Brexit, Today is the Vote!

a reply to: ScepticScot

We don't need polls. We had a people's vote. Polls before the People's vote also said Remain was preferred. They were incorrect.
What do you think was wrong with the 1st vote? Why are you disregarding the ACTUAL vote of the people for polls (by the way that link is a nonsense - it shows a trend view of a collection of different online polls over time).

If we have a second vote and it goes for Leave also, would it be best out of 5?
If a second vote went Remain, it's 1-1. What then? Should we have another one just to be sure?

Your link, spurious as it is, shows 21% of people undecided - at least that is not surprising given the # show Theresa May has made of Brexit.
In your poll, a minority of people want to Remain - 44%. Even if we take your poll at face value, you want a second vote because a minority of people are calling for it?

It's really quite simple. We've had the People's vote. There is no need for a do over.

If there was a 2nd vote the only options should be:

1) Leave with no deal
2) Continue to negotiate the exit.

Remaining in the EU should not even be on the table. Only enemies of democracy want that.

a reply to: UKTruth

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

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.

Oh yeah, I forgot.

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.

a reply to: UKTruth

Easily done.

If we have a second referendum on EU membership then the people of Scotland will demand the same opportunity regards Scottish independence.

What is the point of having a referendum on anything if the result is not going to be accepted by those in power? The people of Ireland went through the same nonsense.

Those calling for a second referendum have no right to do so.

a reply to: Freeborn

We should have a General Election in which the question would be "Do you want Corbyn to be in charge and end up a bankrupt third world country and a satellite of Russia, or not?"

a reply to: midicon

The point of having a second referendum is because they did not get their own way and we must keep on voting until they do because they know what's best for us and we don't.

a reply to: oldcarpy

a reply to: Flavian

Good to see more converts to my way of thinking.

It's been suggested that we;
1. Place the severed heads of all the guilty parties to this farce on spikes on Westminster Bridge.
2. Hang all guilty parties from London Bridge.

In addition its been proposed that we burn Westminster to the ground with all who infest the place secured inside.

a reply to: Freeborn

Harsh, but fair. Seems only reasonable.

originally posted by: Freeborn


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

Not necessarily. For example (not that i really support the idea of another referendum) it could ask us if we favour a Customs Union in a deal or not, whether freedom of movement is a good idea or not, etc. At least then nobody in Parliament could argue what the people actually want from Brexit and would give them an indication of what the negotiating strategy should be. If, say, the majority want a Customs Union in some form it puts to bed the "No Deal" scenario (or vice-versa if most people favour no).

I agree though that it should not be another referendum on membership of the EU in any way, shape or form - i conced that has already been decided, as an arch remainer!

a reply to: oldcarpy

aye they just sit and blame each other instead of talking about brexit !

now they are crying about "abuse" of parliamentarians

and wanting the police to "protect " them from abuse because someone was called a # today on the steps of parliament OH WOW
what a shame , how can they go on with their lives !
Abuse is callign 10 years of austerity on the public , where is our justice !

calling someone a name is not illegal and I dont know why MP's think they are somehow able to be free from public scrutiny
public scrutiny can be critical assessment of government policy or it can be name calling !

a reply to: oldcarpy

There should be another option on a General Election ballot paper; Vote for none of the above.
Imagine the chaos if millions of us voted for that option for the simple reason that none of them are fit to serve office.

a reply to: Freeborn

this is the only solution for me

neither the government or the EU have our best interests at heart
so surely we could boot them both to the curb!

a reply to: Freeborn

In addition its been proposed that we burn Westminster to the ground with all who infest the place secured inside.

I think the better option is fumigation , it's a beautiful building not deserving of destruction.

May I suggest reviving the old tradition of hanging , drawing and quartering the worst offenders.

a reply to: sapien82

I don't think that they are getting nearly enough abuse.

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 !

a reply to: sapien82

As you know I viewed Brexit as an opportunity to rid ourselves not only of the undemocratic EU Commissars but also at the same time start the process of reforming our electoral and parliamentary procedures.

Unfortunately we concentrated on the few issues that divide us rather than the many that unite us.

Both systems are rotten to the core....we have more chance of changing our domestic processes than we do have of reforming the EU.

But its not going to happen.....people would rather bicker and moan and do nothing than unite and fight together in the hope of effecting real and positive change.

a reply to: gortex

......it's a beautiful building not deserving of destruction.

Yes, it is beautiful.....but its what it represents.

May I suggest reviving the old tradition of hanging , drawing and quartering the worst offenders.

I think that's a worthy addition to the list of options that should be available to us.

a reply to: oldcarpy

I don't think that they are getting nearly enough abuse.

Indeed!
A rallying and uniting point for us all.

I think the British people have been far too muted in expressing our dissatisfaction of our elected representatives.
Surely both sides can see the them for the abject failures and self-aggrandising, careerist egotists the vast majority of them clearly are.

I really can't put into words the full measure of the disgust and contempt I have for them.

We should be rallying and protesting about them and the system they maintain!

a reply to: sapien82

Here here that man!

originally posted by: UKTruth
a reply to: ScepticScot

We don't need polls. We had a people's vote. Polls before the People's vote also said Remain was preferred. They were incorrect.
What do you think was wrong with the 1st vote? Why are you disregarding the ACTUAL vote of the people for polls (by the way that link is a nonsense - it shows a trend view of a collection of different online polls over time).

If we have a second vote and it goes for Leave also, would it be best out of 5?
If a second vote went Remain, it's 1-1. What then? Should we have another one just to be sure?

Your link, spurious as it is, shows 21% of people undecided - at least that is not surprising given the # show Theresa May has made of Brexit.
In your poll, a minority of people want to Remain - 44%. Even if we take your poll at face value, you want a second vote because a minority of people are calling for it?

It's really quite simple. We've had the People's vote. There is no need for a do over.

If there was a 2nd vote the only options should be:

1) Leave with no deal
2) Continue to negotiate the exit.

Remaining in the EU should not even be on the table. Only enemies of democracy want that.

Because as already explained it has been over 2 years (almost 3 by time we leave). Since the last referendum. The idea we are somehow irrevocably tied to a decision made then is what's fundamentally undemocratic.

Describing people disagree with you as 'enemies of democracy' doesn't support your case at all.