How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 4)

[sidicks]

Helicopter123 said:

Leavers I know and speak with are in two camps

1. The 'hard brexit' types who want out. They have a religion and will not change their mind.
2. The 'soft brexit' types who voted out but recognise they were lied to and would look again at remaining.

I haven't met a single remainer who has looked at the utter clusterfk of the past two years and now thinks brexit is just what this country needs.

I wouldn't underestimate just how powerful the 'remain' desire is the youngest generation now. The 15/16/17 year olds who didn't get a vote in 2016 would I think be 90% remain.

Where do Gary Lineker and Gabby Yorath fit into this?

[Jazzy Jag]

T0MMY said:

Murph7355 said:

You took my response to you as one? Or more generically?

On the latter, you've not been around these threads much in the last 2yrs if that's a concern

I hadn't even seen this thread at all until a couple of days ago. No not your response, and yes more generically, just the tone of the thread. This sort of "haha we won so fk you" type attitude, but perhaps the Leavers would have been just the same if they'd won. The other thing I find a bit depressing is this disdain for what people may actually want...like pointing out that if the young didn't get out to vote in enough numbers that's their fault so fk them. Whilst that is true on one level, on another level it suggests that many people were more interested in winning than on any notion of making absolutely sure we are doing what people actually want.

This is why I find the incredible opposition to another referendum amazing...if you're confident attitudes haven't changed then it doesn't matter, you'll get a stronger mandate. The point is that we all know a hell of a lot more about brexit now than we did 2 years ago and this is an incredibly important decision, more so than which government we get for a 5 year spell and we do of course get to change our minds about that one.

Partly, it's the principle of a second referendum I find unacceptable.

"A once in a lifetime opportunity " was offered but the public had the audacity to vote differently to what we were supposed.

We have seen a number of countries vote the "wrong" way and seen the EU make them vote again until the right result is achieved.

What sort of democracy is that?

If we don't like the results of the next GE, should we have a second vote on sack point of the manifesto?

Should we vote again offering our preferred demographic a vote?

No. One vote, one result. Get on with it.

Edited by Jazzy Jag on Sunday 23 September 11:26

[don'tbesilly]

Kenny Powers said:

So far this morning all I’ve learned from this discussion is that a few vocal remoaniacs care so much about the rights of the people, as provided by the almighty European Union, that they want the views of elderly people scrubbed from the referendum because it would swing the vote in their own favour.

Or assuming (secretly hoping) that enough of the older voters would have died off, and enough younger voters would have jumped delightfully on their graves.

The problem being that people get older, and many who voted Remain as a younger voter, would have gained the wisdom that youngsters lack and change from Remain to Leave.

[T0MMY]

andy_s said:

If that's referring to my comment don't read too much into it - there was no 'fk 'em' implied, just the notion that if you can't be bothered to vote you have very little cause to be upset if it doesn't go your way. My own point of view may be remain or leave - but that doesn't alter the situation with respect to moaning about something if you can't muster the energy to have your say at the proper time.

To be fair, I doubt the people "moaning" about it on this thread are the people that couldn't be bothered to vote!

[gooner1]

T0MMY said:

Well let's hope they give a bit more attention to your wishes when deciding when to farm you off to an old folks' home

Are you saying that if your siblings had shown a preference for Leave, your
vote would have echoed their preference?

Perhaps we should replace individual voting with a single family block vote
with just the appointed head of the family named as the voter.

[andy_s]

T0MMY said:

To be fair, I doubt the people "moaning" about it on this thread are the people that couldn't be bothered to vote!

Well yes, that's true

[T0MMY]

Jazzy Jag said:

No. One vote, one result. Get on with it.

You mean two votes surely? We already had a vote in the 70s.

[Vanden Saab]

T0MMY said:

I hadn't even seen this thread at all until a couple of days ago. No not your response, and yes more generically, just the tone of the thread. This sort of "haha we won so fk you" type attitude, but perhaps the Leavers would have been just the same if they'd won. The other thing I find a bit depressing is this disdain for what people may actually want...like pointing out that if the young didn't get out to vote in enough numbers that's their fault so fk them. Whilst that is true on one level, on another level it suggests that many people were more interested in winning than on any notion of making absolutely sure we are doing what people actually want.

This is why I find the incredible opposition to another referendum amazing...if you're confident attitudes haven't changed then it doesn't matter, you'll get a stronger mandate. The point is that we all know a hell of a lot more about brexit now than we did 2 years ago and this is an incredibly important decision, more so than which government we get for a 5 year spell and we do of course get to change our minds about that one.

You really don't see it do you. IMHO there are three reasons why people do not want a second referendum.
1. What we voted for and what was promised in the first one hasn't been given to us yet.
2. If the result was the other way you can bet there wouldn't be another one.
3. We had to wait over 40 years for a chance to vote again, Why should you get another one within 3 years.
I would be happy to have a referendum on whether to leave with or without a deal but that is not what you want is it?

[sidicks]

Helicopter123 said:

That’s a very useful article from a very well respected poster. Pre collapse of chequers it’s neck and neck. With only a hard Brexit on the ballot though, moderates would surely remain this time around.

Are you using the ‘very well respected poster’ line to mean ‘someone that shares the same opinion as me’, like you’ve done previously?

[T0MMY]

gooner1 said:

Are you saying that if your siblings had shown a preference for Leave, your
vote would have echoed their preference?

Perhaps we should replace individual voting with a single family block vote
with just the appointed head of the family named as the voter.

No, I'm saying that if I was 75 and knew full well I wasn't going to be living in the future my vote was shaping, I would genuinely pay more attention to what the people that were going to live in it wanted. This isn't something I'm trying to start an argument about, you may feel different but that's genuinely what I would have done in that position.

[Jazzy Jag]

T0MMY said:

Jazzy Jag said:

No. One vote, one result. Get on with it.

You mean two votes surely? We already had a vote in the 70s.

I didn't.
And those that did voted to remain in a Common Market not to be ruled by the EU which are two entirely different entities.

[don'tbesilly]

sidicks said:

Helicopter123 said:

That’s a very useful article from a very well respected poster. Pre collapse of chequers it’s neck and neck. With only a hard Brexit on the ballot though, moderates would surely remain this time around.

Are you using the ‘very well respected poster’ line to mean ‘someone that shares the same opinion as me’, like you’ve done previously?

Anyone/everyone is 'well respected' as long as their opinion tallies with Helicopter

[gooner1]

T0MMY said:

I hadn't even seen this thread at all until a couple of days ago. No not your response, and yes more generically, just the tone of the thread. This sort of "haha we won so fk you" type attitude, but perhaps the Leavers would have been just the same if they'd won. The other thing I find a bit depressing is this disdain for what people may actually want...like pointing out that if the young didn't get out to vote in enough numbers that's their fault so fk them. Whilst that is true on one level, on another level it suggests that many people were more interested in winning than on any notion of making absolutely sure we are doing what people actually want.

This is why I find the incredible opposition to another referendum amazing...if you're confident attitudes haven't changed then it doesn't matter, you'll get a stronger mandate. The point is that we all know a hell of a lot more about brexit now than we did 2 years ago and this is an incredibly important decision, more so than which government we get for a 5 year spell and we do of course get to change our minds about that one.

I hate to break it to you at this late stage, but the Leavers actually did win.
Peace out.

[T0MMY]

Vanden Saab said:

You really don't see it do you. IMHO there are three reasons why people do not want a second referendum.
1. What we voted for and what was promised in the first one hasn't been given to us yet.
2. If the result was the other way you can bet there wouldn't be another one.
3. We had to wait over 40 years for a chance to vote again, Why should you get another one within 3 years.
I would be happy to have a referendum on whether to leave with or without a deal but that is not what you want is it?

I suppose from my perspective, I consider this far and away the most important decision this country has made in my lifetime and it needs to be correct. I dare say you're right about there not being another vote if remain had won but then of course remaining doesn't carry the same level of implication. You could always have another vote to leave in the future but you couldn't have another vote to re-enter with the arrangement we currently have.

We all know a lot more about brexit now and I also dare say voter engagement would be higher after the last couple of years of wrangling. If the majority of the country genuinely want to remain at this point then why are we leaving? If the majority don't want to remain still then a second vote will just confirm the outcome without a shadow of a doubt, and permanently shut the "remoaniacs" up.

[TaylotS2K]

T0MMY said:

Kenny Powers said:

Alternative viewpoint is that their position comes from a lifetime of wanting out.

If you were 75 years old and your children and grandchildren all wanted to stay in, would you vote out?

If you were 75 years old your children and grandchildren all wanted to leave, would you vote remain?

[Helicopter123]

don'tbesilly said:

Anyone/everyone is 'well respected' as long as their opinion tallies with Helicopter

Sir John Curtice is a very well respected academic and pollster. Are you suggesting otherwise?

[T0MMY]

gooner1 said:

I hate to break it to you at this late stage, but the Leavers actually did win.
Peace out.

Ah you got me there, that wasn't a simple mistake, I actually don't even know which way the vote went

[T0MMY]

TaylotS2K said:

If you were 75 years old your children and grandchildren all wanted to leave, would you vote remain?

No, I would vote leave.

[Jazzy Jag]

T0MMY said:

Vanden Saab said:

You really don't see it do you. IMHO there are three reasons why people do not want a second referendum.
1. What we voted for and what was promised in the first one hasn't been given to us yet.
2. If the result was the other way you can bet there wouldn't be another one.
3. We had to wait over 40 years for a chance to vote again, Why should you get another one within 3 years.
I would be happy to have a referendum on whether to leave with or without a deal but that is not what you want is it?

I suppose from my perspective, I consider this far and away the most important decision this country has made in my lifetime and it needs to be correct. I dare say you're right about there not being another vote if remain had won but then of course remaining doesn't carry the same level of implication. You could always have another vote to leave in the future but you couldn't have another vote to re-enter with the arrangement we currently have.

We all know a lot more about brexit now and I also dare say voter engagement would be higher after the last couple of years of wrangling. If the majority of the country genuinely want to remain at this point then why are we leaving? If the majority don't want to remain still then a second vote will just confirm the outcome without a shadow of a doubt, and permanently shut the "remoaniacs" up.

You don't think that the democratic will of the people isn't "correct"?

What would have been correct?

You also assume that the EU will be still around in a few years

[jjlynn27]

Murph7355 said:

You appear to be under the impression that people's political views don't change as they age.

No bubbles are important, including yours and any other demographic split people care to mention by way of justification for things not going their way. The only thing that matters is the result. Your bubble were in the majority. If they'd used all their intelligence and expertise to put forward a good case for the benefits of the EU, they might not be sulking into their souffles right now

My bold.

You keep repeating that same 'put good case for the benefits of the EU line' and it's disingenuous. You had decades of conditioning that the bad EU is responsible for pretty much everything bad that's happened in their lives.

Random images;



Coupled with the 'zomg immigrants' pitching any economic benefit didn't stand a chance.

People's political views might change, but, as per Ashcroft's poll, the division was more along the lines of old vs young, educated vs three-day-certificate-of-attendance, successful vs less-so and not along Lab vs Con. After all, both far left and far right were voting leave.

That picture from 'leave means leave' is hardly surprising.

But you knew all that anyway.