O/T DDay for Brexit..well sort of...

[WanChaiMiller]

Corbyn's at fault for abandoning his anti-EU principles for electoral gain though.

What about May abandoning her Remain belief to stay in power.

[WanChaiMiller]

For the people blaming Cameron, I actually blame Major, we should have had a Referendum before signing up to Maastricht, that was an unconstitutional transfer of power.

But as we have seen, he was another one serving the EU not the UK.

Why not place the main portion of your scorn on Thatcher, the architect of the Single Market and Customs Union.

[ragingpup]

However you split it though, I would confidently say that there is only a small (but very passionate) minority for the No Deal with the vast majority (48% Remain + all of those who want a deal of sorts) makes up the vast majority of our electorate.

Where on earth do you get that conclusion from?
Have you been meeting with KA?
I believe that the majority want a deal but certainly not this one[/QUOTE]


I'm not making an argument for this deal Exile (as you might have seen) - you have hit the nail on the head with "I believe that the majority want a deal but certainly not this one" - with emphasis on "the majority want a deal". Hence, if we are being democratic, a deal is what we should get that as near as possible to the middle ground of hard/soft deal? Wouldn't that be the most democratic in that it would best represent the majority of the population?

In response to Sharkey, yes, I agree that the options should be 'A Deal of Some Kind' v 'No Deal' if we were going to vote again. But wouldn't you agree that the vast majority of people in the country (= most democratic outcome) would want 'A Deal of Some Kind'? I think the only way a 'No Deal' would come close is if you tracked down the 48% of Remain voters and barred them from voting again, leaving the decision only to the 52% who voted Leave.

Either way you cut it, surely to force a No Deal would be the least democratic outcome?

[Exiletyke]

We've already had a democratic vote on whether to leave or remain.

Surely your options should only be;

- No deal
- Exit with deal of some kind

We've got a deal of some kind but not a good deal of any kind
Remember May telling us no deal is better than a bad deal but now trying to con us into believing she's done a wonderful job
The woman should be charged with treason

[Exiletyke]

It seems rp that you have succumbed to the relentless Remain propaganda
How would we agree on what deal to accept,except by putting it to the electorate again [peoples vote new name for a referendum] but we've already had a referendum which was to LEAVE
Anything else would just leave us going round in circles which May has been doing for the last two & a half years
I believe that where we are now was always part of the end game
This was the ballot paper

[BigLadonOS]

We've already had a democratic vote on whether to leave or remain.

Surely your options should only be;

- No deal
- Exit with deal of some kind

I agree. Those are the only 2 options that we should be focusing on. May has come up with a deal that has taken nearly 2 years to come up with and has now gone to a vote in the commons. If that deal fails to go through then the only other option of no deal should be the one we go for.

The worst thing of all is if she goes back to try and change the deal. She has 21 days to negotiate another deal before a decision has to be made (or so we are lead to believe) however, she could also ask for an extension to this which could lead to yet another 2 years of trying to cum up with a deal.

I can't believe that this government is trying everything to not leave the EU as voted for by the British electorate.

[Shark27]

Where on earth do you get that conclusion from?
Have you been meeting with KA?
I believe that the majority want a deal but certainly not this one

I'm not making an argument for this deal Exile (as you might have seen) - you have hit the nail on the head with "I believe that the majority want a deal but certainly not this one" - with emphasis on "the majority want a deal". Hence, if we are being democratic, a deal is what we should get that as near as possible to the middle ground of hard/soft deal? Wouldn't that be the most democratic in that it would best represent the majority of the population?

In response to Sharkey, yes, I agree that the options should be 'A Deal of Some Kind' v 'No Deal' if we were going to vote again. But wouldn't you agree that the vast majority of people in the country (= most democratic outcome) would want 'A Deal of Some Kind'? I think the only way a 'No Deal' would come close is if you tracked down the 48% of Remain voters and barred them from voting again, leaving the decision only to the 52% who voted Leave.

Either way you cut it, surely to force a No Deal would be the least democratic outcome?[/QUOTE]

As long as the remain element isn't included.

The only thing that bothers me is that the potential for a no deal was known before we voted so people knew (or should have known) the risks that came with voting leave. Everyone had the chance to listen to the remain argument before they voted and weigh up the pros and cons to decide which way they were going to vote.

By the way, what is Amber Rudd on? Is she trying reverse psychology by putting forward an even worse deal than the PM in order make Mays deal look good!

[animallittle3]

Seems to be much support for no deal on here. By way of balance, is that really democratic?

I think I said earlier in this thread that we could loosely break down the people in the country into these Brexit preferences:

- No deal
- Hard Brexit al la ERG (Canada + type option)
- May's deal
- Soft Brexit with CU/SM Focus
- Remain

The problem is that the commons, and behind that, all of us are incredibly split behind these deal options. Or you could break it down this way:

- No deal
- Exit with deal of some kind
- Remain

Again, you'd find the nation very split between these options.


However you split it though, I would confidently say that there is only a small (but very passionate) minority for the No Deal with the vast majority (48% Remain + all of those who want a deal of sorts) makes up the vast majority of our electorate.

So, if you are arguing for a democratic outcome, how can it be argued that a No Deal is democratic and represents the majority of people?

(However, it is accepted that this notion was encouraged by the crass binary choice on the 2016 ballot paper. But surely, if we are trying to get a truly democratic outcome, we have to go for a compromise that loosely reflects the national majority?)

This poll suggests May's deal is as dead with the electorate as it is in parliament raging .

Having to remain in the EU because we are hamstrung otherwise is going to cause all kinds of problems going forward with a good many people .

This thing will never go away , the far right will be the real winners .


https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a8670726.html

[Exiletyke]

I'm not making an argument for this deal Exile (as you might have seen) - you have hit the nail on the head with "I believe that the majority want a deal but certainly not this one" - with emphasis on "the majority want a deal". Hence, if we are being democratic, a deal is what we should get that as near as possible to the middle ground of hard/soft deal? Wouldn't that be the most democratic in that it would best represent the majority of the population?

In response to Sharkey, yes, I agree that the options should be 'A Deal of Some Kind' v 'No Deal' if we were going to vote again. But wouldn't you agree that the vast majority of people in the country (= most democratic outcome) would want 'A Deal of Some Kind'? I think the only way a 'No Deal' would come close is if you tracked down the 48% of Remain voters and barred them from voting again, leaving the decision only to the 52% who voted Leave.

Either way you cut it, surely to force a No Deal would be the least democratic outcome?

As long as the remain element isn't included.

The only thing that bothers me is that the potential for a no deal was known before we voted so people knew (or should have known) the risks that came with voting leave. Everyone had the chance to listen to the remain argument before they voted and weigh up the pros and cons to decide which way they were going to vote.

By the way, what is Amber Rudd on? Is she trying reverse psychology by putting forward an even worse deal than the PM in order make Mays deal look good![/QUOTE]

By the way, what is Amber Rudd on? Is she trying reverse psychology by putting forward an even worse deal than the PM in order make Mays deal look good![/QUOTE]


You're getting the idea now Shark. Having been booted out once why else would she be back?
Lots of moving parts so to speak [now where have I heard that before?]

[Exiletyke]

It seems rp that you have succumbed to the relentless Remain propaganda
How would we agree on what deal to accept,except by putting it to the electorate again [peoples vote new name for a referendum] but we've already had a referendum which was to LEAVE
Anything else would just leave us going round in circles which May has been doing for the last two & a half years
I believe that where we are now was always part of the end game
This was the ballot paper

Note the unintended irony on the form
"vote only once"