  |
 EU/Brexit Discussion Thread III, Here we go again. |
| Track this thread - Email this thread - Print this thread - Download this thread - Subscribe to this forum |
 26th May 2018, 11:59 AM
Post
#41
|
|
 I'm a paragon so don't perceive me
Joined: 3 February 2011
Posts: 37,417 User: 12,929                
|
The pro-Remain marches have been maybe a couple of thousand strong, and have been peaceful. The other half of the country is not going to be significantly more belligerent if the tables get flipped, it's just going to go back to being even more miserable and pessimistic than they currently are, on the winning side, no less, in the Express/Mail comment section.
|
 |
 
|
|
26th May 2018, 12:01 PM
Post
#42
|
|
 BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 18 July 2012
Posts: 22,821 User: 17,376 
 
|
QUOTE(vidcapper @ May 25 2018, 03:54 PM)  I'm assuming some of our money is invested in this, so we should either get access to it, or a refund. presumably in the same way as someone agreeing to buy something as a member of a club, putting it in legal writing, then deciding they don't want to leave the club but still have access to the club? Sounds familiar. It's what the lying brexiters told us we could have in the campaign to leave the EU, and they told us that we couldn't. That Leave means Leave. But by all means blame the EU for making us decide to leave and making us abide by the rules of non-club-members. |
|
|
|
|
26th May 2018, 12:06 PM
Post
#43
|
|
|
BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 18 July 2012
Posts: 22,821 User: 17,376
|
QUOTE(vidcapper @ May 26 2018, 06:40 AM) I'll tell you why - they're expecting a 'divorce' settlement from us on the basis of lost income, so why shouldn't our settlement allow for our investment in ongoing projects that we will now get no benefit from? Neither side can both have their cake & eat it. On a side issue, it should be pointed out that even EU countries are split on the issue of the EU sat-nav system - some of them support us. No, it's NOT a divorce settlement, it's called paying debts that you have signed up to, right up to the moment you leave the club. Big difference. We arent fighting over the kids. The EU have entire custody of everything. The UK is walking the streets with a begging bowl. There is no reason we can't remain part of the project - if we remain contributing to the EU in various areas and both sides agree. It's called "Trading Agreement". There is no automatic right to anything on either side. You have to AGREE. I realise this is an alien concept to Brexiters who feel that the world owes us everything because we are British!! How very dare they not give us everything we want immediately....!! The cheek. We're British!!! |
|
|
|
|
26th May 2018, 12:12 PM
Post
#44
|
|
|
BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 18 July 2012
Posts: 22,821 User: 17,376
|
QUOTE(vidcapper @ May 26 2018, 06:46 AM) Well there's the 'slight inconvenience' of ongoing public support for Brexit, which is not going to go away - and we have numbers on our side unless/until proven otherwise. IF you think the gov't is unpopular *now*, just imagine what it would be like if they reneged on the result of a vote that they themselves called! Maybe some of you might think the resulting civil unrest would be worth the price, but IMO that would be worse than any conceivable fallout from Brexit! 1. If that's true then you wont have a problem with testing that in a final vote. 2. They would be equally unpopular as they are with Remainers, since the vote was split and large numbers of people didnt express a preference. Besides which no one is asking anybody to renege on anything. They asking for a final vote on the final agreed deal by way of comparing what was promised with what is delivered. 3. So, civil unrest. Why then are people not rioting in the streets to remain in the EU? Are you suggesting that remainers are somehow more law-abiding than Leavers? Are you suggesting that rioting is not criminal beahviour and that these criminals who riot shouldnt immediately be subject to the same instant violent justice that you claim all criminals should be subject to? |
|
|
|
|
26th May 2018, 02:16 PM
Post
#45
|
|
 Paul Hyett
Joined: 4 April 2006
Posts: 25,346 User: 364
|
QUOTE(Popchartfreak @ May 26 2018, 01:12 PM) 1. If that's true then you wont have a problem with testing that in a final vote. 2. They would be equally unpopular as they are with Remainers, since the vote was split and large numbers of people didnt express a preference. Besides which no one is asking anybody to renege on anything. They asking for a final vote on the final agreed deal by way of comparing what was promised with what is delivered. 3. So, civil unrest. Why then are people not rioting in the streets to remain in the EU? Are you suggesting that remainers are somehow more law-abiding than Leavers? Are you suggesting that rioting is not criminal beahviour and that these criminals who riot shouldnt immediately be subject to the same instant violent justice that you claim all criminals should be subject to? 1. You keep on throwing this back as me as if I've opposed the idea. However, I'd be OK with another vote as long as it wasn't a Remain-favouriing 'heads we win, tails you lose' one : e.g. a) Accept the negotiated deal or, b) Stay in the EU. 2. But we can't take into account those who didn't express a preference, because, well, they didn't express a preference...  3. Because, unlike many posters here, a good proportion of Remainer supporters *accept* the democratic vote. Here's an interesting blog on this subject, by Owen Jones of your beloved Guardian, no less... https://medium.com/@OwenJones84/why-im-a-re...ult-d198dbc99c2 As for civil unrest (I never said *rioting* - that was your term), it could potentially involve a significant proportion of the population, rather than a few thousand disgruntled thugs, as in the London riots of 2011, so the police simply could not cope with that level of unrest. Still, I guess any gov't prepared to ignore a democratic vote would presumably have no qualms in machine-gunning protesters like some 3rd world dictatorship... This post has been edited by vidcapper: 26th May 2018, 02:19 PM |
|
|
|
|
26th May 2018, 02:21 PM
Post
#46
|
|
 Buffy/Charmed
Joined: 18 April 2013
Posts: 44,064 User: 18,639
     
|
WHAT
It was a 50/50 ADVISORY vote in a representative democracy. It ABSOLUTELY can ignore the advice given by 52% in favour of the more reasonable opinion of the 48% and 2 nations plus Gibraltar. Canada didn't machine gun anyone when it ignored Quebec. Australia didn't when it ignored the northwest voting for independence. Please. |
|
|
|
|
26th May 2018, 03:09 PM
Post
#47
|
|
 BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 13 April 2007
Posts: 36,668 User: 3,272
 
|
I agree with Oewn Jones on many things; I disagree with what he said in the article you provide. That's because I don't blindly follow the thoughts of anyone - apart from my own well-considered thoughts of course.
Meanwhile, here is an analysis by one of the country's leading pollsters. https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/blogs/pe...swing-to-remain |
|
|
|
|
26th May 2018, 03:10 PM
Post
#48
|
|
|
Paul Hyett
Joined: 4 April 2006
Posts: 25,346 User: 364
|
QUOTE(Queef of Peace @ May 26 2018, 03:21 PM) WHAT It was a 50/50 ADVISORY vote in a representative democracy. It ABSOLUTELY can ignore the advice given by 52% in favour of the more reasonable opinion of the 48% and 2 nations plus Gibraltar. Canada didn't machine gun anyone when it ignored Quebec. Australia didn't when it ignored the northwest voting for independence. Please. Referenda are not decided on the entirely subjective 'which is the more reasonable result' - but by the completely objective 'number of votes cast for each choice'. |
|
|
|
|
26th May 2018, 03:18 PM
Post
#49
|
|
|
Paul Hyett
Joined: 4 April 2006
Posts: 25,346 User: 364
|
QUOTE(Suedehead2 @ May 26 2018, 04:09 PM) I agree with Oewn Jones on many things; I disagree with what he said in the article you provide. That's because I don't blindly follow the thoughts of anyone - apart from my own well-considered thoughts of course. Meanwhile, here is an analysis by one of the country's leading pollsters. https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/blogs/pe...swing-to-remain Concentrating on one particular section (if nothing else, to show I did at least check out the article) : Indeed, given the softness of the Leave support among Labour voters, it is possible that, IF there were a new referendum and IF the Labour Party campaigned actively to stay in the EU, then the Remain majority could be substantial. This would, of course, require Jeremy Corbyn to abandon his past views of Brussels, which have ranged from lack of enthusiasm to outright hostility. But a change in his stance would have the backing of almost all his party’s MPs and large majorities of party members and Momentum activists. If he needed further temptation to change tack, his backing for staying in the EU could help to inflict a huge defeat on the government. Surely if Corbyn changed sides he might well lose some Leave supporters who had previously stuck with the unofficial party Remain line? 
|
|
|
|
|
26th May 2018, 04:16 PM
Post
#50
|
|
|
BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 18 July 2012
Posts: 22,821 User: 17,376
|
QUOTE(vidcapper @ May 26 2018, 03:16 PM) 1. You keep on throwing this back as me as if I've opposed the idea. However, I'd be OK with another vote as long as it wasn't a Remain-favouriing 'heads we win, tails you lose' one : e.g. a) Accept the negotiated deal or, b) Stay in the EU. 2. But we can't take into account those who didn't express a preference, because, well, they didn't express a preference... 3. Because, unlike many posters here, a good proportion of Remainer supporters *accept* the democratic vote. Here's an interesting blog on this subject, by Owen Jones of your beloved Guardian, no less... https://medium.com/@OwenJones84/why-im-a-re...ult-d198dbc99c2 As for civil unrest (I never said *rioting* - that was your term), it could potentially involve a significant proportion of the population, rather than a few thousand disgruntled thugs, as in the London riots of 2011, so the police simply could not cope with that level of unrest. Still, I guess any gov't prepared to ignore a democratic vote would presumably have no qualms in machine-gunning protesters like some 3rd world dictatorship... 1. Thats not a referndum, that's blackmail. Take it or accept the worst-case scenario. Which is what you want. Thats not democracy. You are afraid of democracy. 2. Thats what I said. 3. Accepting the democratic vote is not the same thing as jumping off a cliff because everyone was assured there is a mattress 60feet tall filled with riches beyond your wildest dreams, only to find its a sack with rocks in it. You dont force everyone to jump off the cliff you give them a chance to review their opinion. And then act based on that if everyone still decides to jump. |
|
|
|
|
26th May 2018, 04:25 PM
Post
#51
|
|
|
BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 13 April 2007
Posts: 36,668 User: 3,272
|
QUOTE(vidcapper @ May 26 2018, 04:18 PM) Concentrating on one particular section (if nothing else, to show I did at least check out the article) : Indeed, given the softness of the Leave support among Labour voters, it is possible that, IF there were a new referendum and IF the Labour Party campaigned actively to stay in the EU, then the Remain majority could be substantial. This would, of course, require Jeremy Corbyn to abandon his past views of Brussels, which have ranged from lack of enthusiasm to outright hostility. But a change in his stance would have the backing of almost all his party’s MPs and large majorities of party members and Momentum activists. If he needed further temptation to change tack, his backing for staying in the EU could help to inflict a huge defeat on the government. Surely if Corbyn changed sides he might well lose some Leave supporters who had previously stuck with the unofficial party Remain line? Corbyn supported Remain, albeit very quietly. |
|
|
|
|
26th May 2018, 04:28 PM
Post
#52
|
|
|
BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 18 July 2012
Posts: 22,821 User: 17,376
|
QUOTE(vidcapper @ May 26 2018, 04:10 PM) Referenda are not decided on the entirely subjective 'which is the more reasonable result' - but by the completely objective 'number of votes cast for each choice'. And then 5 years later have another round of opinions. You wish to deny that in a whisker-thin, illegally-funded, heavily propagandised campaign that took voters in. That's not democracy. Before completing a non-returnable action you make doubly sure everyone's on board with the final deal which fails on almost all matters and issues that were promised. Civil unrest: Peaceful demonstrations and protests that abide by the law, such as the Women's March, do not constitute civil unrest. Civil unrest is typically defined by law enforcement as a gathering of three or more people, in reaction to an event, with the intention of causing a public disturbance in violation of the law. In other words breaking the law. You still didn't answer my point about the split country NOT currently rioting in the streets. You also havent amswered the bit about the Irish border and the decades of murder of "Civil unrest". What you are doing it using Project Fear: you must do as I say because people will be rioting in the streets and their isnt enough police to control them? What about the military forces? They were brought in for Northern Ireland and may well again if a solution to the border is not found. If people go around creating civil unrest then they will suffer the consequences which you constantly say they deserve to. In fact, from previous arguments (stealing stuff from a house) you should be in favour of shooting them dead in the street for breaking the law. Bet you would if it were Remainers creating "civil unrest" against the law. Or do you support my right to go out and create havoc no matter what the law? You just continue to try and provide excuses for the problems of Brexit rather than face up to reality. |
|
|
|
|
26th May 2018, 04:33 PM
Post
#53
|
|
|
BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 18 July 2012
Posts: 22,821 User: 17,376
|
QUOTE(Suedehead2 @ May 26 2018, 05:25 PM) Corbyn supported Remain, albeit very quietly. If he'd been even more low profile than his 7/10 support for something he wanted to trigger the very next day after the result he'd have been burrowing underground. Some might say that's his modus operandi on difficult issues 
|
|
|
|
|
26th May 2018, 05:01 PM
Post
#54
|
|
|
Buffy/Charmed
Joined: 18 April 2013
Posts: 44,064 User: 18,639
|
QUOTE(vidcapper @ May 26 2018, 04:10 PM) Referenda are not decided on the entirely subjective 'which is the more reasonable result' - but by the completely objective 'number of votes cast for each choice'. Except in the two cases I put forward there PLUS a recent referendum in Switzerland. Again our system barely even allows for referenda - and in fact fly in the face of a representative parliament, but there you go. |
|
|
|
|
26th May 2018, 05:50 PM
Post
#55
|
|
|
BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 18 July 2012
Posts: 22,821 User: 17,376
|
QUOTE(Queef of Peace @ May 26 2018, 06:01 PM) Except in the two cases I put forward there PLUS a recent referendum in Switzerland. Again our system barely even allows for referenda - and in fact fly in the face of a representative parliament, but there you go. But Brexiteers WANT to hand over control to the British Parliament, British courts and British law. Except when they dont like it, which seems to be all the time.... 
|
|
|
|
|
27th May 2018, 06:13 AM
Post
#56
|
|
|
Paul Hyett
Joined: 4 April 2006
Posts: 25,346 User: 364
|
QUOTE(Popchartfreak @ May 26 2018, 05:16 PM) 1. Thats not a referndum, that's blackmail. Take it or accept the worst-case scenario. Which is what you want. Thats not democracy. You are afraid of democracy. 2. Thats what I said. 3. Accepting the democratic vote is not the same thing as jumping off a cliff because everyone was assured there is a mattress 60feet tall filled with riches beyond your wildest dreams, only to find its a sack with rocks in it. You dont force everyone to jump off the cliff you give them a chance to review their opinion. And then act based on that if everyone still decides to jump. 1. What I want is a *fair* referendum - one that gives both sides a chance to vote for their preferred choice. In the example I referred to, it gives Hard Brexiters nothing to vote for. 2. Then what's the problem? 3. You seem to be suggesting that Leavers are lemmings. QUOTE(Suedehead2 @ May 26 2018, 05:25 PM) Corbyn supported Remain, albeit very quietly. And convinced nobody, given that he'd always be Eurosceptic before. QUOTE(Popchartfreak @ May 26 2018, 05:28 PM) And then 5 years later have another round of opinions. You wish to deny that in a whisker-thin, illegally-funded, heavily propagandised campaign that took voters in. That's not democracy. There you go *again*, suggesting I don't want another vote! Given the Remain side had the massive advantage of a £9m gov't funded leaflet that didn't even count as part of the referendum expenses, any dodgy Leave expenses are just a drop in the ocean compared to that. Also, you've never offered any sort of proof that the campaign was decisive in determining the result. QUOTE Civil unrest: Peaceful demonstrations and protests that abide by the law, such as the Women's March, do not constitute civil unrest. Civil unrest is typically defined by law enforcement as a gathering of three or more people, in reaction to an event, with the intention of causing a public disturbance in violation of the law. In other words breaking the law. You still didn't answer my point about the split country NOT currently rioting in the streets. Yes I did, I suggest you reread what I wrote.  QUOTE You just continue to try and provide excuses for the problems of Brexit rather than face up to reality. It's not my job to deal with the problems of achieving Brexit - after all, we all vote in GE's without needing to know how the winning party will achieve what it set out in its manifesto... QUOTE(Queef of Peace @ May 26 2018, 06:01 PM) Again our system barely even allows for referenda - and in fact fly in the face of a representative parliament, but there you go. But the main flaw in a system of representative democracy is that if all major parties want something, but the voters want the opposite, then voters are basically f*cked. |
|
|
|
|
27th May 2018, 11:27 AM
Post
#57
|
|
|
BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 18 July 2012
Posts: 22,821 User: 17,376
|
QUOTE(vidcapper @ May 27 2018, 07:13 AM) 1. What I want is a *fair* referendum - one that gives both sides a chance to vote for their preferred choice. In the example I referred to, it gives Hard Brexiters nothing to vote for. 2. Then what's the problem? 3. You seem to be suggesting that Leavers are lemmings. And convinced nobody, given that he'd always be Eurosceptic before. There you go *again*, suggesting I don't want another vote! Given the Remain side had the massive advantage of a £9m gov't funded leaflet that didn't even count as part of the referendum expenses, any dodgy Leave expenses are just a drop in the ocean compared to that. Also, you've never offered any sort of proof that the campaign was decisive in determining the result. Yes I did, I suggest you reread what I wrote. It's not my job to deal with the problems of achieving Brexit - after all, we all vote in GE's without needing to know how the winning party will achieve what it set out in its manifesto... But the main flaw in a system of representative democracy is that if all major parties want something, but the voters want the opposite, then voters are basically f*cked. 1. No, you have a choice to vote for the deal agreed by our democratically-elected governemnt. You want the British Government to have the power, you can't then turn down the best deal they can do to force the rest of us into a worst-case scenario because you dont get your own selfish way. In your scenario no doubt half the country is blackmailed into accepting whatever deal is offered. 2. There is no problem. Your first comment was pointless and led to my pointless comment which led to your pointless comment and this additional pointless comment. Though I'm glad you agreed with me, while trying to make it sound as if you were making the first point I made. 3. Pretty much are... 4. Sitting governments always have an advantage. They didn't however break the law. Leave did. Every journalist, campaigner and MP has every opportunity to come up with evidence that Remain broke the law. Leave certainly 100% did. 5. No it's not your job to provide Brexit as was claimed it would be provided by Lying Leavers. It's also not your job to try to spread weak feeble excuses for what they are failing to do and all the lies they told, yet here we are... I'm glad you bring up GE's because we get to judge them 5 years later. I'm glad you agree that we have the right to judge them 5 years later and review our feeling again as a country based on what they promised to deliver and actually delivered. 6. You didn't respond to my assertion that you were operating Project Fear about civil unrest by Leavers. You didn't respond to my suggestion that you are saying they are more likely, in your Project fear scenario, to carrty out illegal action than the people who have had their rights to be a European Citizen removed. Leavers have lost no rights they didn't want to get rid of. In the real world Remainers should be the ones causing civil unrest. They aren't. So unless you are saying Leavers are a bit thick and unrily your logic is entirely flawed. As usual. Just Project fear. You also don't say that you would be happy to see them shot for breaking the law in such a hypothetical case as you undoubtedly would if Remainers started protesting in civil unrest, and as you do with thieves. Curious you have no comment on these points.... |
|
|
|
|
27th May 2018, 11:40 AM
Post
#58
|
|
|
Buffy/Charmed
Joined: 18 April 2013
Posts: 44,064 User: 18,639
|
Popchart is SLAYING these arguments right now - I don't have anything to add to that
 Vidcapper now seems to be saying we won, get over it :/ |
|
|
|
|
27th May 2018, 01:47 PM
Post
#59
|
|
|
Paul Hyett
Joined: 4 April 2006
Posts: 25,346 User: 364
|
QUOTE(Popchartfreak @ May 27 2018, 12:27 PM) Curious you have no comment on these points.... Nothing that hasn't already been replied to, many times. |
|
|
|
|
27th May 2018, 01:50 PM
Post
#60
|
|
|
Paul Hyett
Joined: 4 April 2006
Posts: 25,346 User: 364
|
QUOTE(Queef of Peace @ May 27 2018, 12:40 PM) Popchart is SLAYING these arguments right now - I don't have anything to add to that Vidcapper now seems to be saying we won, get over it :/ Precisely - PCF can win all the arguments he wants - the only one that matters was won on 23/6/2016. |
|
|
|
|
| Time is now: 23rd April 2024, 02:09 PM |
Copyright © 2006 - 2024 BuzzJack.com
About | Contact | Advertise | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service
