Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"52% also voted for a tolerant inclusive harmonious future with our European neighbours" Er? How do you make that out? 52% (of those who voted, not of the population or even the elctorate, but set that to one side for now) voted to leave the EU. Nowhere on the ballot paper did it ask what sort of future we would have. Nor if it should include Europe, or anywhere else for that matter. I'm sure you did vote for that, you're consistent in your approach in this forum, but to say that 52% did is a conclusion noone is able to draw. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"52% also voted for a tolerant inclusive harmonious future with our European neighbours Er? How do you make that out? 52% (of those who voted, not of the population or even the elctorate, but set that to one side for now) voted to leave the EU. Nowhere on the ballot paper did it ask what sort of future we would have. Nor if it should include Europe, or anywhere else for that matter. I'm sure you did vote for that, you're consistent in your approach in this forum, but to say that 52% did is a conclusion noone is able to draw." Yet you draw the conclusion that the rest of the voters who didnt vote and all the rest of the country wanted to stay  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"OP, "forced upon?" We voted to leave. I am afraid that staying would be the least democratic option." ..  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Prime Minister May truly has lost the plot if she truly thinks that the country should unite and move forwards at the same time as she pursues the most divisive action ever forced upon the citizens of this country in modern history. Leadership starts at the top and starts with doing as I do and not doing as I say. When PM May starts to act and speak in an inclusive way, then maybe the country will follow suit. I feel truly sorry for the the almost 50% of the voters who voted for tolerance, inclusiveness and a harmonious future with our close European neighbours in the EU and who are now being told that their ideals are wrong and they have to now get behind policies built on division and a warped sense of British superiority that is in all likelihood see their lives become very much poorer as a result. I say, stop talking bollocks Mrs May. You are out of your depth so please just get us quickly out of the EU with the hard Brexit that your UKIP wing of the Party wants and get the GBP down as quickly as possible to parity with the USD and let the pain begin." She is 100% correct so grow up | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"OP, "forced upon?" We voted to leave. I am afraid that staying would be the least democratic option." We elect Politicians to do the right thing and to have a bit more than a one dimensional train of thought. The referendum was divisive and the result was divisive because it was virtually 50/50. A good PM and good Politicians should be leading the way in trying to harmonise the population. Pursuing single mindedly a tiny majority opinion and not including other political parties in the Brexit negotiations will not end well for the PM or for the country. Anyone who truly believes that steamrollering almost 50% of the voting population into something that they don't want will end well, has no concept of politics and history. I don't accept PM Mays call for unity because she displays no desire for unity with her words and actions, but as I have said before, I think it is time that Brexiters had their day and we get out quick, hard and as painfully as possible. The very worst possible outcome now as far as I am concerned is that Brexit means leaving the EU and staying in the single market and the customs union. Fuck that. Out of everything, let the pound completely collapse to USD parity or lower and let the pain begin. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"52% also voted for a tolerant inclusive harmonious future with our European neighbours Er? How do you make that out? 52% (of those who voted, not of the population or even the elctorate, but set that to one side for now) voted to leave the EU. Nowhere on the ballot paper did it ask what sort of future we would have. Nor if it should include Europe, or anywhere else for that matter. I'm sure you did vote for that, you're consistent in your approach in this forum, but to say that 52% did is a conclusion noone is able to draw." We voted to leave the EU not Europe.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"52% also voted for a tolerant inclusive harmonious future with our European neighbours Er? How do you make that out? 52% (of those who voted, not of the population or even the elctorate, but set that to one side for now) voted to leave the EU. Nowhere on the ballot paper did it ask what sort of future we would have. Nor if it should include Europe, or anywhere else for that matter. I'm sure you did vote for that, you're consistent in your approach in this forum, but to say that 52% did is a conclusion noone is able to draw." Ok take the recent Richmond by election then, the Lib dem candidate who won there Sarah Olney got less than 50% of the overall vote on a 53% turnout. 47% of the population of Richmond didn't bother to vote so does that make her victory null and void or less valid? The overall turnout of the EU referendum was much higher on 70% turnout and the 52% who voted leave (17 and a half million people) is the biggest vote for anything ever in the entire history of the UK. As you well know each election/referendum is run on an agreed set of rules which all sides agree to before any votes are cast. If Remainers insist that Sarah Olney's victory for the Lib dems in Richmond is viable and all above board they must also agree that the EU referendum result is viable and above board. You can't have it both ways, and everyone knows the only votes that count in elections are the ones cast. If people have a vote but chose not to cast their vote then that's upto them and they can't complain about the result afterwards. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"OP, "forced upon?" We voted to leave. I am afraid that staying would be the least democratic option. We elect Politicians to do the right thing and to have a bit more than a one dimensional train of thought. The referendum was divisive and the result was divisive because it was virtually 50/50. A good PM and good Politicians should be leading the way in trying to harmonise the population. Pursuing single mindedly a tiny majority opinion and not including other political parties in the Brexit negotiations will not end well for the PM or for the country. Anyone who truly believes that steamrollering almost 50% of the voting population into something that they don't want will end well, has no concept of politics and history. I don't accept PM Mays call for unity because she displays no desire for unity with her words and actions, but as I have said before, I think it is time that Brexiters had their day and we get out quick, hard and as painfully as possible. The very worst possible outcome now as far as I am concerned is that Brexit means leaving the EU and staying in the single market and the customs union. Fuck that. Out of everything, let the pound completely collapse to USD parity or lower and let the pain begin." Would pursuing the minority option be better then? Mrs May is calling upon unity, yet you suggest the exact opposite. Would you prefer her to call upon disunity? I have no idea at all why you wish to see the pound collapse. It really is not a terribly logical post, OP. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"52% also voted for a tolerant inclusive harmonious future with our European neighbours Er? How do you make that out? 52% (of those who voted, not of the population or even the elctorate, but set that to one side for now) voted to leave the EU. Nowhere on the ballot paper did it ask what sort of future we would have. Nor if it should include Europe, or anywhere else for that matter. I'm sure you did vote for that, you're consistent in your approach in this forum, but to say that 52% did is a conclusion noone is able to draw. Ok take the recent Richmond by election then, the Lib dem candidate who won there Sarah Olney got less than 50% of the overall vote on a 53% turnout. 47% of the population of Richmond didn't bother to vote so does that make her victory null and void or less valid? The overall turnout of the EU referendum was much higher on 70% turnout and the 52% who voted leave (17 and a half million people) is the biggest vote for anything ever in the entire history of the UK. As you well know each election/referendum is run on an agreed set of rules which all sides agree to before any votes are cast. If Remainers insist that Sarah Olney's victory for the Lib dems in Richmond is viable and all above board they must also agree that the EU referendum result is viable and above board. You can't have it both ways, and everyone knows the only votes that count in elections are the ones cast. If people have a vote but chose not to cast their vote then that's upto them and they can't complain about the result afterwards. " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"OP, "forced upon?" We voted to leave. I am afraid that staying would be the least democratic option. We elect Politicians to do the right thing and to have a bit more than a one dimensional train of thought. The referendum was divisive and the result was divisive because it was virtually 50/50. A good PM and good Politicians should be leading the way in trying to harmonise the population. Pursuing single mindedly a tiny majority opinion and not including other political parties in the Brexit negotiations will not end well for the PM or for the country. Anyone who truly believes that steamrollering almost 50% of the voting population into something that they don't want will end well, has no concept of politics and history. I don't accept PM Mays call for unity because she displays no desire for unity with her words and actions, but as I have said before, I think it is time that Brexiters had their day and we get out quick, hard and as painfully as possible. The very worst possible outcome now as far as I am concerned is that Brexit means leaving the EU and staying in the single market and the customs union. Fuck that. Out of everything, let the pound completely collapse to USD parity or lower and let the pain begin." A tiny majority? The majority over Remain was over a million people. Leave got over a million more votes than Remain. That is not a tiny majority, and it wasn't 50/50, it was 52/48 in favour of Leave. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"OP, "forced upon?" We voted to leave. I am afraid that staying would be the least democratic option. We elect Politicians to do the right thing and to have a bit more than a one dimensional train of thought. The referendum was divisive and the result was divisive because it was virtually 50/50. A good PM and good Politicians should be leading the way in trying to harmonise the population. Pursuing single mindedly a tiny majority opinion and not including other political parties in the Brexit negotiations will not end well for the PM or for the country. Anyone who truly believes that steamrollering almost 50% of the voting population into something that they don't want will end well, has no concept of politics and history. I don't accept PM Mays call for unity because she displays no desire for unity with her words and actions, but as I have said before, I think it is time that Brexiters had their day and we get out quick, hard and as painfully as possible. The very worst possible outcome now as far as I am concerned is that Brexit means leaving the EU and staying in the single market and the customs union. Fuck that. Out of everything, let the pound completely collapse to USD parity or lower and let the pain begin." She is trying to unite the population by getting the best deal for the uk, politicians voted 6 to 1 to let the british people choose and they chose to leave your solution is to go against the majority and now you want tocause as much pain as possible, talk about a sore loser, you really need to grow up and stop acting like a spoiled child, if you dont like it then you have a recourse,that is get off your arse and start a new political party to campaign for us to rejoin ukieu, maybe in 40 years you can persuade the majority that you and the remoaners are right and we can have another referendum about rejoining, that is the correct way in a democracy to go about things | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"52% also voted for a tolerant inclusive harmonious future with our European neighbours Er? How do you make that out? 52% (of those who voted, not of the population or even the elctorate, but set that to one side for now) voted to leave the EU. Nowhere on the ballot paper did it ask what sort of future we would have. Nor if it should include Europe, or anywhere else for that matter. I'm sure you did vote for that, you're consistent in your approach in this forum, but to say that 52% did is a conclusion noone is able to draw. Yet you draw the conclusion that the rest of the voters who didnt vote and all the rest of the country wanted to stay "No, I don't, not in the post you reply to or elsewhere. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"52% also voted for a tolerant inclusive harmonious future with our European neighbours Er? How do you make that out? 52% (of those who voted, not of the population or even the elctorate, but set that to one side for now) voted to leave the EU. Nowhere on the ballot paper did it ask what sort of future we would have. Nor if it should include Europe, or anywhere else for that matter. I'm sure you did vote for that, you're consistent in your approach in this forum, but to say that 52% did is a conclusion noone is able to draw. Ok take the recent Richmond by election then, the Lib dem candidate who won there Sarah Olney got less than 50% of the overall vote on a 53% turnout. 47% of the population of Richmond didn't bother to vote so does that make her victory null and void or less valid? The overall turnout of the EU referendum was much higher on 70% turnout and the 52% who voted leave (17 and a half million people) is the biggest vote for anything ever in the entire history of the UK. As you well know each election/referendum is run on an agreed set of rules which all sides agree to before any votes are cast. If Remainers insist that Sarah Olney's victory for the Lib dems in Richmond is viable and all above board they must also agree that the EU referendum result is viable and above board. You can't have it both ways, and everyone knows the only votes that count in elections are the ones cast. If people have a vote but chose not to cast their vote then that's upto them and they can't complain about the result afterwards. " I'm not arguing with the result. I'm simply disagreeing with the first post at the top of the quote. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"52% also voted for a tolerant inclusive harmonious future with our European neighbours Er? How do you make that out? 52% (of those who voted, not of the population or even the elctorate, but set that to one side for now) voted to leave the EU. Nowhere on the ballot paper did it ask what sort of future we would have. Nor if it should include Europe, or anywhere else for that matter. I'm sure you did vote for that, you're consistent in your approach in this forum, but to say that 52% did is a conclusion noone is able to draw." Tell Ms Sturgeon the same thing she say 62% of Scottish votes voted to stay when in fact it was only 36% of eligible votes she is totally ignoring the 33% that voted leave. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"52% also voted for a tolerant inclusive harmonious future with our European neighbours Er? How do you make that out? 52% (of those who voted, not of the population or even the elctorate, but set that to one side for now) voted to leave the EU. Nowhere on the ballot paper did it ask what sort of future we would have. Nor if it should include Europe, or anywhere else for that matter. I'm sure you did vote for that, you're consistent in your approach in this forum, but to say that 52% did is a conclusion noone is able to draw. Yet you draw the conclusion that the rest of the voters who didnt vote and all the rest of the country wanted to stay
No, I don't, not in the post you reply to or elsewhere."You said 52% of those who voted wanted to leave You said that wasnt a percentage of the country thereby implying the rest did want to stay, well thats how I believe it to be meant | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"52% also voted for a tolerant inclusive harmonious future with our European neighbours Er? How do you make that out? 52% (of those who voted, not of the population or even the elctorate, but set that to one side for now) voted to leave the EU. Nowhere on the ballot paper did it ask what sort of future we would have. Nor if it should include Europe, or anywhere else for that matter. I'm sure you did vote for that, you're consistent in your approach in this forum, but to say that 52% did is a conclusion noone is able to draw. Yet you draw the conclusion that the rest of the voters who didnt vote and all the rest of the country wanted to stay
No, I don't, not in the post you reply to or elsewhere.
You said 52% of those who voted wanted to leave You said that wasnt a percentage of the country thereby implying the rest did want to stay, well thats how I believe it to be meant"Not at all, it's meant to say that it wasn't 52% of the UK, or even the electorate. Straightforward reading, no implication. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"OP, "forced upon?" We voted to leave. I am afraid that staying would be the least democratic option. We elect Politicians to do the right thing and to have a bit more than a one dimensional train of thought. The referendum was divisive and the result was divisive because it was virtually 50/50. A good PM and good Politicians should be leading the way in trying to harmonise the population. Pursuing single mindedly a tiny majority opinion and not including other political parties in the Brexit negotiations will not end well for the PM or for the country. Anyone who truly believes that steamrollering almost 50% of the voting population into something that they don't want will end well, has no concept of politics and history. I don't accept PM Mays call for unity because she displays no desire for unity with her words and actions, but as I have said before, I think it is time that Brexiters had their day and we get out quick, hard and as painfully as possible. The very worst possible outcome now as far as I am concerned is that Brexit means leaving the EU and staying in the single market and the customs union. Fuck that. Out of everything, let the pound completely collapse to USD parity or lower and let the pain begin. A tiny majority? The majority over Remain was over a million people. Leave got over a million more votes than Remain. That is not a tiny majority, and it wasn't 50/50, it was 52/48 in favour of Leave. " Hilary Clinton got nearly 3,000,000 more votes than Donald Trump. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Hilary Clinton got nearly 3,000,000 more votes than Donald Trump. " What on earth has that got to do with the referendum? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"OP, "forced upon?" We voted to leave. I am afraid that staying would be the least democratic option. We elect Politicians to do the right thing and to have a bit more than a one dimensional train of thought. The referendum was divisive and the result was divisive because it was virtually 50/50. A good PM and good Politicians should be leading the way in trying to harmonise the population. Pursuing single mindedly a tiny majority opinion and not including other political parties in the Brexit negotiations will not end well for the PM or for the country. Anyone who truly believes that steamrollering almost 50% of the voting population into something that they don't want will end well, has no concept of politics and history. I don't accept PM Mays call for unity because she displays no desire for unity with her words and actions, but as I have said before, I think it is time that Brexiters had their day and we get out quick, hard and as painfully as possible. The very worst possible outcome now as far as I am concerned is that Brexit means leaving the EU and staying in the single market and the customs union. Fuck that. Out of everything, let the pound completely collapse to USD parity or lower and let the pain begin. A tiny majority? The majority over Remain was over a million people. Leave got over a million more votes than Remain. That is not a tiny majority, and it wasn't 50/50, it was 52/48 in favour of Leave. Hilary Clinton got nearly 3,000,000 more votes than Donald Trump. " On an agreed set of rules for the electoral collage system which makes Donald Trump the legitimate winner. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" She is trying to unite the population by getting the best deal for the uk, politicians voted 6 to 1 to let the british people choose and they chose to leave your solution is to go against the majority and now you want tocause as much pain as possible, talk about a sore loser, you really need to grow up and stop acting like a spoiled child, if you dont like it then you have a recourse,that is get off your arse and start a new political party to campaign for us to rejoin ukieu, maybe in 40 years you can persuade the majority that you and the remoaners are right and we can have another referendum about rejoining, that is the correct way in a democracy to go about things" OK and once again. I do not accept that the referendum was the right thing to do and I don't accept that it was conducted on the right way and I don't think that the result is decisive enough to warrant the most radical change in British policy in recent history. That said, I suspected that this might happen and around this time last year I took measures to insulate myself against the effects of a Brexit vote and potentially and actual Brexit. My belief is that most "ordinary" Brexiters want a hard, fast and almost brutal exit from the EU and a complete 100% cut of all ties. So be it. I think you should have your day and you should have your vision play out and I am sure that good or bad consequences you will be celebrating your independanc from something that you were independent from anyway, My opinion of the consequences of such an action will be that the pound will dive again against the dollar, inflation will rise, tax receipts will fall, the Union of the UK will start to collapse and jobs will be lost. This chain of events will affect those who voted and championed the cause of Brexit the most - the "ordinary" working people of the Midlands and the North. I truly hope that I am wrong and that the world will come running into our arms with love, flowers and money and that Brexit creates a Utopia of 100% employment, high wages and low taxes for all. I suspect that won't happen as does every other EU and World leader and credible economist - but hey the people have spoke and they know best because if it is what they believe in, then it must be true. Cameron was a bell end for calling the referendum and May is prolonging the division by reacting to the call of the right wing of her party and dismissing almost 50% of those who voted. Both were/are wrong. I actually think that the EU will change in the next two years anyway and the entire reasons for leaving will be moot and the country will have gone through mayhem and division for nothing. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"OP, "forced upon?" We voted to leave. I am afraid that staying would be the least democratic option. We elect Politicians to do the right thing and to have a bit more than a one dimensional train of thought. The referendum was divisive and the result was divisive because it was virtually 50/50. A good PM and good Politicians should be leading the way in trying to harmonise the population. Pursuing single mindedly a tiny majority opinion and not including other political parties in the Brexit negotiations will not end well for the PM or for the country. Anyone who truly believes that steamrollering almost 50% of the voting population into something that they don't want will end well, has no concept of politics and history. I don't accept PM Mays call for unity because she displays no desire for unity with her words and actions, but as I have said before, I think it is time that Brexiters had their day and we get out quick, hard and as painfully as possible. The very worst possible outcome now as far as I am concerned is that Brexit means leaving the EU and staying in the single market and the customs union. Fuck that. Out of everything, let the pound completely collapse to USD parity or lower and let the pain begin. A tiny majority? The majority over Remain was over a million people. Leave got over a million more votes than Remain. That is not a tiny majority, and it wasn't 50/50, it was 52/48 in favour of Leave. Hilary Clinton got nearly 3,000,000 more votes than Donald Trump. On an agreed set of rules for the electoral collage system which makes Donald Trump the legitimate winner. " Ukip got over a million more votes than the SNP during the general election. Result, ukip = 1 MP SNP = over 50 MP's. As a Ukip voter/supporter I'm not crying about it or having temper tantrums, the general election result is what it is on an agreed set of rules so I accept it for what it is and life goes on. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Prime Minister May truly has lost the plot if she truly thinks that the country should unite and move forwards at the same time as she pursues the most divisive action ever forced upon the citizens of this country in modern history. Leadership starts at the top and starts with doing as I do and not doing as I say. When PM May starts to act and speak in an inclusive way, then maybe the country will follow suit. I feel truly sorry for the the almost 50% of the voters who voted for tolerance, inclusiveness and a harmonious future with our close European neighbours in the EU and who are now being told that their ideals are wrong and they have to now get behind policies built on division and a warped sense of British superiority that is in all likelihood see their lives become very much poorer as a result. I say, stop talking bollocks Mrs May. You are out of your depth so please just get us quickly out of the EU with the hard Brexit that your UKIP wing of the Party wants and get the GBP down as quickly as possible to parity with the USD and let the pain begin." A merry Brexit Christmas to you and yours.   | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Did the OP get a new axe for Christmas, and now wants to grind it?" No. It is an old axe. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
""Agreed set of rules" for the referendum? So why are we waiting to here the Supreme Court judgement on the govt appealing against the ruling that they have to follow the agreed rules? -Matt" That would be because the government has appealed the last judgement. That is how it works, you know. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
""Agreed set of rules" for the referendum? So why are we waiting to here the Supreme Court judgement on the govt appealing against the ruling that they have to follow the agreed rules? -Matt That would be because the government has appealed the last judgement. That is how it works, you know." Right. So despite being told that they do have to follow the rules, they appealed against the ruling? Sorry, just find it ironic a leave-supporter talking about following the rules. -Matt | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
""Agreed set of rules" for the referendum? So why are we waiting to here the Supreme Court judgement on the govt appealing against the ruling that they have to follow the agreed rules? -Matt That would be because the government has appealed the last judgement. That is how it works, you know. Right. So despite being told that they do have to follow the rules, they appealed against the ruling? Sorry, just find it ironic a leave-supporter talking about following the rules. -Matt" Nothing ironic about it. It is how our justice system works. You know, you launch an appeal to the Supreme Court. I am just hoping that it won't go to the ECJ. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
""Agreed set of rules" for the referendum? So why are we waiting to here the Supreme Court judgement on the govt appealing against the ruling that they have to follow the agreed rules? -Matt That would be because the government has appealed the last judgement. That is how it works, you know. Right. So despite being told that they do have to follow the rules, they appealed against the ruling? Sorry, just find it ironic a leave-supporter talking about following the rules. -Matt" I thought that the agreed rules of the referendum were that Parliament gave the decision to leave or remain to the British people and that the government would carry out their wishes? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Then you were misled -Matt you mean lied to" Did you note my comment above? Leave the EU, but retain free movement and all other regulations as per Norway. Referendum honoured. OK with you? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Then you were misled -Matt you mean lied to" Well, perhaps that too, but that is quite an emotive term and many people here would disagree with that sentiment. -Matt | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"52% also voted for a tolerant inclusive harmonious future with our European neighbours" Yeah right. Not. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Then you were misled -Matt" Spot on,but never assume someone who voted brexit actually read the bill or understands the process | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Then you were misled -Matt Spot on,but never assume someone who voted brexit actually read the bill or understands the process " did you? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Then you were misled -Matt you mean lied to Did you note my comment above? Leave the EU, but retain free movement and all other regulations as per Norway. Referendum honoured. OK with you?" no. Leaving the EU is leaving the single market, they are one and the same thing, which means we have control over movement. What does Norway have to do with anything | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Then you were misled -Matt Spot on,but never assume someone who voted brexit actually read the bill or understands the process did you?" No. I didn't fully understand the process by which the UK was going to actually successfully leave the EU. Hence I voted to remain. I still don't fully understand it. And listening to Theresa May at the select committee last week, I don't think she does either. -Matt | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Then you were misled -Matt you mean lied to Did you note my comment above? Leave the EU, but retain free movement and all other regulations as per Norway. Referendum honoured. OK with you? no. Leaving the EU is leaving the single market, they are one and the same thing, which means we have control over movement. What does Norway have to do with anything" Point proved I think. Your view on what Brexit is differs from one of the many permutations by which the UK could proceed and still meet the wording of the referendum that 'the people' voted on. Let's hope your definition is the one the May eventually goes for. -Matt | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Then you were misled -Matt Spot on,but never assume someone who voted brexit actually read the bill or understands the process " Never assume someone who voted for remain actually read the bill or understands the process. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Then you were misled -Matt you mean lied to Did you note my comment above? Leave the EU, but retain free movement and all other regulations as per Norway. Referendum honoured. OK with you? no. Leaving the EU is leaving the single market, they are one and the same thing, which means we have control over movement. What does Norway have to do with anything Point proved I think. Your view on what Brexit is differs from one of the many permutations by which the UK could proceed and still meet the wording of the referendum that 'the people' voted on. Let's hope your definition is the one the May eventually goes for. -Matt" Leaving the single market was what the 'Vote leave' and 'grassroots out' and 'Leave.EU' organisations campaigned and won the referendum on (when they said take back control of our borders it means leaving the single market). They also said we should leave the customs union (to make our own trade deals around the world it means we leave the customs union). It's only bitter remainers now who want to stay in the single market and stay in the customs union because that is the closest possible thing to remaining in the EU. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Then you were misled -Matt Spot on,but never assume someone who voted brexit actually read the bill or understands the process Never assume someone who voted for remain actually read the bill or understands the process." The difference being, that common sense would say that not understanding something would be a very valid and responsible reason for not going ahead and doing that thing. -Matt | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Then you were misled -Matt Spot on,but never assume someone who voted brexit actually read the bill or understands the process Never assume someone who voted for remain actually read the bill or understands the process. The difference being, that common sense would say that not understanding something would be a very valid and responsible reason for not going ahead and doing that thing. -Matt" why, what does it matter or what difference does it make who has the authority to trigger article 50? You're not making any sense | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
""Agreed set of rules" for the referendum? So why are we waiting to here the Supreme Court judgement on the govt appealing against the ruling that they have to follow the agreed rules? -Matt That would be because the government has appealed the last judgement. That is how it works, you know. Right. So despite being told that they do have to follow the rules, they appealed against the ruling? Sorry, just find it ironic a leave-supporter talking about following the rules. -Matt Nothing ironic about it. It is how our justice system works. You know, you launch an appeal to the Supreme Court. I am just hoping that it won't go to the ECJ."
The appeal process is part of the agreed rules on how our justice system works.
Besides the case at the high court and the supreme court is nothing to do with the result of the referendum, it's to do with how article 50 is triggered. The judges at the supreme court said they were not there to overturn the result of the referendum. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Leaving the single market was what the 'Vote leave' and 'grassroots out' and 'Leave.EU' organisations campaigned and won the referendum on (when they said take back control of our borders it means leaving the single market). They also said we should leave the customs union (to make our own trade deals around the world it means we leave the customs union). " So why won't the government come out and confirm that that is their position then? If you think that that is so clear as to what the referendum was about, then why when directly asked about it in the select committee last week was May unable to give a straight answer? But just to be 100% clear, you may be right in that that is what was campaigned on by those organisations above, but that was *not* what the question on the referendum was. I sincerely wish it was, as it would have saved a lot of uncertainty since the vote. -Matt | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Then you were misled -Matt Spot on,but never assume someone who voted brexit actually read the bill or understands the process Never assume someone who voted for remain actually read the bill or understands the process. The difference being, that common sense would say that not understanding something would be a very valid and responsible reason for not going ahead and doing that thing. -Matt why, what does it matter or what difference does it make who has the authority to trigger article 50? You're not making any sense" Sorry, I thought the discussion above was about the "rules" of the referendum and what was an wasn't followed. The "rules" were that is was an advisory poll with no legal binding. May thinks it is legally binding. The supreme court case is nothing to do with the result at all, despite what some people may think. It is about sovereignty of Parliament. It has implications much wider than the brexit poll. -Matt | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Leaving the single market was what the 'Vote leave' and 'grassroots out' and 'Leave.EU' organisations campaigned and won the referendum on (when they said take back control of our borders it means leaving the single market). They also said we should leave the customs union (to make our own trade deals around the world it means we leave the customs union). So why won't the government come out and confirm that that is their position then? If you think that that is so clear as to what the referendum was about, then why when directly asked about it in the select committee last week was May unable to give a straight answer? But just to be 100% clear, you may be right in that that is what was campaigned on by those organisations above, but that was *not* what the question on the referendum was. I sincerely wish it was, as it would have saved a lot of uncertainty since the vote. -Matt" Conservative MP Oliver Letwin, appeared on BBC 2 Newsnight a few weeks ago and said this is what the government are going to do when we leave the EU as it's what the campaigns who campaigned for Leave won the referendum on. He said the reason Teresa May and David Davis are being coy about it is because it's a kind of cat and mouse game at the moment with the EU until article 50 is triggered and the real negotiations will start then. The Oliver Letwin interview on Newsnight is very easy to find on YouTube. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Then you were misled -Matt Spot on,but never assume someone who voted brexit actually read the bill or understands the process Never assume someone who voted for remain actually read the bill or understands the process. The difference being, that common sense would say that not understanding something would be a very valid and responsible reason for not going ahead and doing that thing. -Matt why, what does it matter or what difference does it make who has the authority to trigger article 50? You're not making any sense Sorry, I thought the discussion above was about the "rules" of the referendum and what was an wasn't followed. The "rules" were that is was an advisory poll with no legal binding. May thinks it is legally binding. The supreme court case is nothing to do with the result at all, despite what some people may think. It is about sovereignty of Parliament. It has implications much wider than the brexit poll. -Matt" Even though the EU referendum was advisory the government were very clear they would implement the result and carry out the wishes of the people. You'd have to be very naive to think the government weren't going to act on the result. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Then you were misled -Matt Spot on,but never assume someone who voted brexit actually read the bill or understands the process Never assume someone who voted for remain actually read the bill or understands the process. The difference being, that common sense would say that not understanding something would be a very valid and responsible reason for not going ahead and doing that thing. -Matt why, what does it matter or what difference does it make who has the authority to trigger article 50? You're not making any sense Sorry, I thought the discussion above was about the "rules" of the referendum and what was an wasn't followed. The "rules" were that is was an advisory poll with no legal binding. May thinks it is legally binding. The supreme court case is nothing to do with the result at all, despite what some people may think. It is about sovereignty of Parliament. It has implications much wider than the brexit poll. -Matt Even though the EU referendum was advisory the government were very clear they would implement the result and carry out the wishes of the people. You'd have to be very naive to think the government weren't going to act on the result. " No I fully expected them to act on it. Just not bypassing parliamentary sovereignty and setting a very nasty precedent for any future things that May decides she doesn't like... e.g the ECJ ruling that the blanket data retention in the IP Bill is illegal. -Matt | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Leaving the single market was what the 'Vote leave' and 'grassroots out' and 'Leave.EU' organisations campaigned and won the referendum on (when they said take back control of our borders it means leaving the single market). They also said we should leave the customs union (to make our own trade deals around the world it means we leave the customs union). So why won't the government come out and confirm that that is their position then? If you think that that is so clear as to what the referendum was about, then why when directly asked about it in the select committee last week was May unable to give a straight answer? But just to be 100% clear, you may be right in that that is what was campaigned on by those organisations above, but that was *not* what the question on the referendum was. I sincerely wish it was, as it would have saved a lot of uncertainty since the vote. -Matt Conservative MP Oliver Letwin, appeared on BBC 2 Newsnight a few weeks ago and said this is what the government are going to do when we leave the EU as it's what the campaigns who campaigned for Leave won the referendum on. He said the reason Teresa May and David Davis are being coy about it is because it's a kind of cat and mouse game at the moment with the EU until article 50 is triggered and the real negotiations will start then. The Oliver Letwin interview on Newsnight is very easy to find on YouTube. " Why do they say it is a cat an mouse game and that May has to be coy about it, if that was what the referendum was all about? If you think that it was so clear that this is what the referendum was all about, then there is nothing to be coy about? Or do you think that those in the EU on the 'other side' of the negotiations don't have access to the Daily Mail? -Matt | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Leaving the single market was what the 'Vote leave' and 'grassroots out' and 'Leave.EU' organisations campaigned and won the referendum on (when they said take back control of our borders it means leaving the single market). They also said we should leave the customs union (to make our own trade deals around the world it means we leave the customs union). So why won't the government come out and confirm that that is their position then? If you think that that is so clear as to what the referendum was about, then why when directly asked about it in the select committee last week was May unable to give a straight answer? But just to be 100% clear, you may be right in that that is what was campaigned on by those organisations above, but that was *not* what the question on the referendum was. I sincerely wish it was, as it would have saved a lot of uncertainty since the vote. -Matt Conservative MP Oliver Letwin, appeared on BBC 2 Newsnight a few weeks ago and said this is what the government are going to do when we leave the EU as it's what the campaigns who campaigned for Leave won the referendum on. He said the reason Teresa May and David Davis are being coy about it is because it's a kind of cat and mouse game at the moment with the EU until article 50 is triggered and the real negotiations will start then. The Oliver Letwin interview on Newsnight is very easy to find on YouTube. Why do they say it is a cat an mouse game and that May has to be coy about it, if that was what the referendum was all about? If you think that it was so clear that this is what the referendum was all about, then there is nothing to be coy about? Or do you think that those in the EU on the 'other side' of the negotiations don't have access to the Daily Mail? -Matt" Its how negotiations are done. Neither side wants to show all of their cards and always best to keep an ace or 2 up your sleeve. If you don't believe what's in the Daily Mail then why should anyone in the EU? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Its how negotiations are done. Neither side wants to show all of their cards and always best to keep an ace or 2 up your sleeve. If you don't believe what's in the Daily Mail then why should anyone in the EU? " But you just said that the UK's 'hand' was clear and obvious as it was what was voted on in the referendum. So which is it? Was it clear and unambiguous and what the referendum was about? Or is is a coy negotiating position of the govt and still with wiggle room for them to decide to stay in the custom union etc? -Matt | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Then you were misled -Matt Spot on,but never assume someone who voted brexit actually read the bill or understands the process did you?" Yes | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"OP, "forced upon?" We voted to leave. I am afraid that staying would be the least democratic option. We elect Politicians to do the right thing and to have a bit more than a one dimensional train of thought. The referendum was divisive and the result was divisive because it was virtually 50/50. A good PM and good Politicians should be leading the way in trying to harmonise the population. Pursuing single mindedly a tiny majority opinion and not including other political parties in the Brexit negotiations will not end well for the PM or for the country. Anyone who truly believes that steamrollering almost 50% of the voting population into something that they don't want will end well, has no concept of politics and history. I don't accept PM Mays call for unity because she displays no desire for unity with her words and actions, but as I have said before, I think it is time that Brexiters had their day and we get out quick, hard and as painfully as possible. The very worst possible outcome now as far as I am concerned is that Brexit means leaving the EU and staying in the single market and the customs union. Fuck that. Out of everything, let the pound completely collapse to USD parity or lower and let the pain begin." What a load of rubbish | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Then you were misled -Matt you mean lied to Did you note my comment above? Leave the EU, but retain free movement and all other regulations as per Norway. Referendum honoured. OK with you? no. Leaving the EU is leaving the single market, they are one and the same thing, which means we have control over movement. What does Norway have to do with anything Point proved I think. Your view on what Brexit is differs from one of the many permutations by which the UK could proceed and still meet the wording of the referendum that 'the people' voted on. Let's hope your definition is the one the May eventually goes for. -Matt Leaving the single market was what the 'Vote leave' and 'grassroots out' and 'Leave.EU' organisations campaigned and won the referendum on (when they said take back control of our borders it means leaving the single market). They also said we should leave the customs union (to make our own trade deals around the world it means we leave the customs union). It's only bitter remainers now who want to stay in the single market and stay in the customs union because that is the closest possible thing to remaining in the EU. " So why has Boris Johnson consistently stated that we could remain in the single market and be out of the EU? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"OP, "forced upon?" We voted to leave. I am afraid that staying would be the least democratic option. We elect Politicians to do the right thing and to have a bit more than a one dimensional train of thought. The referendum was divisive and the result was divisive because it was virtually 50/50. A good PM and good Politicians should be leading the way in trying to harmonise the population. Pursuing single mindedly a tiny majority opinion and not including other political parties in the Brexit negotiations will not end well for the PM or for the country. Anyone who truly believes that steamrollering almost 50% of the voting population into something that they don't want will end well, has no concept of politics and history. I don't accept PM Mays call for unity because she displays no desire for unity with her words and actions, but as I have said before, I think it is time that Brexiters had their day and we get out quick, hard and as painfully as possible. The very worst possible outcome now as far as I am concerned is that Brexit means leaving the EU and staying in the single market and the customs union. Fuck that. Out of everything, let the pound completely collapse to USD parity or lower and let the pain begin.What a load of rubbish" Why not contribute further by adding your own considered opinion? It will carry more weight than simply aggressively dismissing something you don't agree with without adding your own take. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Its how negotiations are done. Neither side wants to show all of their cards and always best to keep an ace or 2 up your sleeve. If you don't believe what's in the Daily Mail then why should anyone in the EU? But you just said that the UK's 'hand' was clear and obvious as it was what was voted on in the referendum. So which is it? Was it clear and unambiguous and what the referendum was about? Or is is a coy negotiating position of the govt and still with wiggle room for them to decide to stay in the custom union etc? -Matt" It's clear in my mind what will happen, it seems to be you who can't make your mind up. You either believe the Daily Mail or you don't. Which is it? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Then you were misled -Matt you mean lied to Did you note my comment above? Leave the EU, but retain free movement and all other regulations as per Norway. Referendum honoured. OK with you? no. Leaving the EU is leaving the single market, they are one and the same thing, which means we have control over movement. What does Norway have to do with anything Point proved I think. Your view on what Brexit is differs from one of the many permutations by which the UK could proceed and still meet the wording of the referendum that 'the people' voted on. Let's hope your definition is the one the May eventually goes for. -Matt Leaving the single market was what the 'Vote leave' and 'grassroots out' and 'Leave.EU' organisations campaigned and won the referendum on (when they said take back control of our borders it means leaving the single market). They also said we should leave the customs union (to make our own trade deals around the world it means we leave the customs union). It's only bitter remainers now who want to stay in the single market and stay in the customs union because that is the closest possible thing to remaining in the EU. So why has Boris Johnson consistently stated that we could remain in the single market and be out of the EU?" Boris said we should leave the single market during the referendum campaign. When Boris appeared on the Andrew Marr show during the referendum campaign, Andrew Marr said "Micheal Gove said we should leave the single market, was he right?" Boris replied "Yes Micheal was right". | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"OP, "forced upon?" We voted to leave. I am afraid that staying would be the least democratic option. We elect Politicians to do the right thing and to have a bit more than a one dimensional train of thought. The referendum was divisive and the result was divisive because it was virtually 50/50. A good PM and good Politicians should be leading the way in trying to harmonise the population. Pursuing single mindedly a tiny majority opinion and not including other political parties in the Brexit negotiations will not end well for the PM or for the country. Anyone who truly believes that steamrollering almost 50% of the voting population into something that they don't want will end well, has no concept of politics and history. I don't accept PM Mays call for unity because she displays no desire for unity with her words and actions, but as I have said before, I think it is time that Brexiters had their day and we get out quick, hard and as painfully as possible. The very worst possible outcome now as far as I am concerned is that Brexit means leaving the EU and staying in the single market and the customs union. Fuck that. Out of everything, let the pound completely collapse to USD parity or lower and let the pain begin.What a load of rubbish Why not contribute further by adding your own considered opinion? It will carry more weight than simply aggressively dismissing something you don't agree with without adding your own take." A very good point but at the present moment I do not have an hour to write an essay but the conclusion will be the same | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Leaving the EU is leaving the single market, they are one and the same thing, which means we have control over movement. What does Norway have to do with anything" Interesting. The wording of the referendum was: "Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?" The members of the EU are listed here and does not include Norway: https://europa.eu/european-union/about-eu/countries/member-countries_en This is Norway's relationship with the EU: http://www.eu-norway.org/eu/norway_and_the_eu/#.WGGkDfSnzqA So, we can not be in the EU as voted for in the referendum and do this. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Leaving the EU is leaving the single market, they are one and the same thing, which means we have control over movement. What does Norway have to do with anything Interesting. The wording of the referendum was: "Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?" The members of the EU are listed here and does not include Norway: https://europa.eu/european-union/about-eu/countries/member-countries_en This is Norway's relationship with the EU: http://www.eu-norway.org/eu/norway_and_the_eu/#.WGGkDfSnzqA So, we can not be in the EU as voted for in the referendum and do this." We could yes, but Prime Minister Teresa May and Brexit secretary David Davis have both said we won't be looking for a Norway type deal. They have both said we'll be looking to do a unique British deal. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Leaving the EU is leaving the single market, they are one and the same thing, which means we have control over movement. What does Norway have to do with anything Interesting. The wording of the referendum was: "Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?" The members of the EU are listed here and does not include Norway: https://europa.eu/european-union/about-eu/countries/member-countries_en This is Norway's relationship with the EU: http://www.eu-norway.org/eu/norway_and_the_eu/#.WGGkDfSnzqA So, we can not be in the EU as voted for in the referendum and do this." Yes you are right with the wording of the Referendum but we were told by the then PM David Cameron on numerous occasions that voting leave meant leaving the single market this point has been made many times since the Referendum. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Then you were misled -Matt Spot on,but never assume someone who voted brexit actually read the bill or understands the process did you? Yes " so you know more than Supreme Court judges? Fair enough, how can I argue with that | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Norway. So there we go. Different interpretations of the same question. Everyone voted for something different. There is no Brexit that means Brexit to everyone. Remain was and is, pretty consistently, remain although I know no one who thought that the arrangement as it was seemed OK. Conidered by remainders to be better than most of the many possible futures of Brexit though." Funny, it's clear all the Brexiteers on this thread are in agreement that we will leave the single market. Where are the different interpretations you speak of? You didn't vote leave you voted Remain so you didn't vote for a Norway type deal. It's only Remainers who now want a Norway type deal since they lost the referendum as is evident on this thread. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Funny, it's clear all the Brexiteers on this thread are in agreement that we will leave the single market. Where are the different interpretations you speak of? You didn't vote leave you voted Remain so you didn't vote for a Norway type deal. It's only Remainers who now want a Norway type deal since they lost the referendum as is evident on this thread. " I didn't state that I wanted the Norwegian option. I was asking if that would fulfil the referendum question or not. I don't intend for this to appear trite, but it seems rather in the same frame as the "out of touch elites" to assume that your interpretation of a single, simple question represents those of everyone who voted leave. Is it possible that 100% of the population having had the opportunity to vote on the referendum (if they took it or not) that 100% of the population have an equally valid opinion on what form Brexit should take, if they voted for it or not. Voting leave doesn't make anyone's opinion more valid. Is that wrong? https://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/3795/Public-divided-on-prioritising-access-to-the-Single-Market-or-controlling-immigration.aspx http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2016/06/how-the-united-kingdom-voted-and-why/ If you don't believe polls, then the only information available is the answer to the referendum question. No individual interpretation of it matters. The government, preferably Parliament, decides. That's actually what was voted for. Is that wrong? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The elites, both domestic and foreign are not to be trusted. Our government aren't telling us what Brexit means. We should trust them now though. Really? "It appears that business leaders trust the government to get a good deal from the EU negotiations. A poll published in yesterday's newspapers shows business confidence has now returned to the levels seen before the EU referendum vote in June. The Institute of Directors poll said most of their 34,000 business owning members believe 2017 will herald higher revenues and profitability, despite Brexit naysayers. Just 15% of businesses expect their revenue to fall next year, while 60% expect a big windfall. 46% of businesses feel optimistic about the future and there has been a 6% rise in 'very optimistic' firms. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Funny, it's clear all the Brexiteers on this thread are in agreement that we will leave the single market. Where are the different interpretations you speak of? You didn't vote leave you voted Remain so you didn't vote for a Norway type deal. It's only Remainers who now want a Norway type deal since they lost the referendum as is evident on this thread. I didn't state that I wanted the Norwegian option. I was asking if that would fulfil the referendum question or not. I don't intend for this to appear trite, but it seems rather in the same frame as the "out of touch elites" to assume that your interpretation of a single, simple question represents those of everyone who voted leave. Is it possible that 100% of the population having had the opportunity to vote on the referendum (if they took it or not) that 100% of the population have an equally valid opinion on what form Brexit should take, if they voted for it or not. Voting leave doesn't make anyone's opinion more valid. Is that wrong? https://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/3795/Public-divided-on-prioritising-access-to-the-Single-Market-or-controlling-immigration.aspx http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2016/06/how-the-united-kingdom-voted-and-why/ If you don't believe polls, then the only information available is the answer to the referendum question. No individual interpretation of it matters. The government, preferably Parliament, decides. That's actually what was voted for. Is that wrong?" You sound just like Nick Clegg and countless other Remain MP's who appear on BBC 1 Question Time each week and every week they tell the audience, "you didn't know what you were voting for, you didn't vote to leave the single market". Patronising to the extreme these out of touch Remain MP's are met with the same justifiably angry reaction from those who voted Leave in the audience, and week after week those who voted leave give the same answer.... "we knew exactly what we voted for, we knew a vote to Leave meant leaving the single market, this is what we were told time and again by leading figures of both the Remain campaign and the Leave campaign." | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Norway. So there we go. Different interpretations of the same question. Everyone voted for something different. There is no Brexit that means Brexit to everyone. Remain was and is, pretty consistently, remain although I know no one who thought that the arrangement as it was seemed OK. Conidered by remainders to be better than most of the many possible futures of Brexit though." Remainers were voting to remain in a 'reformed EU'.... but at no point was it ever explained what a reformed EU would look like, nor what reforms there would be.... even now, Remain politicians all talk about a reformed EU, and that the EU needs to reform.... but they all have different ideas about what needs reforming.... So remainers didn't know what they were voting for.... and don't say 'the status quo' , as they were talking about reform during the referendum campaign, and so there was never any such thing as the status quo | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Funny, it's clear all the Brexiteers on this thread are in agreement that we will leave the single market. Where are the different interpretations you speak of? You didn't vote leave you voted Remain so you didn't vote for a Norway type deal. It's only Remainers who now want a Norway type deal since they lost the referendum as is evident on this thread. I didn't state that I wanted the Norwegian option. I was asking if that would fulfil the referendum question or not. I don't intend for this to appear trite, but it seems rather in the same frame as the "out of touch elites" to assume that your interpretation of a single, simple question represents those of everyone who voted leave. Is it possible that 100% of the population having had the opportunity to vote on the referendum (if they took it or not) that 100% of the population have an equally valid opinion on what form Brexit should take, if they voted for it or not. Voting leave doesn't make anyone's opinion more valid. Is that wrong? https://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/3795/Public-divided-on-prioritising-access-to-the-Single-Market-or-controlling-immigration.aspx http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2016/06/how-the-united-kingdom-voted-and-why/ If you don't believe polls, then the only information available is the answer to the referendum question. No individual interpretation of it matters. The government, preferably Parliament, decides. That's actually what was voted for. Is that wrong? You sound just like Nick Clegg and countless other Remain MP's who appear on BBC 1 Question Time each week and every week they tell the audience, "you didn't know what you were voting for, you didn't vote to leave the single market". Patronising to the extreme these out of touch Remain MP's are met with the same justifiably angry reaction from those who voted Leave in the audience, and week after week those who voted leave give the same answer.... "we knew exactly what we voted for, we knew a vote to Leave meant leaving the single market, this is what we were told time and again by leading figures of both the Remain campaign and the Leave campaign."" Right. And this is my point that you keep missing or avoiding. If it is so clear what Brexit actually meant and what everyone was voting on to leave. Then why can't Theresa May come out with anything more specific than 'Brexit means Brexit' and 'red, white and blue brexit'. And when SPECIFICALLY asked in the select committee about it she refused to answer. If you believe this is a negotiating tactic then that implies there are multiple options and she is not revealing which for tactical reasons. Which sounds fair enough. But that is at odds to you saying that leavers all know exactly what they voted for. Or another example. Transitional arrangements. Was there a clear position on whether there would be any transitional arrangement for leaving? If so what wasn't the accepted timeframe for that? What did you vote for? No transition? 1 year? 5 years? 20 years? And what does that transition period look like? Are you happy if, as an example, the transitional period is for 20 years and in that time we keep the free movement of people in return for spreading the payment of our existing commitments to the EU over those years? -Matt | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I honestly don't think most people who voted leave even considered the single market ! I didn't and neither did everyone I know who voted leave . I just wanted to leave , and now ! And yes worry about it later ! I don't see any need to negotiate . See you , bye , all the Best will suffice . " Even though Michael Gove, Boris Johnson, Andrea Leadsome, David Cameron and George Osborne (and many other MP's) all said a vote to Leave means we leave the single market. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Funny, it's clear all the Brexiteers on this thread are in agreement that we will leave the single market. Where are the different interpretations you speak of? You didn't vote leave you voted Remain so you didn't vote for a Norway type deal. It's only Remainers who now want a Norway type deal since they lost the referendum as is evident on this thread. I didn't state that I wanted the Norwegian option. I was asking if that would fulfil the referendum question or not. I don't intend for this to appear trite, but it seems rather in the same frame as the "out of touch elites" to assume that your interpretation of a single, simple question represents those of everyone who voted leave. Is it possible that 100% of the population having had the opportunity to vote on the referendum (if they took it or not) that 100% of the population have an equally valid opinion on what form Brexit should take, if they voted for it or not. Voting leave doesn't make anyone's opinion more valid. Is that wrong? https://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/3795/Public-divided-on-prioritising-access-to-the-Single-Market-or-controlling-immigration.aspx http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2016/06/how-the-united-kingdom-voted-and-why/ If you don't believe polls, then the only information available is the answer to the referendum question. No individual interpretation of it matters. The government, preferably Parliament, decides. That's actually what was voted for. Is that wrong? You sound just like Nick Clegg and countless other Remain MP's who appear on BBC 1 Question Time each week and every week they tell the audience, "you didn't know what you were voting for, you didn't vote to leave the single market". Patronising to the extreme these out of touch Remain MP's are met with the same justifiably angry reaction from those who voted Leave in the audience, and week after week those who voted leave give the same answer.... "we knew exactly what we voted for, we knew a vote to Leave meant leaving the single market, this is what we were told time and again by leading figures of both the Remain campaign and the Leave campaign." Right. And this is my point that you keep missing or avoiding. If it is so clear what Brexit actually meant and what everyone was voting on to leave. Then why can't Theresa May come out with anything more specific than 'Brexit means Brexit' and 'red, white and blue brexit'. And when SPECIFICALLY asked in the select committee about it she refused to answer. If you believe this is a negotiating tactic then that implies there are multiple options and she is not revealing which for tactical reasons. Which sounds fair enough. But that is at odds to you saying that leavers all know exactly what they voted for. Or another example. Transitional arrangements. Was there a clear position on whether there would be any transitional arrangement for leaving? If so what wasn't the accepted timeframe for that? What did you vote for? No transition? 1 year? 5 years? 20 years? And what does that transition period look like? Are you happy if, as an example, the transitional period is for 20 years and in that time we keep the free movement of people in return for spreading the payment of our existing commitments to the EU over those years? -Matt " How do you expect anyone on here to know anything of the above, we were asked to vote whether to leave or stay. We voted leave the Government have a good idea why we voted leave it is up to them to decide what deal to accept. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I don't intend for this to appear trite, but it seems rather in the same frame as the "out of touch elites" to assume that your interpretation of a single, simple question represents those of everyone who voted leave. Is it possible that 100% of the population having had the opportunity to vote on the referendum (if they took it or not) that 100% of the population have an equally valid opinion on what form Brexit should take, if they voted for it or not. Voting leave doesn't make anyone's opinion more valid. Is that wrong? If you don't believe polls, then the only information available is the answer to the referendum question. No individual interpretation of it matters. The government, preferably Parliament, decides. That's actually what was voted for. Is that wrong? You sound just like Nick Clegg and countless other Remain MP's who appear on BBC 1 Question Time each week and every week they tell the audience, "you didn't know what you were voting for, you didn't vote to leave the single market". Patronising to the extreme these out of touch Remain MP's are met with the same justifiably angry reaction from those who voted Leave in the audience, and week after week those who voted leave give the same answer.... "we knew exactly what we voted for, we knew a vote to Leave meant leaving the single market, this is what we were told time and again by leading figures of both the Remain campaign and the Leave campaign."" Oh. I actually intended quite the opposite. I am suggesting that you know exactly why you voted to leave the EU. I voted to stay in the EU. The question asked. Not re-negotiations or any other unspecified destination. You may also know why a small number of others, particularly in the press or other media voted to leave or remain. I do not believe that you nor I nor anyone else knows the motivations of the majority of referendum voters, particularly if polling data is to be ignored. Would you not be as guilty of the behaviour of the "liberal elite" whom you despise, by asserting that it is "clear" and obvious" what the UK population's vision of leaving the EU might be. Regardless of the opinion of those who did vote to remain, does the opinion of those who voted to remain or did not vote at all not of equal importance in deciding what form leaving the EU takes? Is it arrogant to ignore the opinion of remain or non-voters? The Norway option does fulfil the the terms of the referendum if you, me or anyone else like a it or not doesn't it? Is it now up to government and preferably Parliament to negotiate the terms of leaving the EU and therefore out of our hands if polling is irrelevant? The decision has been made with no more detail available than the answer to the referendum question, or is this not the case? We could have another referendum on the deal being proposed. Would that be necessary? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I don't intend for this to appear trite, but it seems rather in the same frame as the "out of touch elites" to assume that your interpretation of a single, simple question represents those of everyone who voted leave. Is it possible that 100% of the population having had the opportunity to vote on the referendum (if they took it or not) that 100% of the population have an equally valid opinion on what form Brexit should take, if they voted for it or not. Voting leave doesn't make anyone's opinion more valid. Is that wrong? If you don't believe polls, then the only information available is the answer to the referendum question. No individual interpretation of it matters. The government, preferably Parliament, decides. That's actually what was voted for. Is that wrong? You sound just like Nick Clegg and countless other Remain MP's who appear on BBC 1 Question Time each week and every week they tell the audience, "you didn't know what you were voting for, you didn't vote to leave the single market". Patronising to the extreme these out of touch Remain MP's are met with the same justifiably angry reaction from those who voted Leave in the audience, and week after week those who voted leave give the same answer.... "we knew exactly what we voted for, we knew a vote to Leave meant leaving the single market, this is what we were told time and again by leading figures of both the Remain campaign and the Leave campaign." Oh. I actually intended quite the opposite. I am suggesting that you know exactly why you voted to leave the EU. I voted to stay in the EU. The question asked. Not re-negotiations or any other unspecified destination. You may also know why a small number of others, particularly in the press or other media voted to leave or remain. I do not believe that you nor I nor anyone else knows the motivations of the majority of referendum voters, particularly if polling data is to be ignored. Would you not be as guilty of the behaviour of the "liberal elite" whom you despise, by asserting that it is "clear" and obvious" what the UK population's vision of leaving the EU might be. Regardless of the opinion of those who did vote to remain, does the opinion of those who voted to remain or did not vote at all not of equal importance in deciding what form leaving the EU takes? Is it arrogant to ignore the opinion of remain or non-voters? The Norway option does fulfil the the terms of the referendum if you, me or anyone else like a it or not doesn't it? Is it now up to government and preferably Parliament to negotiate the terms of leaving the EU and therefore out of our hands if polling is irrelevant? The decision has been made with no more detail available than the answer to the referendum question, or is this not the case? We could have another referendum on the deal being proposed. Would that be necessary?" Those who did not vote did not have an opinion strong enough to vote either way - so therefore they did not mind whichever way the vote went. Thus they have no right to complain. It's like J suggesting we go out for dinner, me asking where she'd like to go, her saying 'I don't mind', and then saying she didn't want to go there after we've eaten. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I don't intend for this to appear trite, but it seems rather in the same frame as the "out of touch elites" to assume that your interpretation of a single, simple question represents those of everyone who voted leave. Is it possible that 100% of the population having had the opportunity to vote on the referendum (if they took it or not) that 100% of the population have an equally valid opinion on what form Brexit should take, if they voted for it or not. Voting leave doesn't make anyone's opinion more valid. Is that wrong? If you don't believe polls, then the only information available is the answer to the referendum question. No individual interpretation of it matters. The government, preferably Parliament, decides. That's actually what was voted for. Is that wrong? You sound just like Nick Clegg and countless other Remain MP's who appear on BBC 1 Question Time each week and every week they tell the audience, "you didn't know what you were voting for, you didn't vote to leave the single market". Patronising to the extreme these out of touch Remain MP's are met with the same justifiably angry reaction from those who voted Leave in the audience, and week after week those who voted leave give the same answer.... "we knew exactly what we voted for, we knew a vote to Leave meant leaving the single market, this is what we were told time and again by leading figures of both the Remain campaign and the Leave campaign." Oh. I actually intended quite the opposite. I am suggesting that you know exactly why you voted to leave the EU. I voted to stay in the EU. The question asked. Not re-negotiations or any other unspecified destination. You may also know why a small number of others, particularly in the press or other media voted to leave or remain. I do not believe that you nor I nor anyone else knows the motivations of the majority of referendum voters, particularly if polling data is to be ignored. Would you not be as guilty of the behaviour of the "liberal elite" whom you despise, by asserting that it is "clear" and obvious" what the UK population's vision of leaving the EU might be. Regardless of the opinion of those who did vote to remain, does the opinion of those who voted to remain or did not vote at all not of equal importance in deciding what form leaving the EU takes? Is it arrogant to ignore the opinion of remain or non-voters? The Norway option does fulfil the the terms of the referendum if you, me or anyone else like a it or not doesn't it? Is it now up to government and preferably Parliament to negotiate the terms of leaving the EU and therefore out of our hands if polling is irrelevant? The decision has been made with no more detail available than the answer to the referendum question, or is this not the case? We could have another referendum on the deal being proposed. Would that be necessary? Those who did not vote did not have an opinion strong enough to vote either way - so therefore they did not mind whichever way the vote went. Thus they have no right to complain. It's like J suggesting we go out for dinner, me asking where she'd like to go, her saying 'I don't mind', and then saying she didn't want to go there after we've eaten." | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Those who did not vote did not have an opinion strong enough to vote either way - so therefore they did not mind whichever way the vote went. Thus they have no right to complain. It's like J suggesting we go out for dinner, me asking where she'd like to go, her saying 'I don't mind', and then saying she didn't want to go there after we've eaten." Is it possible that people did not vote because they did not fee that there was sufficiently reliable information from either side to make an informed decision or that they cared desperately but we're too conflicted to take a side? Do you know for sure what proportion of non-voters were apathetic? If I do not have an opinion on where we eat but whilst I'm there the restaurant is closed down for being unhygenic, or the food tastes carp or I get food poisoning then I think that I have every right to have an opinion on if it was any good. Equally if the services, ambience and food are excellent I can still have an opinion. If I don't vote in a general election can I not vote for the opposition next time if the previous regime is crap? Any opinions on the other, more points I raised? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Those who did not vote did not have an opinion strong enough to vote either way - so therefore they did not mind whichever way the vote went. Thus they have no right to complain. It's like J suggesting we go out for dinner, me asking where she'd like to go, her saying 'I don't mind', and then saying she didn't want to go there after we've eaten. Is it possible that people did not vote because they did not fee that there was sufficiently reliable information from either side to make an informed decision or that they cared desperately but we're too conflicted to take a side? Do you know for sure what proportion of non-voters were apathetic? If I do not have an opinion on where we eat but whilst I'm there the restaurant is closed down for being unhygenic, or the food tastes carp or I get food poisoning then I think that I have every right to have an opinion on if it was any good. Equally if the services, ambience and food are excellent I can still have an opinion. If I don't vote in a general election can I not vote for the opposition next time if the previous regime is crap? Any opinions on the other, more points I raised?" No. They did not vote because they could not be arsed to vote or they could not make their minds up. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"No. They did not vote because they could not be arsed to vote or they could not make their minds up." ...or that they thought that their lives would not improve either way. Of course some of them just couldn't be bothered. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"No. They did not vote because they could not be arsed to vote or they could not make their minds up. ...or that they thought that their lives would not improve either way. Of course some of them just couldn't be bothered." Which is why their votes did not count. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"No. They did not vote because they could not be arsed to vote or they could not make their minds up. ...or that they thought that their lives would not improve either way. Of course some of them just couldn't be bothered. Which is why their votes did not count." And those who voted remain? Does their view of the future relationship with the EU as valid as those who voted leave? Should they get 46% of what they would like after leaving the EU or nothing? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"No. They did not vote because they could not be arsed to vote or they could not make their minds up. ...or that they thought that their lives would not improve either way. Of course some of them just couldn't be bothered. Which is why their votes did not count. And those who voted remain? Does their view of the future relationship with the EU as valid as those who voted leave? Should they get 46% of what they would like after leaving the EU or nothing?" So are you saying that people that don't vote for the new government in a general election shouldn't have to abide by the decision of that election? Or shouldn't have to abide by any new rules, laws, taxes, etc that are brought in by that government? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Those who did not vote did not have an opinion strong enough to vote either way - so therefore they did not mind whichever way the vote went. Thus they have no right to complain. It's like J suggesting we go out for dinner, me asking where she'd like to go, her saying 'I don't mind', and then saying she didn't want to go there after we've eaten. Is it possible that people did not vote because they did not fee that there was sufficiently reliable information from either side to make an informed decision or that they cared desperately but we're too conflicted to take a side? Do you know for sure what proportion of non-voters were apathetic? " Those that did not vote didn't care which way the vote went - in other words, 'would accept the vote of the majority'. If they felt they didn't have enough information to vote either way, then they should have voted to remain.. i.e. 'the status quo', as remainers keep putting it. As it is, the leave vote was the majority, and as such, the 30 % of the electorate that didn't vote, tacitly voted with the majority. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" So are you saying that people that don't vote for the new government in a general election shouldn't have to abide by the decision of that election? Or shouldn't have to abide by any new rules, laws, taxes, etc that are brought in by that government?" Actually, we do not vote in five year dictatorships. The party in power does not have carte Blanche to do as it chooses. Is this true? Legislation is debated in Parliament. Some laws are I passed and some are not. Is this true? Decisions are broadly made by consensus otherwise they will simply be repealed once the party in power loses. That's how democracies survive and thrive. Otherwise you end up with gridlock as in the USA or chaos as with Brexit here | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Those that did not vote didn't care which way the vote went - in other words, 'would accept the vote of the majority'. If they felt they didn't have enough information to vote either way, then they should have voted to remain.. i.e. 'the status quo', as remainers keep putting it. As it is, the leave vote was the majority, and as such, the 30 % of the electorate that didn't vote, tacitly voted with the majority." The question of people who didn't vote is a footnote. I don't care that much but they might if the situation becomes negative for them. How about the more substantive points in that same post which everyone is studiously ignoring?  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I honestly don't think most people who voted leave even considered the single market ! I didn't and neither did everyone I know who voted leave . I just wanted to leave , and now ! And yes worry about it later ! I don't see any need to negotiate . See you , bye , all the Best will suffice . Even though Michael Gove, Boris Johnson, Andrea Leadsome, David Cameron and George Osborne (and many other MP's) all said a vote to Leave means we leave the single market." I voted according to what was on my voting slip.... Stay in the EU Leave the EU The vote was nothing more, nothing less, just like everybody else's, no mention of trading, free movement, nothing, the rest would be upto the government to decide as they moved forward acting on the result if they decided to do so since it was an advisory referendum. The only thing that counted was what was on the voting slip. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I honestly don't think most people who voted leave even considered the single market ! I didn't and neither did everyone I know who voted leave . I just wanted to leave , and now ! And yes worry about it later ! I don't see any need to negotiate . See you , bye , all the Best will suffice . Even though Michael Gove, Boris Johnson, Andrea Leadsome, David Cameron and George Osborne (and many other MP's) all said a vote to Leave means we leave the single market. I voted according to what was on my voting slip.... Stay in the EU Leave the EU The vote was nothing more, nothing less, just like everybody else's, no mention of trading, free movement, nothing, the rest would be upto the government to decide as they moved forward acting on the result if they decided to do so since it was an advisory referendum. The only thing that counted was what was on the voting slip." | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I honestly don't think most people who voted leave even considered the single market ! I didn't and neither did everyone I know who voted leave . I just wanted to leave , and now ! And yes worry about it later ! I don't see any need to negotiate . See you , bye , all the Best will suffice . " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Prime Minister May truly has lost the plot if she truly thinks that the country should unite and move forwards at the same time as she pursues the most divisive action ever forced upon the citizens of this country in modern history. Leadership starts at the top and starts with doing as I do and not doing as I say. When PM May starts to act and speak in an inclusive way, then maybe the country will follow suit. I feel truly sorry for the the almost 50% of the voters who voted for tolerance, inclusiveness and a harmonious future with our close European neighbours in the EU and who are now being told that their ideals are wrong and they have to now get behind policies built on division and a warped sense of British superiority that is in all likelihood see their lives become very much poorer as a result. I say, stop talking bollocks Mrs May. You are out of your depth so please just get us quickly out of the EU with the hard Brexit that your UKIP wing of the Party wants and get the GBP down as quickly as possible to parity with the USD and let the pain begin."
Well put! While I want exceptions for London's interests, and enough flexibility to keep Northern Ireland and Scotland in the Union, I do feel that those who wanted this should get what they voted for and they deal with the consequences. None of this 'soft' brexit soft. Full hard brexit and we see whether the decision to leave was correct or not. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
