Brexit, Today is the Vote!

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: UKTruth

You are forgetting that Brexiteers are all ignorant racist bigots who did not understand what we were voting for. Etc.

Just trying to catch up here....I am assuming you are just being sarcastic yes?

originally posted by: Freeborn
a reply to: ScepticScot

..... which is why we need another referendum.

Why?

I've asked this question several times now and no-one has answered it with sufficient clarity; What was wrong with the first referendum?
Was it undemocratic?
Was it illegal?
Was it mis-leading?

If, heaven forbid, we do have another referendum why will this be any more democratic and if the vote is for Remain will you honour Brexit supporters claims for a third and deciding referendum?

If there is another referendum the options should be to support the government recommended deal or exit with No Deal, pretty simple really.

Because it is fast approaching 3 years ago and we don't need to be bound by that decision.

There are more new voters alone than the margin between leave/remain redirected get onti another
Demographic changes or people just plain being allowed to.change their mind.

If the majority of people oppose leaving do you really think we should still leave based on a vote from 3 years back?

a reply to: ScepticScot

It was clear at the time it would be a lengthy exit.
You're not making any sense.

Do you support a 3rd referendum if we have a second one? How many do we need?

Once again, we had a people's vote. It was a fair Democratic vote.

No deal vs Extend the negotiations for the exit would be a fair question to ask... but NOT another vote on whether we leave the EU.

If anyone is interested I have written a thread similar to this on the impending vote tonight regarding the vote of no confidence.

Link

We had a good bit of chat and banter over this last night, hope we can do the same again.

originally posted by: sapien82
a reply to: oldcarpy

this is what I couldnt fathom, ABUSE she cries in parliament ABUSE

what the actual # ?

Right so we arent allowed to call PM's names for their terrible decisions
or putting families into poverty , taking us into wars, making us bail out banks at our expense.

The eejits need to look up the definition of abuse

1.
use (something) to bad effect or for a bad purpose; misuse.
"the judge abused his power by imposing the fines"
synonyms: misuse, misapply, misemploy, mishandle; More
2.
treat with cruelty or violence, especially regularly or repeatedly.
"riders who abuse their horses should be prosecuted"
synonyms: mistreat, maltreat, ill-treat, treat badly, ill-use, misuse; More


Calling someone a name is not abuse , its not cruel or violent

cruelty requires causing pain or suffering to others, suffering , yeh I dont think anyone really suffers being called a #

abuse , so is name calling a misuse of language , foul words are they considered a misuse of language, No because they wouldnt exist if they were a misuse

Abuse , is government imposed austerity for a decade
abuse is pushing those deemed medically unfit to work into work
abuse is forcing families into food banks
abuse is not giving people their benefits
abuse is bailing out banks with tax payers money
abuse is stealing from the public coffers

all of the above perpetrated by government

I think anyone who has been in government and found to be undemocractic , should be exiled
just like Aristotle , those who are against the UK and the will of the people , should be exiled !

The abuse statement was made in relation to actual death threats made towards MPs.

An extension of the kind of idiotic thinking that calls people with opposing views enemies of the people ETC.

Some (maybe many) MPs are undoubtedly self serving dicks. However why would any decent person want to get into politics as we decent further and further into personal abuse and actual threats against people based on differing political positions.

a reply to: angelchemuel

Yes, you assume correctly.

originally posted by: UKTruth
a reply to: ScepticScot

It was clear at the time it would be a lengthy exit.
You're not making any sense.

Do you support a 3rd referendum if we have a second one? How many do we need?

Once again, we had a people's vote. It was a fair Democratic vote.

No deal vs Extend the negotiations for the exit would be a fair question to ask... but NOT another vote on whether we leave the EU.

Nice slipply slope argument.

None of which invalidates that both electorate itself has changed and people are allowed to change their minds.

Do you think we should leave if the majority want to stay?

a reply to: ScepticScot

If the majority of people oppose leaving do you really think we should still leave based on a vote from 3 years back?

According to whom, exactly?

a reply to: ScepticScot

Its called democracy.

We had a referendum, the people voted.
The politicians have failed to enact the result of that referendum.

Was the last referendum undemocratic?
Was it illegal?
Was it misleading?

If the answer to all three is No then surely there is no moral or ethical reason why the result of that referendum should be conveniently ignored.

New voters?
There's new voters every single day.....does that invalidate every election we have?
My constituency is represented by a Labour MP, with all the new eligible voters since the last election she might not have a mandate so should we have another election just to make sure?

There is absolutely no legal precedence in the UK for ignoring the result of a democratically held referendum.....neither is their any moral or ethical reason to do so.

And again; if, heaven forbid, there is another referendum and it went in favour of Remain would you and other Remainers support Brexit calls for a third and deciding referendum?
If not, why not?
What would be different about this referendum than the first referendum?

a reply to: ScepticScot

You are the one on a slippy slope.

So, we have a general election. The Govt get in, then 6 months later they are behind in the polls. According to you, time for another general election, no?

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Freeborn
a reply to: ScepticScot

..... which is why we need another referendum.

Why?

I've asked this question several times now and no-one has answered it with sufficient clarity; What was wrong with the first referendum?
Was it undemocratic?
Was it illegal?
Was it mis-leading?

If, heaven forbid, we do have another referendum why will this be any more democratic and if the vote is for Remain will you honour Brexit supporters claims for a third and deciding referendum?

If there is another referendum the options should be to support the government recommended deal or exit with No Deal, pretty simple really.

Because it was fast approaching 3 years ago and we don't need to be bound by that decision.

There are more new voters alone than the margin between leave/remain redirected get onti another
Demographic changes or people just plain being allowed to.change their mind.

If the majority of people oppose leaving do you really think we should still leave based on a vote from 3 years back?

Crazy - More people have reached voting age so we should vote again????
Maybe we should change MP's every few months depending on the flow of people reaching 18... or people changing their minds.
What happens if we stay in the EU and then change our minds again - another vote? Maybe we have one every 2 years and when we vote to leave, which takes 2 years, have another one and then keep going forever in a state of chaos.
Maybe this whole democracy thing is just a bad idea and we should just do as we're told by Brussels...

What a nonsense. It seems you just don't want to accept the People's vote.

Thanks for the laugh, though. I have heard some crazy excuses for a 2nd referendum, but yours is the funniest by far.

originally posted by: UKTruth
a reply to: ScepticScot

It was clear at the time it would be a lengthy exit.
You're not making any sense.

Do you support a 3rd referendum if we have a second one? How many do we need?

Once again, we had a people's vote. It was a fair Democratic vote.

No deal vs Extend the negotiations for the exit would be a fair question to ask... but NOT another vote on whether we leave the EU.

Wl what was the verdict and will it be done?????

I'm out of the loop... And what of the Scott's?.
Update please

As Johnny Rotten was performing the last Sex Pistols gig (I believe in New York) he asked the audience:

"Ever get the feeling you've been had?"

May and her husband are nothing but money-grabbers. She has been "negotiating" for 2.5 years and this is the best she had?

British politics, much like other nations is ruled by greed, cronyism and lies. BREXIT!!!

You know I think it is unfortunate that this thread has defended into a debate about a second referendum.

I think that are good arguments to be made on both sides but it does annoy me when people make the absurd argument that its undemocratic to have a second vote.

For me personally I would support a second referendum and I think that there are some sound arguments for it but like I have said before am not really all that interested in getting into them when a second referendum isn't something that looks like its going to be happening any time soon.

What I would add to this though is simply an article.

Its up to individuals if they want to read it or not but I will link to it anyway.

The great British Brexit robbery: how our democracy was hijacked

No I don't expect it to change any minds just give some perspective as to why some question the validity of the first vote.

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask

originally posted by: UKTruth
a reply to: ScepticScot

It was clear at the time it would be a lengthy exit.
You're not making any sense.

Do you support a 3rd referendum if we have a second one? How many do we need?

Once again, we had a people's vote. It was a fair Democratic vote.

No deal vs Extend the negotiations for the exit would be a fair question to ask... but NOT another vote on whether we leave the EU.

Wl what was the verdict and will it be done?????

I'm out of the loop... And what of the Scott's?.
Update please

May's deal was rejected.
Here's what you need to know.

As of now we have no deal.
A deal is not required to leave the EU.
By law, implemented last year, we officially leave with no deal on the 29th March.
There is now a vote of no confidence in the Govt because they screwed up the exit so badly - If May loses that today we're headed for a General election.
Remainers are using the Govt's mess to try and wrangle a way to stay in the EU and over ride the Referendum.

The Scots are for remain, but they are bound to the decision by the whole UK. Talk of them leaving the UK is still floating around (which would completely cripple their country far more so than leaving the EU, so not sure why any Scot would want this).

a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

We voted to leave. No one cares about the Scots because they just whinge all the time. Mind the Gappe.

originally posted by: Freeborn
a reply to: ScepticScot

Its called democracy.

We had a referendum, the people voted.
The politicians have failed to enact the result of that referendum.

Was the last referendum undemocratic?
Was it illegal?
Was it misleading?

If the answer to all three is No then surely there is no moral or ethical reason why the result of that referendum should be conveniently ignored.

New voters?
There's new voters every single day.....does that invalidate every election we have?
My constituency is represented by a Labour MP, with all the new eligible voters since the last election she might not have a mandate so should we have another election just to make sure?

There is absolutely no legal precedence in the UK for ignoring the result of a democratically held referendum.....neither is their any moral or ethical reason to do so.

And again; if, heaven forbid, there is another referendum and it went in favour of Remain would you and other Remainers support Brexit calls for a third and deciding referendum?
If not, why not?
What would be different about this referendum than the first referendum?

Already answered, we are in no way legally or morally bound by a vote almost 3 years redirected event.

New voters don't invalidate elections, but we do keep having elections. There was only 2 years between last 2.

If the majority of people want to stay in the EU do you think we should still leave?

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Freeborn
a reply to: ScepticScot

..... which is why we need another referendum.

Why?

I've asked this question several times now and no-one has answered it with sufficient clarity; What was wrong with the first referendum?
Was it undemocratic?
Was it illegal?
Was it mis-leading?

If, heaven forbid, we do have another referendum why will this be any more democratic and if the vote is for Remain will you honour Brexit supporters claims for a third and deciding referendum?

If there is another referendum the options should be to support the government recommended deal or exit with No Deal, pretty simple really.

Because it was fast approaching 3 years ago and we don't need to be bound by that decision.

There are more new voters alone than the margin between leave/remain redirected get onti another
Demographic changes or people just plain being allowed to.change their mind.

If the majority of people oppose leaving do you really think we should still leave based on a vote from 3 years back?

Crazy - More people have reached voting age so we should vote again????
Maybe we should change MP's every few months depending on the flow of people reaching 18... or people changing their minds.
What happens if we stay in the EU and then change our minds again - another vote? Maybe we have one every 2 years and when we vote to leave, which takes 2 years, have another one and then keep going forever in a state of chaos.
Maybe this whole democracy thing is just a bad idea and we should just do as we're told by Brussels...

What a nonsense. It seems you just don't want to accept the People's vote.

Thanks for the laugh, though. I have heard some crazy excuses for a 2nd referendum, but yours is the funniest by far.

Might be better if you replied to things I actually said rather than things you made up.

Same question again. Do you think we should leave the EU if the majority want to stay?

a reply to: ScepticScot

You can't just keep moving the goalposts to suit. There's your answer.

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask

originally posted by: UKTruth
a reply to: ScepticScot

It was clear at the time it would be a lengthy exit.
You're not making any sense.

Do you support a 3rd referendum if we have a second one? How many do we need?

Once again, we had a people's vote. It was a fair Democratic vote.

No deal vs Extend the negotiations for the exit would be a fair question to ask... but NOT another vote on whether we leave the EU.

Wl what was the verdict and will it be done?????

I'm out of the loop... And what of the Scott's?.
Update please

TLDR Version.

May lost her deal by the biggest margin in history 230 votes so right now we don't have a deal for leaving the EU.

The leader of the opposition then got up an motioned for a Vote of No Confidance in the Government

The vote is tonight at 19:00.

If the government lose, parliament have 14 days to form a new government, if they are unable or unwilling to do so then it goes to a General Election.

If the Government win then by Monday they have to come back to the house with some kind of new plan for Brexit, which could be anything from accepting no deal, extending (or revoking for that matter) article 50 or heading back to the EU to negotiate for something better.

us Scots are looking forward to the annual baby haggis hunt.