OK, lets say for the sake of argument, that only half of 2016's Leavers wanted No Deal (I suspect the real figure was higher than that, but that's another issue). If they then boycotted a referendum in which No Deal was not an option, it would severely undermine the mandate for whatever the result turned out to be.

 

For example : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973_Northern...and_border_poll

 

When was leaving without No Deal ever established during the 2016 referendum? If you find it I’ll be impressed.

I wonder if the EU would consider the Norway-option tbh.

 

Like sure it would be beneficially economically, but it would also open the door for other countries to go that direction with populism being big as hell around europe. And surely they wanna make an example out of the UK (no matter how harsh it sounds)

When was leaving without No Deal ever established during the 2016 referendum? If you find it I’ll be impressed.

 

It was not specifically stated, but surely you can't believe that no-one who voted Leave, wanted it?

Which is very different from claiming that over half of Leave voters wanted it.

Which is very different from claiming that over half of Leave voters wanted it.

 

Actually, I was doing the 'for sake of argument' thing, which is less than making an actual claim.

It was not specifically stated, but surely you can't believe that no-one who voted Leave, wanted it?

 

They may have wanted no deal, but if you asked them would they be happy for the cost of everyday living to go up at the cost of leaving the EU, I don't think they would have voted no deal. I don't believe for a second that the majority of the people who voted Brexit would actually vote for no deal if they knew the truth of what it meant for them.

 

Question for the Brexiteers - if you feel so strong about democracy - how do you feel that many Brexiteers in the Tory party might actually vote for May's (terrible) Deal? This is the same deal that they believed was so bad they tried to get rid of her.

As was inevitable, the Article 50 petition achieved nothing, other than the standard 'It will be debated in the HoC'.

 

What did the people who signed it expect - that the gov't would actually halt the Leave process because of it? :wacko:

 

It's a safe bet that 98%+ of those who signed it, voted to Remain in 2016 already, so it's not as if they haven't had a chance to make to have their voices heard. Most of the 2% were probably too young to vote in 2016 anyway.

 

I was too young to vote against the Thatcher gov't in 1983, but I never suggested my vote should be retroactively considered as a means to challenge that result.

As was inevitable, the Article 50 petition achieved nothing, other than the standard 'It will be debated in the HoC'.

 

What did the people who signed it expect - that the gov't would actually halt the Leave process because of it? :wacko:

 

It's a safe bet that 98%+ of those who signed it, voted to Remain in 2016 already, so it's not as if they haven't had a chance to make to have their voices heard. Most of the 2% were probably too young to vote in 2016 anyway.

 

I was too young to vote against the Thatcher gov't in 1983, but I never suggested my vote should be retroactively considered as a means to challenge that result.

 

It's called "democracy". The right to peacefully express an opinion. Also the right to change an opinion. You may wish to have a word with Rees-Mogg, saviour of the British People, about being a massive f***ing hypocrite when it comes to HIM changing his mind on a deal he has already voted against twice in the space of one month, and suddenly decides to change his mind on it, vs the population at large who voted by a slim margin for what they thought was going to be a great deal for the UK 3 years ago, and turned out to be something that the people who negotiated the deal, who said it would be a great deal, end up bailing and calling it a shit deal, having the opportunity to change their mind now they know they were lied to.

 

PS 35 million voted in 2016. Around 1.5 million in the general population have since died, presumably more of them older people who voted more likely Leave, so as many as three-quarters of a million voters no longer hold that opinion (or any opinion on anything) while around 1.5 million will have joined the voter lists, most of them Remain. So as I see it there is likely to be a year-on-year net gain for Remain as each year passes because, as we've seen, most people who voted hold the same view despite events since. So there is no longer a majority for Brexit, and that's why Bexiters don't want another democratic vote on an actual deal.

 

I pissed myself reading all the posts on Mogg's twitter feed from hard-line Brexiters slagging him off, realising what I've been saying about him for years is true, and swearing to never vote again in anything or trust a politician. Poor dears, putting your trust in rich liars can be SO disappointing.....

It's called "democracy". The right to peacefully express an opinion. Also the right to change an opinion. You may wish to have a word with Rees-Mogg, saviour of the British People, about being a massive f***ing hypocrite when it comes to HIM changing his mind on a deal he has already voted against twice in the space of one month, and suddenly decides to change his mind on it, vs the population at large who voted by a slim margin for what they thought was going to be a great deal for the UK 3 years ago, and turned out to be something that the people who negotiated the deal, who said it would be a great deal, end up bailing and calling it a shit deal, having the opportunity to change their mind now they know they were lied to.

 

I doubt he's suddenly become a Remainer o/n though - more likely just realised that May's deal, iffy though it is, is the best we're likely to get from the EU.

 

PS 35 million voted in 2016. Around 1.5 million in the general population have since died, presumably more of them older people who voted more likely Leave, so as many as three-quarters of a million voters no longer hold that opinion (or any opinion on anything) while around 1.5 million will have joined the voter lists, most of them Remain. So as I see it there is likely to be a year-on-year net gain for Remain as each year passes because, as we've seen, most people who voted hold the same view despite events since. So there is no longer a majority for Brexit, and that's why Bexiters don't want another democratic vote on an actual deal.

 

There wasn't *supposed* to have been a majority for Brexit in 2016... ;)

 

As for 'a continuous rise in support for the EU' - that is literally impossible, because the support for it was higher in 1975, so it must've fallen since then and/or varied over time.

 

Say Brexit is somehow stopped - how long do you think it'll be before the EU brings in more deeply unpopular laws, which would be then in a far weaker position to resist, having whimpered away with our tail between our legs... :(

Edited March 27, 20196 yr by vidcapper

The petition has achieved its purpose. It was not intended or expected to reap immediate political change. But it has shifted the Overton window in a way that confirms to politicians/reminds them that there is a sizable number of the engaged populace who wish to revoke Article 50. Previously this option was ignored in Parliamentary debates. Now there are indicative votes on the subject.

The petition has achieved its purpose. It was not intended or expected to reap immediate political change. But it has shifted the Overton window in a way that confirms to politicians/reminds them that there is a sizable number of the engaged populace who wish to revoke Article 50. Previously this option was ignored in Parliamentary debates. Now there are indicative votes on the subject.

 

I'd never heard of this 'Overton window' before.

The petition’s purpose is to highlight that the will of the people does not mean everyone wants i) to leave ii) a hard Brexit as has been continuously pushed by this Government. The Government are acting on a mandate of 52% and not considering the opinions of the 48%, a strongly significant proportion - it was not a landslide as has been pushed by the Government/Leave voters. A balance should have been better striked to work towards a softer Brexit (along the lines of Norway+) or a people’s vote

I'd never heard of this 'Overton window' before.

 

I’m surprised.

 

Shorthand for ‘acceptable range of political discourse’, acceptable just meaning what is considered worth discussing by public figures. Revocation for a while dropped out of it despite its level of support because no one was bringing it up in the media. Meanwhile no deal entered it when negotiations started to go poorly.

 

Extreme extended Overton windows see the perceived center ground shift further right or left, so that those ideas can benefit from then seeming like the compromise option. Of course where it currently is is very debateable and depends on the issue.

The petition’s purpose is to highlight that the will of the people does not mean everyone wants i) to leave ii) a hard Brexit as has been continuously pushed by this Government. The Government are acting on a mandate of 52% and not considering the opinions of the 48%, a strongly significant proportion - it was not a landslide as has been pushed by the Government/Leave voters. A balance should have been better striked to work towards a softer Brexit (along the lines of Norway+) or a people’s vote

 

How low does the proportion have to go before opponents can be 'ignored'. :rolleyes:

 

Seriously though, there must be a line drawn somewhere to ensure the losing side do not get *more* consideration than the winning side.

How low does the proportion have to go before opponents can be 'ignored'. :rolleyes:

 

Seriously though, there must be a line drawn somewhere to ensure the losing side do not get *more* consideration than the winning side.

so you think Remain voters should be ignored?

 

Look at the Wales devolution referendum - that was a similar situation where it was a near 50/50 split, in favour of devolution. However, whilst they were given a government with devolution powers - these were very limited when compared to Scotland (where the referendum was heavily in favour of devolution). This shows the Govenrment acted on the referendum result but, given the close result, responded to those who did not want a devolved government by providing limited powers.

 

Considering Brexit has even larger implications, the Government should not have reacted in a way that only listens to 52%. A soft Brexit means acting upon the referendums result but in a way that respects how close the result was, in a very similar way to the Wales devolution referendum.

I agree - think right now we're headed to a longer extension and possibly end up with a soft Brexit option.

 

The ERG are crazy. I mean they're a bunch of loons as it is, if they don't get their fantasy ideology through now (which I agree they choked with the failed leadership bid) then I can't see how they think getting Mogg in would help. The hardliners have backed themselves in to a terrible corner.

 

The ERG are like a traditional conservative right with add free market views. A wee bit like the TUV in NI!

So, Parliament have announced they're gonna debate the petition to revoke Article 50 on April Fools' Day.

 

I wonder if that's a coincidence.

so you think Remain voters should be ignored?

 

I see that as e rhetorical question. :mellow:

 

Considering Brexit has even larger implications, the Government should not have reacted in a way that only listens to 52%. A soft Brexit means acting upon the referendums result but in a way that respects how close the result was,

 

Which imho they have done, as if they hadn't, they could have gone straight for the No Deal option.

 

 

So, Parliament have announced they're gonna debate the petition to revoke Article 50 on April Fools' Day.

 

I wonder if that's a coincidence.

 

I couldn't possibly comment. :teresa:

Which imho they have done, as if they hadn't, they could have gone straight for the No Deal option.

The leave campaign was about securing a deal:

 

‘Taking back control is a careful change, not a sudden stop - we will negotiate the terms of a new deal before we start any legal process to leave’

 

http://i66.tinypic.com/x3aluf.jpg

 

http://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/theme....pdf?1463496002

The leave campaign was about securing a deal:

 

I hate to tell you this, but only a very small proportion of voters actually took any notice of the campaign, other than the bits we were beaten over the head with ; the £350m NHS, Farage's infamous poster, and the Jo Cox murder.