Not what we wanted to hear: it's looking like a No Deal :(

Whatever your political persuasion, defend your corner here. All we ask is that you voice YOUR opinion, rather than just post a link to a half-hour youtube video. Politics can get a bit lively, and if you prefer a less combative debate, please post in the Politics for Moderates section instead.
Jim B
Posts: 2750
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 5:42 am

Re: Not what we wanted to hear: it's looking like a No Deal :(

Post by Jim B »

Jimgym wrote: Sun Oct 13, 2019 6:26 pm
Jim B wrote: Sun Oct 13, 2019 5:23 pm
Jimgym wrote: Sun Oct 13, 2019 12:40 pm

It's irrelevant when the vote came, people were given the information and they voted. The result needs to be implemented, there should be no argument with that. Many politicians went on record at the time to say just that, yet they are now reneging. Most remainers won't accept it yet expect those who voted leave to agree to a second referendum.Why on earth should we? We had one, Remainers thought they were going to win and are still coming to terms with the fact they badly misjudged things. I don't always like the result of democracy but I have to accept it, along with everyone else.
I disagree Alan, the timing of the referendum was crucial; the Tories took a pasting in the following General Election when May lost her massive majority. If Brexit was the B all and end all for the people they would have followed on by supporting the Tories or UKIP but they didnt; May lost her majority and UKIP all but disappeared from the political scene, many people used their vote in the referendum to vote against austerity and then did it again in the GE.
You are right in that Remain badly misjudged things but most feel they were stitched up by lies and fraud and that's why they refuse to accept the result.
As said we can argue these points till we're blue in the face but if we want to move on we have to grasp the nettle.
As for Project Fear, jobs are being lost, factories are closing, value of the pound about 12% down and cost of living (according to my Brexit Sister) is going up weekly so it's turning out to be prophetic.

Jim
Jim, I disagree and this discussion would not be taking place if Remain had won. I can post many Project Fear prophesies that were blatant lies, and I think we all know Project Fear was real, not some figment of Leave voters imagination.
Alan
Instead of promoting the many benefits of the EU, Remain ran a negative campaign on the pitfalls of leaving which was a total disaster.
I would be interested to know which of the Project Fear prophesies you consider were lies even though Brexit hasn't happened yet?

Jim
Jim B
Posts: 2750
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 5:42 am

Re: Not what we wanted to hear: it's looking like a No Deal :(

Post by Jim B »

Interesting reading for those who haven't bothered registering at Immigration.
Jim

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/p ... 1571008906
Jimgym
Posts: 2429
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 7:37 am
Location: Paphos

Re: Not what we wanted to hear: it's looking like a No Deal :(

Post by Jimgym »

Jim B wrote: Mon Oct 14, 2019 7:50 am
Jimgym wrote: Sun Oct 13, 2019 6:26 pm
Jim B wrote: Sun Oct 13, 2019 5:23 pm

I disagree Alan, the timing of the referendum was crucial; the Tories took a pasting in the following General Election when May lost her massive majority. If Brexit was the B all and end all for the people they would have followed on by supporting the Tories or UKIP but they didnt; May lost her majority and UKIP all but disappeared from the political scene, many people used their vote in the referendum to vote against austerity and then did it again in the GE.
You are right in that Remain badly misjudged things but most feel they were stitched up by lies and fraud and that's why they refuse to accept the result.
As said we can argue these points till we're blue in the face but if we want to move on we have to grasp the nettle.
As for Project Fear, jobs are being lost, factories are closing, value of the pound about 12% down and cost of living (according to my Brexit Sister) is going up weekly so it's turning out to be prophetic.

Jim
Jim, I disagree and this discussion would not be taking place if Remain had won. I can post many Project Fear prophesies that were blatant lies, and I think we all know Project Fear was real, not some figment of Leave voters imagination.
Alan
Instead of promoting the many benefits of the EU, Remain ran a negative campaign on the pitfalls of leaving which was a total disaster.
I would be interested to know which of the Project Fear prophesies you consider were lies even though Brexit hasn't happened yet?

Jim
What was said: George Osborne, the then Chancellor, said in a BBC Radio 4 interview that leaving the European Union would cause "financial instability" and leave "no economic plan," which would need an immediate response from the government. "There would have to be increases in tax and cuts in public spending to fill the black hole.

2. The NHS finances would be undermined

What was said: Former Health Minister Stephen Dorrell warned: “We need a strong economy to guarantee the growth in funding that the health and care service requires and evidence suggests leaving the EU would undermine this.” LIE

David Cameron would stay on as prime minister

What was said: Former Prime Minister David Cameron said that if the Leave campaign won, he would stay on to negotiate Brexit. LIE

Brexit will destroy Western civilization as we know it
What was said: European Council President Donald Tusk said a vote to leave the EU would boost anti-European forces. "As a historian I fear Brexit could be the beginning of the destruction of not only the EU but also Western political civilization in its entirety, he told Bild newspaper. LIE

Peace at risk

What was said: David Cameron warned: "Can we be so sure that peace and stability on our Continent are assured beyond any shadow of doubt? Is that a risk worth taking? I would never be so rash as to make that assumption." Are there any wars between European countries?

I could go on but I think you get my point. Now about Project Fear not being real......
Jim B
Posts: 2750
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 5:42 am

Re: Not what we wanted to hear: it's looking like a No Deal :(

Post by Jim B »

As I said Brexit hasn't happened yet and most of what you listed may only happen once the UK leaves.

There is already financial instability with the pound bobbing up and down as one rumour takes over another, factories closing and hundreds of thousands of jobs already being lost. Crops left to rot because there's no one to collect them.

The NHS is in crisis, thousands of EU citizens have left and returned home with no one to fill the vacancies.

Russia is doing its best to split up Europe with cyber warfare and have invaded Ukraine, Georgia, Moldova and attempted a coup in Montenegro, they are poisoning and killing British citizens on our home soil. They have been found to have interfered in the elections in the USA and UK plus there is presently an investigation into funding of certain Brexit parties.

I'll give you David Cameron but what did you expect.

Jim
User avatar
Dominic
Site Admin
Posts: 14931
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 5:00 pm
Location: Polemi
Contact:

Re: Not what we wanted to hear: it's looking like a No Deal :(

Post by Dominic »

Happy in Cyprus wrote: Sun Oct 13, 2019 2:26 am
Dominic wrote: Sat Oct 12, 2019 11:05 amI gave one a while back though. Not having to abide by CAP.
So what is it about the CAP that:

a) you don't like?
b) you feel is so damaging to the UK generally that it is worth the country going through the self-inflicted trauma which it has been through over the past 3 years?

My understanding is that Britain's farmers now live in fear of the consequences of Brexit, as this article https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... eal-brexit makes clear:

Here's just a few short paragraphs from the article:

Today’s report, written by Séan Rickard, the former chief economist of the National Farmers’ Union – and launched by Farmers for a People’s Vote – is a forensic analysis of the effect of a crash-out Brexit, which the government will struggle to refute. The high proportion of UK farm exports to the EU would stop, barred by regulatory barriers and deterred by tariffs: 27% on chickens, 46% on lamb and 65% on beef. Cereals would be hit too. The government says it will remove or sharply lower all tariffs on imported food to keep prices down as the pound plunges. But this report shows how that import surge would wreck British farming.

WTO rules mean Britain must let in food from all over the world on the same tariffs and terms, no picking and choosing, open to all comers. Brazilian beef costs 50% less, US cereals 30% less. What leverage will the UK have for any future deals with the US or anyone, if we have already removed most tariffs?

Some 60% of farm incomes depend on subsidies from the EU’s basic payment scheme.
Michael Gove promised to replace it with environmental subsidies – but only until 2022. Rickard rightly doubts that the same sums will be forthcoming in future when competing for funds with all the other urgent spending needs.

...and...

Patrick Minford, the Brexiteers’ favoured economist, wants shops flooded with cheap imports floating free on global commodities markets, unfettered by regulatory checks, with no tariffs or protection for home produce. Cheap food, promised by Jacob Rees-Mogg, will please consumers and Minford is sanguine about farmers, fishers and most British manufacturers going to the wall. That’s a price worth paying, a valid trade-off for market extremists, who are careless about food security, happy for us to grow nothing ourselves, leaving us wholly dependent on world markets. Minfordites are untouched by the romance of farming or the pull of manufacturing – shrugging them off as relatively small parts of the economy. Finance and services are the only future.

...and...

The tragedy is that so many farmers voted for this destruction of their own livelihoods: Rickard says they were seduced by Owen Paterson, who toured rural areas telling farmers that after Brexit they could have all the advantages of sales to the EU with none of the regulation and paperwork. Now, at the 11th hour, this report should be a wake-up call for what no deal means. “They can stop insulting us and calling this project fear. Let them come up with their own figures,” Rickard challenges the government.
Here's another Guardian article about CAP.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... griculture

Its starts out like this:

I’m a remainer, but there’s one result of Brexit I can’t wait to see: leaving the EU’s common agricultural policy. This is the farm subsidy system that spends €50bn (£44bn) a year on achieving none of its objectives. It is among the most powerful drivers of environmental destruction in the northern hemisphere. Because payments are made only for land that’s in “agricultural condition”, the system creates a perverse incentive to clear wildlife habitats, even in places unsuitable for farming, to produce the empty ground that qualifies for public money. These payments have led to the destruction of hundreds of thousands of hectares of magnificent wild places across Europe.

And continues in a similar vein.
Web Designer / Developer. Currently working on Paphos Life.
Living in Polemi, Cyprus with my wife and daughter.
Jimgym
Posts: 2429
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 7:37 am
Location: Paphos

Re: Not what we wanted to hear: it's looking like a No Deal :(

Post by Jimgym »

Jim B wrote: Mon Oct 14, 2019 10:48 am As I said Brexit hasn't happened yet and most of what you listed may only happen once the UK leaves.

There is already financial instability with the pound bobbing up and down as one rumour takes over another, factories closing and hundreds of thousands of jobs already being lost. Crops left to rot because there's no one to collect them.

The NHS is in crisis, thousands of EU citizens have left and returned home with no one to fill the vacancies.

Russia is doing its best to split up Europe with cyber warfare and have invaded Ukraine, Georgia, Moldova and attempted a coup in Montenegro, they are poisoning and killing British citizens on our home soil. They have been found to have interfered in the elections in the USA and UK plus there is presently an investigation into funding of certain Brexit parties.

I'll give you David Cameron but what did you expect.

Jim
These comments were made in relation to the vote, and used as a threat if Britain voted leave, they did and none of it materialised, that my point about PF. I think the investigation has been completed into the Brexit party, a man was poisoned in London for political reasons in I think 1980, nothing to do with Brexit. Russia, has always been sabre rattling, again nothing to do with Brexit. The NHS will never have enough money, again nothing to do with Brexit. I hate it when people seek to blame every downturn or bad thing on Brexit, the currencies, job, stock markets have all been going up and down since they started, and will continue to do so. Brexit is only one of many influences, good and bad!
jeba
Posts: 1495
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2017 8:38 pm

Re: Not what we wanted to hear: it's looking like a No Deal :(

Post by jeba »

Jimgym wrote: Mon Oct 14, 2019 7:27 am Your definition of educating the voters can be as different as many others. Is there a standard to which we should adhere?
Yes, the minimum should be that the ballot paper is clear on what the vote is about. If there is a vote to leave the EU it shouldn´t be regarded a vote to leave the common market or the customs union as these are different kettles of fish.
Jimgym wrote: Mon Oct 14, 2019 7:27 am I've no idea on the percentages, and I suspect nobody really knows, beyond a vague guess. I'm not making any claims on how people might vote, I leave that to pollsters.
So what´s your vague guess? Were there at least 2 % of voters who voted leave but were under the assumption the they voted for for leaving the EU and not the custums union and / or the common market as well and who would have voted differently had they been aware? If you don´t have any idea - how can you be so sure that their number was below 2 %?
Jimgym wrote: Mon Oct 14, 2019 7:27 am Saying as you have*( edit) on more than one occasion, incorrectly I might add, Britons were told a vote to leave was to leave the single market. It was put out there to the British public. What they chose to do with that information is up to them, as it is in every single election or vote. Guessing, as you say is just that, a ballot paper is proof of people's intentions, and for me that carries far more weight that someone surmising and offering guesses.
I never said they were told that a vote to leave was vote to leave the single market. On the contrary - my argument was they weren´t informed properly that this would be implied (however, this is admittedly based on hearsay since I have never lived in the UK). Apart from that even you haven´t argued that a vote to leave was to be a vote for leaving the custums union.
My point is exactly what your stating yourself: only the ballot paper can be regarded proof and there was no question about leaving the common market nor the customs union.
Jimgym
Posts: 2429
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 7:37 am
Location: Paphos

Re: Not what we wanted to hear: it's looking like a No Deal :(

Post by Jimgym »

It was a very simple question on the ballot paper, remain or leave the EU. Shall I offer my guess as to why it was kept that simple? Because Remain thought they had it won. It certainly backfired on them.

I don't do "vague guesses" I was suggesting other people might not know beyond one, not I. Neither did I suggest anything about 2 % that was you, so your whole line of questioning is completely pointless to me.

No you didn't say they were told, I did, my typo. You argued they weren't told and I offered proof they were.

Yes the ballot paper, of which 17.4 million ticked leave. Apparently that wasn't enough for some people though, such a pity....
User avatar
Jimgward
Posts: 3115
Joined: Fri Dec 30, 2016 8:14 pm
Location: Lanark
Contact:

Re: Not what we wanted to hear: it's looking like a No Deal :(

Post by Jimgward »

Jimgym - I provided proof, including videos from pre-brexit referendum, of ALL of the key players - Johnson, Cummings, Gove, Davis and many more, stating CATEGORICALLY that leaving the EU was not leaving the single market and much more...

This all amounted to MUCH MORE than David Cameron's one appearance you quote.

The average voter in the UK tends to hear something and form an opinion. My wife's mother and uncle both voted Leave because they believed the immigration stories about stopping immigration and that the country couldn't cope with all these dole cheats, users of the NHS, schools and overloading all systems. Others heard about EU laws. Others about 'Back to where we were", others about borders and so on. Most, I would attest, did not properly research or look at media of any kind outside their own sphere. The tow aforementioned get most news from the Daily Mail.

I know that would also work both ways, that many remain voters would not have looked into it enough, however, when that was the status quo, you didn't need to change what you were happy with.

Even if I wasn't making my mind upon the basis of my knowledge and business needs, I would have unselfishly wanted whatever I believed was best for my children and grandchildren.

I argue, therefore, that the majority of the country, despite TV and other media details from all sides and leaflets in their letterboxes, did not make an informed choice.

Now, I think the country is much more informed. My MiL and Uncle have changed their minds massively. I know others who have as well. I am convinced that even a May deal put to the electorate against remain, or even a no-deal or a deal against remain, would see remain winning by over 60%.
Jimgym
Posts: 2429
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 7:37 am
Location: Paphos

Re: Not what we wanted to hear: it's looking like a No Deal :(

Post by Jimgym »

Jimgward wrote: Mon Oct 14, 2019 5:26 pm Jimgym - I provided proof, including videos from pre-brexit referendum, of ALL of the key players - Johnson, Cummings, Gove, Davis and many more, stating CATEGORICALLY that leaving the EU was not leaving the single market and much more...

This all amounted to MUCH MORE than David Cameron's one appearance you quote.

The average voter in the UK tends to hear something and form an opinion. My wife's mother and uncle both voted Leave because they believed the immigration stories about stopping immigration and that the country couldn't cope with all these dole cheats, users of the NHS, schools and overloading all systems. Others heard about EU laws. Others about 'Back to where we were", others about borders and so on. Most, I would attest, did not properly research or look at media of any kind outside their own sphere. The tow aforementioned get most news from the Daily Mail.

I know that would also work both ways, that many remain voters would not have looked into it enough, however, when that was the status quo, you didn't need to change what you were happy with.

Even if I wasn't making my mind upon the basis of my knowledge and business needs, I would have unselfishly wanted whatever I believed was best for my children and grandchildren.

I argue, therefore, that the majority of the country, despite TV and other media details from all sides and leaflets in their letterboxes, did not make an informed choice.

Now, I think the country is much more informed. My MiL and Uncle have changed their minds massively. I know others who have as well. I am convinced that even a May deal put to the electorate against remain, or even a no-deal or a deal against remain, would see remain winning by over 60%.
Jim, the fact that your relatives have apparently changed their mind is completely and utterly irrelevant to the vote. They had a choice, they made it. It wasn't a referendum where you could have a few go's at it, thats a game for children, not adults. Would you be of the same opinion if Remain had won? Somehow I very very much doubt it. Remainers just cannot accept they lost. It really is about time they did. The Prime Minister went on national television and told the country that a vote for leave was a vote to leave the single market. Now, however you slice it, he said it. I don't really care if people didn't believe him, didn't hear him, or a million other reasons Remainers will come up with. He said it, end of. I know loads of people who voted remain and now wish they'd voted leave because of their disgust at how politicians are behaving. So what? All hearsay and hot air. They did make an informed choice, just not one you happen to agree with, that doesn't invalidate it. I am constantly amazed, amused then saddened at how desperately remainers will latch on to any reason or excuse to call for a second referendum.
Jimgym
Posts: 2429
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 7:37 am
Location: Paphos

Re: Not what we wanted to hear: it's looking like a No Deal :(

Post by Jimgym »

Just a reminder to all those who need it. You can argue all you like but here are the facts.
Leave 17,410,742 51.89%
Remain 16,141,241 48.11%

You really cannot get any clearer than that!
jeba
Posts: 1495
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2017 8:38 pm

Re: Not what we wanted to hear: it's looking like a No Deal :(

Post by jeba »

Jimgym wrote: Mon Oct 14, 2019 3:11 pm I don't do "vague guesses" I was suggesting other people might not know beyond one, not I. Neither did I suggest anything about 2 % that was you, so your whole line of questioning is completely pointless to me.
Sorry, but are avoiding the question. Which was how you can be so sure that not even 2% would have voted differently if they had known that leaving the EU would also mean leaving the common market and the customs union (assuming they knew the differences). Or how the author of this: https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comm ... 59316.html article (linked to at the Eastern forum) worded it - if they had known the price of leaving. And guess why I introduced the 2 % figure - because that would already have been enough for remain to win. Maybe there is a poll asking people whether they understand the difference and whether that would have changed their vote? If so and if there were at least 2% who voted leave and who answered yes, would you agree that Brexit should be canceled?
Jimgym wrote: Mon Oct 14, 2019 3:11 pm No you didn't say they were told, I did, my typo. You argued they weren't told and I offered proof they were.
As has been pointed out before: the PM saying on TV that "leave" would mean leaving the common market as well isn´t sufficient to educate voters (no matter how often you repeat that mantra). Plus you conveniently forget to engage with the point that there is a custums union as well which he didn´t seem to have mentioned.
Jimgym wrote: Mon Oct 14, 2019 3:11 pm Yes the ballot paper, of which 17.4 million ticked leave. Apparently that wasn't enough for some people though,
Rightfully not - because the ballot paper wasn´t mentioning customs union / common market.

In my view the whole thing is like asking someone if they liked to have a Rolls Royce rather than a vauxhall without telling the price.
This is a case for https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/ ... y-informed
User avatar
Dominic
Site Admin
Posts: 14931
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 5:00 pm
Location: Polemi
Contact:

Re: Not what we wanted to hear: it's looking like a No Deal :(

Post by Dominic »

The vote was quite simple.

Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?

It didn't mention the Irish border. It didn't mention the Common Market. It just said shall we be in or out of the EU.

It wasn't a complicated question.

It's like saying "Shall we go to Egypt or Benidorm for our holiday?" You aren't voting to fly via BA from Paphos to Spain, or via Easyjet from Larnaca to Cairo. That is a detail that will be decided later. All you are voting for is Benidorm or Egypt.

All people voted for in the referendum was to be in or out of the EU.

Unfortunately, at the moment, nobody knows what being out of the EU actually means. The only known unknown is a no deal Brexit. Everything else is unknown unknowns, to paraphrase the much-maligned Mr Rumsfeld.

If a deal is decided, it would be nice if we all got to vote on it. If a deal cannot be decided, then no-deal is the only real option. Otherwise, we are saying that we can never leave the EU.
Web Designer / Developer. Currently working on Paphos Life.
Living in Polemi, Cyprus with my wife and daughter.
Jimgym
Posts: 2429
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 7:37 am
Location: Paphos

Re: Not what we wanted to hear: it's looking like a No Deal :(

Post by Jimgym »

jeba wrote: Mon Oct 14, 2019 7:13 pm
Jimgym wrote: Mon Oct 14, 2019 3:11 pm I don't do "vague guesses" I was suggesting other people might not know beyond one, not I. Neither did I suggest anything about 2 % that was you, so your whole line of questioning is completely pointless to me.
Sorry, but are avoiding the question. Which was how you can be so sure that not even 2% would have voted differently if they had known that leaving the EU would also mean leaving the common market and the customs union (assuming they knew the differences). Or how the author of this: https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comm ... 59316.html article (linked to at the Eastern forum) worded it - if they had known the price of leaving. And guess why I introduced the 2 % figure - because that would already have been enough for remain to win. Maybe there is a poll asking people whether they understand the difference and whether that would have changed their vote? If so and if there were at least 2% who voted leave and who answered yes, would you agree that Brexit should be canceled?
Jimgym wrote: Mon Oct 14, 2019 3:11 pm No you didn't say they were told, I did, my typo. You argued they weren't told and I offered proof they were.
As has been pointed out before: the PM saying on TV that "leave" would mean leaving the common market as well isn´t sufficient to educate voters (no matter how often you repeat that mantra). Plus you conveniently forget to engage with the point that there is a custums union as well which he didn´t seem to have mentioned.
Jimgym wrote: Mon Oct 14, 2019 3:11 pm Yes the ballot paper, of which 17.4 million ticked leave. Apparently that wasn't enough for some people though,
Rightfully not - because the ballot paper wasn´t mentioning customs union / common market.

In my view the whole thing is like asking someone if they liked to have a Rolls Royce rather than a vauxhall without telling the price.
This is a case for https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/ ... y-informed
I shall refer you to my post just above yours.
jeba
Posts: 1495
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2017 8:38 pm

Re: Not what we wanted to hear: it's looking like a No Deal :(

Post by jeba »

Jimgym wrote: Mon Oct 14, 2019 10:36 pm
jeba wrote: Mon Oct 14, 2019 7:13 pm
Jimgym wrote: Mon Oct 14, 2019 3:11 pm I don't do "vague guesses" I was suggesting other people might not know beyond one, not I. Neither did I suggest anything about 2 % that was you, so your whole line of questioning is completely pointless to me.
Sorry, but are avoiding the question. Which was how you can be so sure that not even 2% would have voted differently if they had known that leaving the EU would also mean leaving the common market and the customs union (assuming they knew the differences). Or how the author of this: https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comm ... 59316.html article (linked to at the Eastern forum) worded it - if they had known the price of leaving. And guess why I introduced the 2 % figure - because that would already have been enough for remain to win. Maybe there is a poll asking people whether they understand the difference and whether that would have changed their vote? If so and if there were at least 2% who voted leave and who answered yes, would you agree that Brexit should be canceled?
Jimgym wrote: Mon Oct 14, 2019 3:11 pm No you didn't say they were told, I did, my typo. You argued they weren't told and I offered proof they were.
As has been pointed out before: the PM saying on TV that "leave" would mean leaving the common market as well isn´t sufficient to educate voters (no matter how often you repeat that mantra). Plus you conveniently forget to engage with the point that there is a custums union as well which he didn´t seem to have mentioned.
Jimgym wrote: Mon Oct 14, 2019 3:11 pm Yes the ballot paper, of which 17.4 million ticked leave. Apparently that wasn't enough for some people though,
Rightfully not - because the ballot paper wasn´t mentioning customs union / common market.

In my view the whole thing is like asking someone if they liked to have a Rolls Royce rather than a vauxhall without telling the price.
This is a case for https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/ ... y-informed
I shall refer you to my post just above yours.
So we agree that 2 % of voters who feel that they voted leave based on wrong assumptions about the implications would have sufficed to change the outcome and that therefore there is no legitimacy in claiming that the UK should not only leave the EU but the customs union and the common market as well?
Jim B
Posts: 2750
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 5:42 am

Re: Not what we wanted to hear: it's looking like a No Deal :(

Post by Jim B »

Alan
Nothing has changed even after all the typing we've all done over the weekend on this subject and Brexit is still at an impasse. The situation isn't going to change unless something radical is done. Politicians and their leaders keep regurgitating the same old same old.
One way or another we will end up going back to a second referendum because that's the only way to sort it out.

Jim
Jimgym
Posts: 2429
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 7:37 am
Location: Paphos

Re: Not what we wanted to hear: it's looking like a No Deal :(

Post by Jimgym »

jeba wrote: Tue Oct 15, 2019 7:16 am
Jimgym wrote: Mon Oct 14, 2019 10:36 pm
jeba wrote: Mon Oct 14, 2019 7:13 pm

Sorry, but are avoiding the question. Which was how you can be so sure that not even 2% would have voted differently if they had known that leaving the EU would also mean leaving the common market and the customs union (assuming they knew the differences). Or how the author of this: https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comm ... 59316.html article (linked to at the Eastern forum) worded it - if they had known the price of leaving. And guess why I introduced the 2 % figure - because that would already have been enough for remain to win. Maybe there is a poll asking people whether they understand the difference and whether that would have changed their vote? If so and if there were at least 2% who voted leave and who answered yes, would you agree that Brexit should be canceled?



As has been pointed out before: the PM saying on TV that "leave" would mean leaving the common market as well isn´t sufficient to educate voters (no matter how often you repeat that mantra). Plus you conveniently forget to engage with the point that there is a custums union as well which he didn´t seem to have mentioned.


Rightfully not - because the ballot paper wasn´t mentioning customs union / common market.

In my view the whole thing is like asking someone if they liked to have a Rolls Royce rather than a vauxhall without telling the price.
This is a case for https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/ ... y-informed
I shall refer you to my post just above yours.
So we agree that 2 % of voters who feel that they voted leave based on wrong assumptions about the implications would have sufficed to change the outcome and that therefore there is no legitimacy in claiming that the UK should not only leave the EU but the customs union and the common market as well?
So, my posting the results of the referendum is taken by you that I agree on your point? Let me make it really plain, for you. People made a choice, they ticked a box, it was their choice, the vote was to leave. Now, to me, that is really quite simple and no amount of arguing, debating, twisting facts or figures will change that. If you scroll up, I have posted the full result of the referendum, for interest.
User avatar
Dominic
Site Admin
Posts: 14931
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 5:00 pm
Location: Polemi
Contact:

Re: Not what we wanted to hear: it's looking like a No Deal :(

Post by Dominic »

Jim B wrote: Tue Oct 15, 2019 7:43 am Alan
Nothing has changed even after all the typing we've all done over the weekend on this subject and Brexit is still at an impasse. The situation isn't going to change unless something radical is done. Politicians and their leaders keep regurgitating the same old same old.
One way or another we will end up going back to a second referendum because that's the only way to sort it out.

Jim
How is that the only way to sort it out? What happens if people vote leave again?
Web Designer / Developer. Currently working on Paphos Life.
Living in Polemi, Cyprus with my wife and daughter.
Jim B
Posts: 2750
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 5:42 am

Re: Not what we wanted to hear: it's looking like a No Deal :(

Post by Jim B »

Alan
The referendum was advisory, as are ALL referendums in the UK, they have no legal binding no matter what David Cameron said or didn't say. The politicians can either take the advice or ignore it as we have a Representative Democracy, not a Direct Democracy as many Leavers appear to believe.
If we had a second referendum it would also be up to politicians to decide whether to accept or reject the result.

Jim
Jimgym
Posts: 2429
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 7:37 am
Location: Paphos

Re: Not what we wanted to hear: it's looking like a No Deal :(

Post by Jimgym »

Jim B wrote: Tue Oct 15, 2019 8:29 am Alan
The referendum was advisory, as are ALL referendums in the UK, they have no legal binding no matter what David Cameron said or didn't say. The politicians can either take the advice or ignore it as we have a Representative Democracy, not a Direct Democracy as many Leavers appear to believe.
If we had a second referendum it would also be up to politicians to decide whether to accept or reject the result.

Jim
Jim, I know the referendum was advisory, I have always known that. The British people were told that their vote would decide, in our out. They spoke, yet the minority who voted Remain don't want to listen, because they lost. It's tough to lose, but it's life. All this talk of a second referendum, or what is laughingly called a "People's Vote" is nonsense. We had one, and by ignoring that result you are only making things worse. How would you feel if a second referendum was held, Remain won, and it was ignored? I can only begin to imagine! Now, replace yourself with many millions of leave voters who are in just that position right now.
Locked