FabSwingers.com mobile

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

Could a third time to solve the impasse?

Jump to newest
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

In 1975 the British public voted 67% to 32% to enter the EEC. It was such a clear mandate that Parliament happily delivered on it.

In 2016, however, less than 1% of the UK population turned the tide on this decision. This majority was so small that it doesn't even command a majority in Parliament. Meaning that politicians who are tasked to act in the best interests of the nation are being compelled down a course of action that they earnestly believe is self mutilating.

No wonder they've ground to a halt!

Seeing as the politicians don't believe in brexit, doesn't it make sense to give it back to the people for a third time to push it through?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *izzy RascallMan
over a year ago

Cardiff

They will have to have a vote to see if they have another vote

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Yawwwwwwwwn

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I no longer give a fuck.

Either get on and leave or stay in. Either way, if we had politicians who were interested in the country and not point scoring or trying to further their own political careers, we could make a bloody good fist of it.

I voted remain. Another referendum, I wouldn’t bother voting. There’s no point if they’re no going to abide by the result.

Not big enough margin? That’s the politicians fault for not stipulating before the vote. Don’t try to change the rules after.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Sick of the scare mongering from the media, we voted leave and so we should!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"Yawwwwwwwwn "

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *olfAndKittenCouple
over a year ago

Bristol

Cameron put it forward, got parliaments permission - if they vote, it happens

We voted

Cameron jumped ship (fuck this for a game of toy soldiers)

May couldnt talk her way out of a wet paperbag (fuck that for a game of toy soliders)

Now what we have us a bunch on idiots talking to a bunch of imbeciles and its the equivalent of watching dumb and dumb discuss how to make a sandwich.

But here in lies the problem

IF they do not honour the vote it shows what a joke democracy is and there will be an outcry bigger that those who voted to stay when they realised they lost.

The topic is boring, done to death, its simple honour the vote, do what the public has asked for and let the chips fall where they may.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Let’s just do why we did as kids - best of three. Or five if you don’t get the result you want. Best of seven? Nine? And then usually mum sent you to bed.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Ah, the old vote until it goes my way ploy.....

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

We had a democratic vote its done the decision was made, those who were bothered enough turned up.

You cant keep revoting untill it goes a certain way.

It doesnt matter if you win by a inch or a mile winning is winning.

The opposition will moan regardless either way the vote went as will the oposit within the nation.

This topic and other topics evolving politics is boaring as shit and really doesnt have a place on this type of site.

The end.

Oh and corbyn and his cronies are dick heads.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

Oh I do enjoy riling brexiteers for breakfast I can't wait for this to descend into the depths of the politics forum where I can be repeatedly told I should fuck off and live somewhere else I love you guys xxx

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Sick of the scare mongering from the media, we voted leave and so we should!"

I agree (Gem)

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *inkyLondonpairCouple
over a year ago

London

That's why referendums are fucking stupid ideas in parliamentary systems. You reduce a complex issue to am either/or. Decision and then the parliamentarians are left to implement a decision they think is bloody idiotic.

Personally, when the UK public voted for brexit, I think all remain supporting mps should have resigned, allowed leavers to take their place and have a company full of leavers to negotiate exist.

If that had happened, they would have made an even bigger fuck up and everyone would have realised what a daft idea it is.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"That's why referendums are fucking stupid ideas in parliamentary systems. You reduce a complex issue to am either/or. Decision and then the parliamentarians are left to implement a decision they think is bloody idiotic.

Personally, when the UK public voted for brexit, I think all remain supporting mps should have resigned, allowed leavers to take their place and have a company full of leavers to negotiate exist.

If that had happened, they would have made an even bigger fuck up and everyone would have realised what a daft idea it is. "

If that had happened there would've been about 5 mps in parliament and 3 of them would have been two faced ambitious shits

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *andS66Couple
over a year ago

Derby


"In 1975 the British public voted 67% to 32% to enter the EEC. It was such a clear mandate that Parliament happily delivered on it.

In 2016, however, less than 1% of the UK population turned the tide on this decision. This majority was so small that it doesn't even command a majority in Parliament. Meaning that politicians who are tasked to act in the best interests of the nation are being compelled down a course of action that they earnestly believe is self mutilating.

No wonder they've ground to a halt!

Seeing as the politicians don't believe in brexit, doesn't it make sense to give it back to the people for a third time to push it through?"

They did not vote to join the EEC....that was a vote by parliament in October 1971, which was won by 112 votes. 356 MPs voted for it. It was opposed by Labour.

Think on that...356 MPs, with a majority of 112 MPs, put this country into the common market.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"In 1975 the British public voted 67% to 32% to enter the EEC. It was such a clear mandate that Parliament happily delivered on it.

In 2016, however, less than 1% of the UK population turned the tide on this decision. This majority was so small that it doesn't even command a majority in Parliament. Meaning that politicians who are tasked to act in the best interests of the nation are being compelled down a course of action that they earnestly believe is self mutilating.

No wonder they've ground to a halt!

Seeing as the politicians don't believe in brexit, doesn't it make sense to give it back to the people for a third time to push it through?

They did not vote to join the EEC....that was a vote by parliament in October 1971, which was won by 112 votes. 356 MPs voted for it. It was opposed by Labour.

Think on that...356 MPs, with a majority of 112 MPs, put this country into the common market."

My bad. It was a referendum on whether to leave

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_European_Communities_membership_referendum,_1975

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *entaur_UKMan
over a year ago

Cannock


"That's why referendums are fucking stupid ideas in parliamentary systems. You reduce a complex issue to am either/or. Decision and then the parliamentarians are left to implement a decision they think is bloody idiotic.

Personally, when the UK public voted for brexit, I think all remain supporting mps should have resigned, allowed leavers to take their place and have a company full of leavers to negotiate exist.

If that had happened, they would have made an even bigger fuck up and everyone would have realised what a daft idea it is. "

I'll tell you what would have happened if Leave MP's or ukip would have been in charge of the Brexit process, they would have started to prepare properly for no deal right from the start, nearly 2 years ago. Theresa May was a remainer and her Remain chancellor Philip Hammond has tried to thwart or undermine Brexit every step of the way.

We had 2 years to prepare for no deal and May and Hammond resisted calls to prepare for no deal ages ago when Brexiters were calling for them to do so. They've left it very late in the day now to start preparing for a no deal scenario.

As for a 2nd referendum, No! Parliament voted by a very big majority (over 80%) to let the people decide this matter in a referendum. The Conservative party spent £9 million quid of taxpayers money on a leaflet delivered to every house in the UK which said they would implement the result of the referendum. The people have voted and spoken and they chose leave. The politicians just need to get on with it.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"That's why referendums are fucking stupid ideas in parliamentary systems. You reduce a complex issue to am either/or. Decision and then the parliamentarians are left to implement a decision they think is bloody idiotic.

Personally, when the UK public voted for brexit, I think all remain supporting mps should have resigned, allowed leavers to take their place and have a company full of leavers to negotiate exist.

If that had happened, they would have made an even bigger fuck up and everyone would have realised what a daft idea it is.

I'll tell you what would have happened if Leave MP's or ukip would have been in charge of the Brexit process, they would have started to prepare properly for no deal right from the start, nearly 2 years ago. Theresa May was a remainer and her Remain chancellor Philip Hammond has tried to thwart or undermine Brexit every step of the way.

We had 2 years to prepare for no deal and May and Hammond resisted calls to prepare for no deal ages ago when Brexiters were calling for them to do so. They've left it very late in the day now to start preparing for a no deal scenario.

As for a 2nd referendum, No! Parliament voted by a very big majority (over 80%) to let the people decide this matter in a referendum. The Conservative party spent £9 million quid of taxpayers money on a leaflet delivered to every house in the UK which said they would implement the result of the referendum. The people have voted and spoken and they chose leave. The politicians just need to get on with it. "

Agreed, there's been too much dithering for 2 years, it should of been rather straight forward, notice of leaving the single market & customs union, sort out all the other agencies we're linked with the EU that we need to continue with then the process of a FTA.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Sick of the scare mongering from the media, we voted leave and so we should!"

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *riefcase_WankerMan
over a year ago

Milton Keynes

I reckon we get Garage and Juncker in a room and they Rock-Paper-Scissors for it, best 3-out-of-5

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *riefcase_WankerMan
over a year ago

Milton Keynes

*Farage obvs

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ophieslutTV/TS
over a year ago

Central

If Brexit is about pursuing the will of the people, then it's appropriate that they get to decide once there is either a deal negotiated or not.

It would be a vote that would be on choices that are intelligible

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

By no all do we mean no deals at all.... or no deals but some side deals?

I agree the technical notes should have been out almost immediately. There really is nothing new in there and would have allowed some more frank discussions about what a no deal really means, and where there are places where just extracting ourselves from an agency isn’t that straight forward... eg where we would need to crate our own regulations/regal stirs which then need to be approved by everyone else.

It would also help get the focus away from just saying Canada plus plus all the time, thinking all we need to do is sort out a trade deal.

That said, I don’t think ukip or a leave PM would have done this any quicker .... farage is still in Canada being the right option ... and DDs output is noticeable by its absence !

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *andS66Couple
over a year ago

Derby


"In 1975 the British public voted 67% to 32% to enter the EEC. It was such a clear mandate that Parliament happily delivered on it.

In 2016, however, less than 1% of the UK population turned the tide on this decision. This majority was so small that it doesn't even command a majority in Parliament. Meaning that politicians who are tasked to act in the best interests of the nation are being compelled down a course of action that they earnestly believe is self mutilating.

No wonder they've ground to a halt!

Seeing as the politicians don't believe in brexit, doesn't it make sense to give it back to the people for a third time to push it through?

They did not vote to join the EEC....that was a vote by parliament in October 1971, which was won by 112 votes. 356 MPs voted for it. It was opposed by Labour.

Think on that...356 MPs, with a majority of 112 MPs, put this country into the common market.

My bad. It was a referendum on whether to leave

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_European_Communities_membership_referendum,_1975 "

Actually, it wasn't a referendum on whether to leave...the question was

"Do you think that the United Kingdom should stay in the European Community (the Common Market)?"

And phsycologically, questions are more likely to get a Yes answer than a No answer.

The Electoral Commission, not formed until 2001, says of referendums "questions must be clear, simple and neutral, and should avoid misleading voters"

So note that, the better, more 'positive' "yes" response to the the wording in the 1975 referendum question was skewed toward remaining - also note that the question expressly said "Common Market"... which for all remainers that say 'it was more than a 'common market' and everybody knew it' that was voted on in 1975....well, that puts to bed that lie that voters weren't misled.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *mmabluTV/TS
over a year ago

upton wirral


"In 1975 the British public voted 67% to 32% to enter the EEC. It was such a clear mandate that Parliament happily delivered on it.

In 2016, however, less than 1% of the UK population turned the tide on this decision. This majority was so small that it doesn't even command a majority in Parliament. Meaning that politicians who are tasked to act in the best interests of the nation are being compelled down a course of action that they earnestly believe is self mutilating.

No wonder they've ground to a halt!

Seeing as the politicians don't believe in brexit, doesn't it make sense to give it back to the people for a third time to push it through?"
Not really because the bitterness would get worse and the polititions are on nobodys side exept there own,what will be will be

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

No we need to leave, we have handed in our resignation.

What should have been happening for the last 18 months is identify all the civil service roles that were outsourced in the 70's, recreate them here and start training or better still recruiting from the existing UK staff in the EU. So we get some skills, all the ones we had back then are pensioners now.

Ignore what labour say, they are supposed to object, that's why they are called the opposition.

But nobody wants to be responsible for the after party so they are kicking the ball around hoping someone else will fuck it up more than they do...

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Gosh what sensible, pragmatic answers people are coming up with to the OPs question. Well done fabbers

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *oodmessMan
over a year ago

yumsville

There are 5 options.

Exit on WTO.

Exit with a deal.

Go back to negotiating a better deal

Remain after leaving

Remain with the same benefits as we do now.

If they can't agree to exit with a deal and if political/popular opinion moves to a peoples vote, then a Remain vote must include the above two options: If we cannot have the same benefits Remaining as we do now, then do we exit on WTO or do we Remain but start as a newly adopted country?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By *andS66Couple
over a year ago

Derby


"Gosh what sensible, pragmatic answers people are coming up with to the OPs question. Well done fabbers

"

Tbh the OP's question was riddled with bollocks.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top