How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 8)

[anonymous-user]

Pan Pan Pan said:

Roman Rhodes said:

Pan Pan Pan said:

But this would then require a third vote, since one win for leave, and one for remain would certainly not settle the issue, especially if the margins were the same for the second vote as they were for the first.
A second and third referendum would serve to delay any kind of certainty even further, and would be in no ones interest. Or do we just do what the EU does, and make people vote again and again until the result the `EU' wants comes up, at which point all further voting for the public would be banned.
I still find all the fuss over the 2016 referendum odd, especially as not a single UK citizen voted, or was even given the chance to vote on whether or not they wanted the UK to be a member of the EU in the first place.

You're veering into 'making stuff up' territory. I'm not commenting on the merits of a second referendum let alone a third. How you can claim "would then require a third vote" I don't know - unless you're trivialising referenda to the level of coin-flipping.
Your point about "what the EU does" is rubbish - and I hope you know it. You do buy into fake news somewhat though (Ford/EU/Turkey).

Do you seriously believe that those who voted to leave in 2016 would accept the results of a second referendum if it showed a win for remain, especially if the results were at similar percentages to those of the first? . Why would the result of a second referendum be any more valid, than the result of the first one in 2016?
In any situation where the result of two votes is a stalemate with one win for each side, the only option is to hold a third and deciding vote, or better still do not have a second vote at all, and act democratically by properly abiding by the result of the first one.
As for all the other stuff about the EU you have your view, and I have mine, You will no more convince me that being in the EU is good for the UK as a whole, any more than I can convince you that it has been bad for the UK so there is not really much point in even trying, especially as the only input anyone has had on the matter was when they put their x in box in the 2016 referendum..

Quite patently those who vote leave the first time and voted remain the second time would accept the result if it was a majority to remain. Aside from that, do you know what the basis of a second referendum would be? No, I thought not. Suppose it was based on UK remaining in the EU unless 60% vote leave?

Makes your coin flipping proposal rather redundant.

[anonymous-user]

amusingduck said:

Roman Rhodes said:

amusingduck said:

I don't mind who's saying it, it's the logic I'm interested in.

You'll see that I changed my reply as I wasn't sure what point you were making. I think the "logic" has been covered extensively so why ask the question? As I've already said, I'm not arguing the merits of a second referendum. On the point in question (a third referendum) I was making the simple point that the reason for a second referendum (whether it is a good or bad reason doesn't matter) doesn't necessarily have to also apply to the second referendum so that a third takes place. The logic being applied was the same as flipping coins - best of X (X being an odd number). Seem rather simplistic and unrealistic - might as well have best of 5 or 7, 9, 11 whatever...

The logic has been covered extensively - as far as I can see there's no argument which justifies a second referendum but would not equally justify a third.

In which case, if a second referendum can be justified, and those arguments equally apply to a third, and it's now 1-1, there's no basis to deny a third.

There won't be a third, either way, I think. But the unjust double standards will be (even more) plain to see.

Or as PM has already said, we MUST implement what people want in 2016 but we MUST NOT implement what people want in 2019? The consistent inconsistency of Leavers yet again!

[Helicopter123]

andymadmak said:

Helicopter123 said:

It is a fact that demographics move in favour of remain - older pro-brexit voters are dying, and new pre-remain voters are joining the electoral role. This has been a milder winter but even so demographics have continued to improve.

and younger voters get older and change their minds.... but we have been through this umpteen times.

Helicopter123 said:

This time around, scrutiny on leave will be intense and any lies told will be exposed.

I agree, and that will apply to both sides. Do you genuinely believe that the Remain camp will be allowed to get away unchallenged with the tripe they threw around last time?
And while we are at it, do you think Remain will be allowed a £9 million pound campaign boost in the form of a free letter to every household, at the exclusion of similar funding for Brexit?

Helicopter123 said:

In many ways, this is the direct opposite of 2016 when remain were under huge scrutiny, and leave could (and did) get away with spouting any old nonsense.

As I said both sides will be subjected to more scrutiny and that is a very good thing. So what do you imagine the Remain position will be in regards to our future participation in the EU (in the event of a Remain win). Do all Remain voters want the same thing? Do you know what you are voting for (not least because even now, what some thought they were voting for in 2016 has already been superseded - Mr Clegg in particular must be feeling very embarrassed about his accusation that Mr Farage was lying about an EU army....

Helicopter123 said:

We've also had three years now of understanding just how bad Brexit would be, while no-one has been able to make a positive case for it, other than a few who think chlorinated chicken is a benefit.

Oh you had to go and spoil it with this silliness. There have been many positive reasons offered for Brexit, as you well know. That you don't agree with them does not make them any less valid. What has been genuinely lacking over the past five years has been any genuine positive reason to remain articulated by even the most ardent Remainers beyond 'we're all going to suffer horribly if we even so much as vote to leave' - which as you must surely concede has been thoroughly trashed as an idea!

Helicopter123 said:

Remain will win very easily.

I admire your optimism and blind faith. Reality might bite you though

Edited to add, The only positive thing about a second referendum would be that there must surely be massive pressure on the Govt. to prepare credible plans for a Brexit result?

Edited by andymadmak on Thursday 28th February 16:00

There is zero evidence to support your view the opinions on Brexit change as people get older.

Remain will centre around the status quo - the deal we have as negotiated by Thatcher and Major, with the Veto, Rebate and opt-outs from Schengen and the Euro.

For me, the four freedoms are far more important than anything put forward by the 'leave' campaign.

[Allanv]

Roman Rhodes said:

amusingduck said:

Roman Rhodes said:

amusingduck said:

I don't mind who's saying it, it's the logic I'm interested in.

You'll see that I changed my reply as I wasn't sure what point you were making. I think the "logic" has been covered extensively so why ask the question? As I've already said, I'm not arguing the merits of a second referendum. On the point in question (a third referendum) I was making the simple point that the reason for a second referendum (whether it is a good or bad reason doesn't matter) doesn't necessarily have to also apply to the second referendum so that a third takes place. The logic being applied was the same as flipping coins - best of X (X being an odd number). Seem rather simplistic and unrealistic - might as well have best of 5 or 7, 9, 11 whatever...

The logic has been covered extensively - as far as I can see there's no argument which justifies a second referendum but would not equally justify a third.

In which case, if a second referendum can be justified, and those arguments equally apply to a third, and it's now 1-1, there's no basis to deny a third.

There won't be a third, either way, I think. But the unjust double standards will be (even more) plain to see.

Or as PM has already said, we MUST implement what people want in 2016 but we MUST NOT implement what people want in 2019? The consistent inconsistency of Leavers yet again!

Did I miss where anything has been asked in 2019? I certainly have not changed my mind since 2016 if you have then great. Fill your boots with the hatred you seem to have.

Being so angry all the time will result in either mental health issues or a heart attack, it is your choice.

[SpeckledJim]

andymadmak said:

Edited to add, The only positive thing about a second referendum would be that there must surely be massive pressure on the Govt. to prepare credible plans for a Brexit result?

Edited by andymadmak on Thursday 28th February 16:00

We've had post-modern, post-9/11, post-Leicester City 2015-16. If we have a second referendum we enter the post-commitment epoch and all pressure is off everyone to do bloody anything.

[wc98]

SpeckledJim said:

If I remember right I got about 2/1 on Leave a couple of minutes after the Sunderland result on the referendum night.



Pollsters & Bookies 0 : 1 A Pigeon

i got 11/4 the day before. sure it was as high as 6-1 at one point. i thought i would get better odds by waiting,doh.

[wc98]

TriumphStag3.0V8 said:

SpeckledJim said:

Think you missed my sarcasm. Maybe read a bit more of the thread before breaking-out the swears?

I did miss the sarcasm and i apologise. I have ammended the post.

good job, on the positive side you are the winner of the npe largest whoosh parrot 2019 award. it might be the earliest month of the year that title has been won as well, so take a bow

[SunsetZed]

Helicopter123 said:

SunsetZed said:

Helicopter123 said:

toppstuff said:

Robertj21a said:

I'm still finding it quite difficult to see how Remain could possibly increase their 48% at all. Surely, it's far more likely that Leave would increase slightly.

We just seem to be wasting valuable time before we get out once and for all.

Here is one theory

https://www.wired.co.uk/article/brexit-second-refe...

Yes, that tallies with my own thinking, a demographic shift has happened.

New voters are very pro-remain, while the elderly are pro-leave.

Equally however, I sense that many who voted leave were sold a false prospectus. Greater scrutiny this time around on leave would prevent a repeat of the lies form 2016. I think Remain will poll 60% +

That's because, and I'm basing this on your other posts, you're either unbelievably blinkered in your view or just trying to get a response.

Either way I firmly do not believe that remain would poll 60% and would love to pay off my mortgage. How big a bet would you like to put on this?

I don't gamble by choice, but I'm sure a bookmaker will gladly take your money.

It is a fact that demographics move in favour of remain - older pro-brexit voters are dying, and new pre-remain voters are joining the electoral role. This has been a milder winter but even so demographics have continued to improve.

This time around, scrutiny on leave will be intense and any lies told will be exposed. In many ways, this is the direct opposite of 2016 when remain were under huge scrutiny, and leave could (and did) get away with spouting any old nonsense.

We've also had three years now of understanding just how bad Brexit would be, while no-one has been able to make a positive case for it, other than a few who think chlorinated chicken is a benefit.

Remain will win very easily.

Somehow I doubt that if we get a second referendum and the question is remain or leave I'll find a bookmaker who'll offer me even's on remain getting 60% of the vote. If you find one though please let me know as it'll help my financial planning significantly, please note generally I also don't gamble by choice but if this was available I'd make an exception.

[anonymous-user]

Pan Pan Pan said:

PurpleMoonlight said:

Pan Pan Pan said:

Do you seriously believe that those who voted to leave in 2016 would accept the results of a second referendum if it showed a win for remain, especially if the results were at similar percentages to those of the first? . Why would the result of a second referendum be any more valid, than the result of the first one in 2016?

They are both equally valid.

The 2016 reflected the consensus of the people in 2016.

The 2019 would reflect the consensus of the people in 2019.

If the 2019 was different to the 2016 why should the 2016 be implemented?

Why should the result of the 2016 referendum be ignored in the first place?
I am all for another referendum on the UK`s membership of the EU, but only when the result of the first one has been democratically enacted upon. Say in 40 years time, when people have had the chance to see what it is like outside the EU. that way they can make a truly informed decision on whether being in or out is best for the UK.
If the result of the first (2016) referendum is ignored, why should anyone take any notice of the result of a second referendum?

Ignored? Have you been in a coma for the last two and a half years (lucky you if so!)?

Despite what you might think about sabotage by Remainers (yes, I'm putting words in your mouth) the total inability of Team Leave to plan before and after the referendum how leave actually looks and works has led us to the point where it looks like the options are st or double st. Sometimes people do conclude that flogging dead horses is not worthwhile you know? It doesn't happen in the various volumes of these threads of course which is why we've gone from "easy trade deals, they need us, worldwide deals ready to go on Day Leave +1" etc. to "oh we ALL knew there would be some pain, its not about money you idiot, nothing wrong with people losing their jobs and houses".

[AJL308]

jsf said:

alfie2244 said:

And yet they know your voter registration number from which, I believe they can also obtain your identifying information such as your date of birth and national insurance number etc, .........just in case a apparently?

There is nothing on the ballot paper to identify you.

Who attends to vote is logged via your electoral register info, which is how they stop you voting multiple times or voting illegally.

Yes, there is. There is a serial number on the back. The serial number is also on the counterfoil in the book of ballot papers from where your ballot paper came from. I'm sure that the counterfoil gets your details written on it.

[Piha]

SunsetZed said:

Somehow I doubt that if we get a second referendum and the question is remain or leave I'll find a bookmaker who'll offer me even's on remain getting 60% of the vote. If you find one though please let me know as it'll help my financial planning significantly, please note generally I also don't gamble by choice but if this was available I'd make an exception.

How much are you talking about here?

[wc98]

London424 said:

But I don't think there are the numbers to vote for another referendum.

And then what happens if the outcome is leave...we are a year down the road and still in the same boat.

i agree, but when did kicking the can ever worry a bunch of politicians.

[wc98]

SpeckledJim said:

You're approaching the Event Horizon of a conversation with H123. Go very steady.

your sense of humour is another star of these discussions , imo. don't ever let it change

[TheDonald]

wc98 said:

London424 said:

But I don't think there are the numbers to vote for another referendum.

And then what happens if the outcome is leave...we are a year down the road and still in the same boat.

i agree, but when did kicking the can ever worry a bunch of politicians.

The thought of this dragging on even longer fills me with dread, if somebody said to me they could end it all today I really wouldn't care if that was in or out or somewhere in-between, I just want it over.

[wc98]

Tycho said:

gothatway said:

On a lighter note, what would you all like to see writ large on the side of a bus in a second referendum campaign ?

"It's not sciatica, he's pissed."

if there is a second referendum i will personally pay to have that on the side of a bus for a week

[youngsyr]

Earthdweller said:

https://order-order.com/

https://www.facebook.com/160128910791789/posts/132...

George Eustace resigns from the Govt

Interesting resignation letter

Am I missing something, or is there a critical and new piece of information in that letter:

George Eustice MP said:

...We already know that in the event of "no deal" the EU will seek an informal transition period for nine months in many areas..."

That's news to me - he's effectively saying that there would never be a cliff edge in a no deal situation as the EU have already informally agreed to a nine month extension period even with no deal?

[CrutyRammers]

Camoradi said:

gothatway said:

On a lighter note, what would you all like to see writ large on the side of a bus in a second referendum campaign ?

"Don't worry if you miss this referendum, there will be another one along soon"

This deserved more recognition

[Crackie]

SpeckledJim said:

Helicopter123 said:

I don't gamble by choice, but I'm sure a bookmaker will gladly take your money.

It is a fact that demographics move in favour of remain - older pro-brexit voters are dying, and new pre-remain voters are joining the electoral role. This has been a milder winter but even so demographics have continued to improve.

This time around, scrutiny on leave will be intense and any lies told will be exposed. In many ways, this is the direct opposite of 2016 when remain were under huge scrutiny, and leave could (and did) get away with spouting any old nonsense.

We've also had three years now of understanding just how bad Brexit would be, while no-one has been able to make a positive case for it, other than a few who think chlorinated chicken is a benefit.

Remain will win very easily.

If you wound it back a bit you'd get a lot more bites and it could actually be quite good fun.

Good post.

[PositronicRay]

TheDonald said:

wc98 said:

London424 said:

But I don't think there are the numbers to vote for another referendum.

And then what happens if the outcome is leave...we are a year down the road and still in the same boat.

i agree, but when did kicking the can ever worry a bunch of politicians.

The thought of this dragging on even longer fills me with dread, if somebody said to me they could end it all today I really wouldn't care if that was in or out or somewhere in-between, I just want it over.

You're not alone there.

[anonymous-user]

Red Devil said:

While we're at it why not change the rules for General Elections? If the result is a narrow win for X, Y can have a moan/rant and call for a fresh ballot.
If/when Y wins by an equally narrow margin, X can do likewise.

A question for PurpleMoonlight: would you throw your support behind this proposal. If not, why not?

In what way is that a proposal? - it is the present position. Nothing to do with "rules".