Is Brexit actually going to happen?

[newbie]

Shan’t. It’s far to fucking stupid to bother with As you well know.

I started editing, which was probably a mistake.

You mean you can't.

If people want to vote for a politician who doesn't compromise they need to choose exactly which one to vote for.

 

[SpackleFrog]

Tha

This is probably the most stupid post on the entire thread. Which takes some doing. Well done.

Not even close, sadly.

 

[Pickman's model]

I started editing, which was probably a mistake.

You mean you can't.

If people want to vote for a politician who doesn't compromise they need to choose exactly which one to vote for.

All politicians compromise

 

[newbie]

All politicians compromise

I know, that was my point. That's what their job is.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

what about them? The outcome of an election is always going to be a government which is expected to implement its manifesto. You are focussing on those that wanted to Remain, the minority, who appear to have voted in favour of policies they didn't want to happen. The majority, which is who I'm on about, might well have decided not to vote for one or other of the major parties if their manifesto had promised to overthrow/ignore the result of the ref.

The parties chose their promises based on what they thought would win. Their MPs endorsed those promises. No party that put forward Remain would have won (south of the border anyway). The LD/Green vote share was tiny.

You're already into 'might' territory. On what do you base your judgement that those that voted leave feel more strongly about brexit than those that voted remain?

Tbh a huge amount has changed since 2017. At that stage things like the gfa fuck up still weren't being openly discussed in debates - partly because neither of the main parties wanted to discuss it. In a new election they would be forced to discuss it.

 

[Pickman's model]

I know, that was my point. That's what their job is.

When one doesn't compromise on an issue like theresa may you see where it ends up

 

[newbie]

You're already into 'might' territory. On what do you base your judgement that those that voted leave feel more strongly about brexit than those that voted remain?

I don't think I've said they do, have I? not in the bit you quoted anyway.

Look, Remainers who voted for and helped elect the winning Labour or Tory candidate in the GE 2017 could have no complaint if that winner subsequently voted for the May deal or for a no deal exit. Because implementing the referendum result was in the manifesto they voted for.

Leavers, on the other hand, who helped elect a winning Labour or Tory have every reason for grievance if that translated into an MP who voted to frustrate Brexit. They did not get what they voted for. Instead they have a representative who stood on the doorstep arguing for what was in the manifesto and then went to parliament and voted directly against it.

Leavers were in the majority, they won the ref and they have every right and reason to expect their decision to be carried out.

Tbh a huge amount has changed since 2017. At that stage things like the gfa fuck up still weren't being openly discussed in debates - partly because neither of the main parties wanted to discuss it. In a new election they would be forced to discuss it.

Yes, a lot has changed. Of course. If a new election is what you want then go out and campaign for one. I don't know what the next Labour manifesto will say, but if, at that election, you want to vote for a party that unambiguously supports Remaining, then there are likely to be candidates from the LDs and Greens.

 

[Pickman's model]

I don't think I've said they do, have I? not in the bit you quoted anyway.

Look, Remainers who voted for and helped elect the winning Labour or Tory candidate in the GE 2017 could have no complaint if that winner subsequently voted for the May deal or for a no deal exit. Because implementing the referendum result was in the manifesto they voted for.

Leavers, on the other hand, who helped elect a winning Labour or Tory have every reason for grievance if that translated into an MP who voted to frustrate Brexit. They did not get what they voted for. Instead they have a representative who stood on the doorstep arguing for what was in the manifesto and then went to parliament and voted directly against it.

Leavers were in the majority, they won the ref and they have every right and reason to expect their decision to be carried out.


Yes, a lot has changed. Of course. If a new election is what you want then go out and campaign for one. I don't know what the next Labour manifesto will say, but if, at that election, you want to vote for a party that unambiguously supports Remaining, then there are likely to be candidates from the LDs and Greens.

so what you're saying is unhappy leavers received a lesson in parliamentary democracy

And you suggest remainers vote lib dem if they want unambiguous support for staying in the eu. Forgetting the great student fees fiasco.

 

[Kaka Tim]

Look, Remainers who voted for and helped elect the winning Labour or Tory candidate in the GE 2017 could have no complaint if that winner subsequently voted for the May deal or for a no deal exit. Because implementing the referendum result was in the manifesto they voted for.

A "no deal" brexit would have been hard to square with labour's manifesto position.

We will scrap the Conservatives’ Brexit White Paper and replace it with fresh negotiating priorities that have a strong emphasis on retaining the benefits of the Single Market and the Customs Union – which are essential for maintaining industries, jobs and businesses in Britain. Labour will always put jobs and the economy first.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

A "no deal" brexit would have been hard to square with labour's manifesto position.

And aside from that they lost the election. They're not in power so they don't have to honour that manifesto, although voting against may's deal was following it. Under our system their job is now to come up with a new manifesto for the next election. It is not their job to vote through govt business. That's the govt's problem.

 

[newbie]

so what you're saying is unhappy leavers received a lesson in parliamentary democracy

No, exactly the opposite. Implementation of manifesto commitments is at the heart of modern parliamentary democracy. See, for instance, that the revising chamber can amend anything before it, and can vote down other government business but does not frustrate or wreck manifesto commitments. The mandate derived from them is central to the formation of government.

Unhappy Leavers have been shafted by scoundrels who sought their vote based on one thing then in parliament voted directly the opposite.

And you suggest remainers vote lib dem if they want unambiguous support for staying in the eu. Forgetting the great student fees fiasco.

If they want an MP who will not compromise on Remaining in the division lobby then they can try voting LD. They'll probably get sold out at some point as you say. There is a difference, you know, between identifying an option and wholeheartedly recommending people actually take it.

 

[Pickman's model]

No, exactly the opposite. Implementation of manifesto commitments is at the heart of modern parliamentary democracy. See, for instance, that the revising chamber can amend anything before it, and can vote down other government business but does not frustrate or wreck manifesto commitments. The mandate derived from them is central to the formation of government.

Unhappy Leavers have been shafted by scoundrels who sought their vote based on one thing then in parliament voted directly the opposite.



If they want an MP who will not compromise on Remaining in the division lobby then they can try voting LD. They'll probably get sold out at some point as you say. There is a difference, you know, between identifying an option and wholeheartedly recommending people actually take it.

I don't think parliamentary democracy is democracy - indeed it cannot be at least as long as there's the pernicious institution of party and cabals of MPs set themselves apart from their constituents. There may be a perception parties should implement the planks on which they were elected but I think this is based on an outmoded belief in the honesty of politicians.

 

[newbie]

I don't think parliamentary democracy is democracy - indeed it cannot be at least as long as there's the pernicious institution of party and cabals of MPs set themselves apart from their constituents. There may be a perception parties should implement the planks on which they were elected but I think this is based on an outmoded belief in the honesty of politicians.

fair enough. In terms of parliamentary democracy I'm not seeking to discuss what should be, merely what is.

 

[gosub]

so what you're saying is unhappy leavers received a lesson in parliamentary democracy

And you suggest remainers vote lib dem if they want unambiguous support for staying in the eu. Forgetting the great student fees fiasco.

The court case that proves you can't sue politicians for breaking their election promises

 

[redsquirrel]

Look, Remainers who voted for and helped elect the winning Labour or Tory candidate in the GE 2017 could have no complaint if that winner subsequently voted for the May deal or for a no deal exit. Because implementing the referendum result was in the manifesto they voted for.

But this nonsense is parroted by those "at the hear to parliamentary democracy" doesn't mean people accept it nor that it is true. You're arguing the same line as Blair and Thatcher - that people supported and wanted the increase in inequality, the sell off of public utilities, the privatisation of the NHS and education system, etc.

fair enough. In terms of parliamentary democracy I'm not seeking to discuss what should be, merely what is.

No, what the pricks in the bubble want it to be.

 

[collectordave]

You are focussing on those that wanted to Remain, the minority, who appear to have voted in favour of policies they didn't want to happen. The majority, which is who I'm on about, might well have decided not to vote for one or other of the major parties if their manifesto had promised to overthrow/ignore the result of the ref.

Those that wanted to Remain, one minority had no choice. The majority, not leavers which were just a slightly bigger minority, also had no choice.

Of course both parties manifestos were to overthrow/ignore the result of the first referendum based on the tenuous results of the second referendum. We will never know how the majority would have voted now as choice was missed out in the GE.

It all started with a referendum then we had a second referendum maybe we should finish it with a third referendum?

 

[newbie]

Those that wanted to Remain, one minority had no choice. The majority, not leavers which were just a slightly bigger minority, also had no choice.

Of course both parties manifestos were to overthrow/ignore the result of the first referendum based on the tenuous results of the second referendum. We will never know how the majority would have voted now as choice was missed out in the GE.

It all started with a referendum then we had a second referendum maybe we should finish it with a third referendum?

Do you think it'll make any odds, this running around trying to pretend that the result of both the referendum and the GE don't properly count because some people didn't or couldn't vote, or that the referendum in the 1970s somehow compromises the results from 2016/7?

 

[redsquirrel]

Of course both parties manifestos were to overthrow/ignore the result of the first referendum based on the tenuous results of the second referendum.
...
It all started with a referendum then we had a second referendum maybe we should finish it with a third referendum?

Are you seriously saying that because the results of the 2016 referendum are opposite to those of referendum held 41 years previously they are somehow less legitimate. I don't agree with Newbie's points no the GE but your line of argument is just pitiable.

 

[HoratioCuthbert]

Those that wanted to Remain, one minority had no choice. The majority, not leavers which were just a slightly bigger minority, also had no choice.

Of course both parties manifestos were to overthrow/ignore the result of the first referendum based on the tenuous results of the second referendum. We will never know how the majority would have voted now as choice was missed out in the GE.

It all started with a referendum then we had a second referendum maybe we should finish it with a third referendum?

The first was essentially a ref on belonging to a trading bloc, far cry from what the 2016 ref was about.

 

[Badgers]

Good to see.

 

[Badgers]

Is this accurate?

 

[magneze]

No

 

[Badgers]

Cheers

 

[redsquirrel]

A better question to ask is even if it was true is it a good argument.

 

[magneze]

Also, no.

 

[kabbes]

It’s not right at all. Global GDP is $75bn and the U.K. is $2.5bn, which is 3.3%, not 2.2%.

In 2017, the U.K. was 5th, not 7th, but almost identical with India and France in 6th and 7th. It’s not that far off Germany in 4th and more than half as much as Japan in 3rd, though.

So is Japan suffering from not being in the EU? India? Is it okay to be 6% like Japan but not 3.3% like the U.K.?

China is almost five times the GDP of the U.K. and US is eight times. But so what? Does being 15% of world GDP somehow grant Chinese people great things?

And what relevance is GDP anyway? Who does it help? The working population, somehow?

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

It’s not right at all. Global GDP is $75bn and the U.K. is $2.5bn, which is 3.3%, not 2.2%.

In 2017, the U.K. was 5th, not 7th, but almost identical with India and France in 6th and 7th. It’s not that far off Germany in 4th and more than half as much as Japan in 3rd, though.

So is Japan suffering from not being in the EU? India? Is it okay to be 6% like Japan but not 3.3% like the U.K.?

China is almost five times the GDP of the U.K. and US is eight times. But so what? Does being 15% of world GDP somehow grant Chinese people great things?

And what relevance is GDP anyway? Who does it help? The working population, somehow?

Trillion, not billion. Surely?

 

[kabbes]

Trillion, not billion. Surely?

That’s the badger. It’s too much second-nature to put bn after these numbers.

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

That’s the badger. It’s too much second-nature to put bn after these numbers.

From counting your salary, no doubt

 

[treelover]

People's Vote campaigners vow to overhaul 'project fear' image

Remain learning lessons?