluespunk said:

A vote on any final deal would serve democracy. 

 

Brexit has been negotiated and the deal is in place. 

 

Let the people decide whether they wish to accept it or not. 

 

If you mean let the British people decide? You do realise, as a foreigner that you would not be eligible to vote.

[Bluespunk]

9 minutes ago, vogie said:

Only the losers want another vote.

 

I support the rights of the winners to have their democratic decision fulfilled.

I don’t pick and choose whose rights are respected. 

[vogie]

3 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

I don’t pick and choose whose rights are respected. 

I have no intention of being part of a Monty Python sketch, yes it is, no it isn't.

[Bluespunk]

11 minutes ago, nontabury said:

 

If you mean let the British people decide? You do realise, as a foreigner that you would not be eligible to vote.

Please point exactly to where I said I would vote.

 

Exactly being the operative word. 

 

Edited July 9, 2019 by Bluespunk

[welovesundaysatspace]

4 hours ago, Reigntax said:

They decided. It's over.

The minority didn't win. The majority won.

The minority are upset they lost. Same with every vote.

It's over. 

You better find a majority in parliament for that. 

[goldenbrwn1]

 As a remain voter who as a rational human being got over the result after a few weeks, yes I was pi##ed because of the exchange rate which I knew would crash etc etc.

 

Just imagine there is another referendum. The result will be very close yet again.  If the result was similar to last time will all the remainer  activists accept it this time around? Tbh I think they will, but what I would be fearful of is a remainer victory with a similar 52%-48% result.   Imagine the civil unrest from that result. They think it kicked off bad in the London riots of 2012....... check what available footage of the poll tax riots is on utube and imagine what wasn’t caught on camera! (No mobiles then let alone camera phones.)

 

IMO we are on dangerous ground here with this referendum rerun talk.

Edited July 10, 2019 by goldenbrwn1

[David in the north]

St. Jeremy & his ilk have no interest in the UK at all.
Anything to cause as much trouble as possible.
Their labour voters in the heartlands were for "out"

A once great political party completely ruined

[ivor bigun]

Absolutely correct. 

Why? So if a new govt is elected ,should we have another vote if many people do not like the outcome?

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

[wombat]

the first one hasn't been implemented yet ?.........how to destroy democracy is the only legacy Teresa May has left..

[Libai]

Can you imagine if the UK had a general election and 3 years later the losing side were still trying to stop the new, 'democratically' elected government taking power with schemes such as withholding funds for various items. Asking for another vote on the basis that the winning side didn't know which 'version' of the party they were voting for, completely revoking the result for no good reason other than their side lost?

 

It is a sham democracy, If you do not have control over the direction and selection of policy, then you do not have any control over how you are governed. If you have no control over how you are governed and cannot directly vote to dismiss those who govern you, you are not a citizen but a slave.

 

The 2016 referendum vote consisted of a YES or a NO. Was that too difficult for some?

 

 

[brianj1964]

sorry if you didn't like the result first time , people voted to leave by majority

[evadgib]

40 minutes ago, wombat said:

the first one hasn't been implemented yet ?.........how to destroy democracy is the only legacy Teresa May has left..

The Tilbrook case hasn't gone away as this latest update explains ????

 

[Chomper Higgot]

The people arguing here on TVF against putting Brexit back to the people are the same folk who argue with smug confidence that Brexit is the will of the people.

 

Riddle me that.

[vogie]

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

The people arguing here on TVF against putting Brexit back to the people are the same folk who argue with smug confidence that Brexit is the will of the people.

 

Riddle me that.

And in the same breath the same people on here have been telling us that for three years that referendums are illegal, now suddenly think they are bone fide and the best thing since sliced bread.

 

Riddle me this.

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

10 minutes ago, evadgib said:

The Tilbrook case hasn't gone away as this latest update explains ????

 

From your link:

 

“The explanation [for this Brexiteer case being thrown out] however lies in the relevant Court Rule which was developed in 2016.  This was supposedly to stop unmeritorious immigration claims clogging up the system.”

 

Brexiteer hopes dashed by a law brought into force to prevent “unmeritorious immigration claims clogging up the system”.

 

Not for the first time Brexiteers prove sweet Irony lives.

....

 

Thanks for that evadgib, it was almost as enjoyable as my morning bike ride through the local national park. 

Edited July 10, 2019 by Chomper Higgot

[Chomper Higgot]

2 minutes ago, vogie said:

And in the same breath the same people on here have been telling us that for three years that referendums are illegal, now suddenly think they are bone fide and the best thing since sliced bread.

 

Riddle me this.

 

 

I don’t recall anybody ever claiming ‘that referendums are illegal’, did you just make that bit up?