How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 2)

[anonymous-user]

mx5nut said:

voyds9 said:

I wonder if we would have heard from him if the vote had gone the other way?

Undoubtedly, if we'd seen the same attacks on democracy from the winning side.

So you accept that he’s attacking democracy in trying to get another vote?

[SidewaysSi]

Think we will have another vote. We may be leaving but it's hardly going to be a cut like we wanted.

The worst Brexit possible.

[wc98]

SidewaysSi said:

Think we will have another vote. We may be leaving but it's hardly going to be a cut like we wanted.

The worst Brexit possible.

i would love another vote asap. instead of the tenner i stuck on for a laugh the last time, i would remortgage the house and put the lot on leave. it would not be anywhere near as close second time around.

[mike9009]

REALIST123 said:

mx5nut said:

voyds9 said:

I wonder if we would have heard from him if the vote had gone the other way?

Undoubtedly, if we'd seen the same attacks on democracy from the winning side.

So you accept that he’s attacking democracy in trying to get another vote?

A democratic voting system should be fair, free and regular. Are we proposing something different to the definition of democracy?

[Coolbanana]

mike9009 said:

A democratic voting system should be fair, free and regular. Are we proposing something different to the definition of democracy?

All the insecure Brexiters are. For them a vote can only take place very infrequently, if ever again, once a result is recognised in any Referendum.

I really do not understand the insecurity though if they are so very confident a 2nd Referendum would swing their way even more. Is that just a false façade to placate themselves or do they genuinely believe their winning margin would increase, in which case, surely a 2nd Referendum could be beneficial in establishing the exact nature of the Brexit the majority of the Brexiters want?

[Troubleatmill]

mike9009 said:

A democratic voting system should be fair, free and regular. Are we proposing something different to the definition of democracy?

I can't recall us having a country wide referendum that we had the option of voting on regularly.
Does that fail your test that our system is democratic?

What do you propose?
Best of 3?
Best of 5?
Why not best of 7?


If Scotland voted to leave the UK, should they be allowed a vote next year to re-join?
And another vote the following year? etc.

[Coolbanana]

wc98 said:

i would love another vote asap. instead of the tenner i stuck on for a laugh the last time, i would remortgage the house and put the lot on leave. it would not be anywhere near as close second time around.

What type of Leave; would you want a 'hard Brexit' or some type of deal, any deal will do approach?

There do appear to be many "No Deal' types blustering away in various Media comments I see and, frankly, if the majority of the Leave Majority wanted that, they should get it. Leave completely, go WTO with the EU and try and strike whatever Deals they can with the ROW.

Heck, they can pocket the 40 million and spend it on the NHS.

I would then be able to sit back with my popcorn and watch the UK embarrass itself - which will be hilarious when confronting and challenging those that voted for it. Sadly, not so funny for those who are surrounded by Brexit Cultists intoxicated on a Nirvana that the UK is simply not strong enough in any capacity to ever deliver.

But I would definitely have a good laugh at the Leavers. So go for it, go Hard!

[confused_buyer]

I can't believe anyone thinks you can run a country where we set a precedent that we vote on the EU every 2 years. It's madness.

If you have a vote to "check" the 2016 one in 2018 then we should have a check on that one in 2020 and so on.....

There is no reason why the subject cannot be revisited and I'm sure it will be but it has to be on a sensible timetable which, like Scotland, is a generational thing.

[frisbee]

Troubleatmill said:

I can't recall us having a country wide referendum that we had the option of voting on regularly.
Does that fail your test that our system is democratic?

What do you propose?
Best of 3?
Best of 5?
Why not best of 7?


If Scotland voted to leave the UK, should they be allowed a vote next year to re-join?
And another vote the following year? etc.

General elections can be considered to be regular referendums. No one, other than dictators, consider a single election to stand forever. Brexit should never have been a simple 50% referendum, the conservatives would have placated the right wing loonies with a 60% one and not left themselves likely to loose the next general election.

People forget that May was a terrible minister, and a remainer. The fan is only just starting to spin up and we are lumbered with very poor politicians on both sides of the house.

In reality, we won't leave the EU.

[mike9009]

mike9009 said:

REALIST123 said:

mx5nut said:

voyds9 said:

I wonder if we would have heard from him if the vote had gone the other way?

Undoubtedly, if we'd seen the same attacks on democracy from the winning side.

So you accept that he’s attacking democracy in trying to get another vote?

A democratic voting system should be fair, free and regular. Are we proposing something different to the definition of democracy?

The other slight issue, as demonstrated by this thread, is that the democratic will of the people was to leave the EU? The next few years will see us slowly negotiating our way back in. The vote said leave - we are not.

[bitchstewie]

mike9009 said:

The other slight issue, as demonstrated by this thread, is that the democratic will of the people was to leave the EU? The next few years will see us slowly negotiating our way back in. The vote said leave - we are not.

Democracy is always changing.

What happens at the next election if a party stands on the promise of taking us back in and they win?

Which one is the "will of the people" the election then or a snapshot in time from what will at that point be 4-5 year ago?

[The Dangerous Elk]

frisbee said:

General elections can be considered to be regular referendums. No one, other than dictators, consider a single election to stand forever. Brexit should never have been a simple 50% referendum, the conservatives would have placated the right wing loonies with a 60% one and not left themselves likely to loose the next general election.
.

Err, we have had a GE since the Brexit vote and the party that "won" was saying we will leave, the party that came 2nd was saying "we will leave", the part that said "we will cancel the vote and stay in" was destroyed.

Seems democratic to me

[anonymous-user]

Put it this way, if we have another referendum and remain win, leave voters have already said that they wouldn't moan about the result.

There would never be a need for another EU referendum.

[mike9009]

bhstewie said:

mike9009 said:

The other slight issue, as demonstrated by this thread, is that the democratic will of the people was to leave the EU? The next few years will see us slowly negotiating our way back in. The vote said leave - we are not.

Democracy is always changing.

What happens at the next election if a party stands on the promise of taking us back in and they win?

Which one is the "will of the people" the election then or a snapshot in time from what will at that point be 4-5 year ago?

We cannot possibly go back on the referendum vote.... that would be undemocratic.......

[gooner1]

Have I got this right, some,, of the more desperate, Remain voters, are calling for regular
Brexit referendums, the loser of which then decides what % of votes cast constitutes
a win, but meanwhile we negotiate a way back in, to something we are, in reality, not going to
leave?
I forgot to mention that the definition of "regular" is also to be determined by the
losing side.

Edited by gooner1 on Sunday 21st January 09:24

[Troubleatmill]

Ghibli said:

Put it this way, if we have another referendum and remain win, leave voters have already said that they wouldn't moan about the result.

There would never be a need for another EU referendum.

Sweeping statement. 17 odd million leave voters. Who did you check with?


Reading your statement again - does that mean we need another referendum because remain voters are moaning about the result?

[anonymous-user]

Troubleatmill said:

Ghibli said:

Put it this way, if we have another referendum and remain win, leave voters have already said that they wouldn't moan about the result.

There would never be a need for another EU referendum.

Sweeping statement. 17 odd million leave voters. Who did you check with?


Reading your statement again - does that mean we need another referendum because remain voters are moaning about the result?

It's based on PH comments in these Brexit threads. Obviously not reality

[ORD]

I cannot see any rational objection to a further vote once the options actually become clear.

‘Leave’ is about as general a concept as can be.

It Hard Brexit is the only Leave option, the public should have the opportunity to think again. Many Leave voters were sold on the idea of a painless process.

[gooner1]

ORD said:

I cannot see any rational objection to a further vote once the options actually become clear.

‘Leave’ is about as general a concept as can be.

It Hard Brexit is the only Leave option, the public should have the opportunity to think again. Many Leave voters were sold on the idea of a painless process.

There is no gain without pain, and I refute your "painless process " claim.
Who thought, or claimed negotiations would be easy?

[Robertj21a]

Just popped in for the occasional read. Seems to just be the usual Remainers spouting a load of waffle without realising that the only other posters on here are usually other disillusioned Remainers ! The Leavers moved on some time ago.

Get a life chaps, we're leaving the EU, there's no need for any further vote and we'll all be fine in due course.