Thread: Brexit - It's Still On!

^^Good job my first seven words made it clear I was saying no such thing then eh?

Don't tell me bunghole boy's reading difficulties are catching.

^^ It's a strong argument, no doubt.

IMO what is manifestly best for the country to move forward in a more unified way is to have a second ref.

Originally Posted by cyrille

^^Good job my first seven words made it clear I was saying no such thing then eh?

Your first seven words ...

"And this is the sort of activity "

referring to wasabi's comment ...

"My Thai household X 3 voted UKIP"

What point were you making or trying to highlight if it wasn't the 3 votes for UKIP?

Originally Posted by cyrille

IMO what is manifestly best for the country to move forward in a more unified way is to have a second ref.

A referendum asking what question exactly?

Originally Posted by Warwick

a federal EU as an opportunity to remove NATO and have it replaced by a European army.

This is not the intention and is never going to happen despite the claims made in certain newspapers.

^^ Wow.

Maybe the problem is more deep seated than I thought.

You don't understand that 'this sort of activity' means I am not referring only to wasabi and his family?

3 votes for UKIP from a guy who posts like he can barely tie his own bootlaces and his family, at least one of whom is Thai and just went along with her husband.

That's an example of why the country should be doomed for decades in your opinion. Purely because of numbers.

Originally Posted by Neverna

A referendum asking what question exactly?

Questions, two of them

Now that you are more informed about the consequences of leaving the union

1. Do you still want us to leave the union?

2. If yes, do you want us to leave without a deal with EU if so needed?

Originally Posted by Warwick

Putin would prefer to see more integration in the EU. He is well aware of the antipathy of the French in particular to the US, and sees a federal EU as an opportunity to remove NATO and have it replaced by a European army.

It is amazing how you can read him so wrong. But then your other posts about Brexit doesn't show any higher activity in your head either..

Originally Posted by lom

1. Do you want the UK to leave the EU?

2. Do you want the UK to leave without a deal with the EU if necessary?

That would be better, imo.

It's a tricky one though, given how dumb the British electorate proved itself the first time around.

Perhaps an internet style 'robot' spotter could be used also.

Something like 'tick the box with the car in it'.

Not to spot robots of course, but to weed out a few of the terminally moronic.

Originally Posted by lom

Questions, two of them

Now that you are more informed about the consequences of leaving the union

1. Do you still want us to leave the union?

2. If yes, do you want us to leave without a deal with EU if so needed?

There should not be an in/out question. We've had that vote already. A deal/no deal question would be fine by me.

Originally Posted by cyrille

^^ Wow.

Maybe the problem is more deep seated than I thought.

You don't understand that 'this sort of activity' means I am not referring only to wasabi and his family?

3 votes for UKIP from a guy who posts like he can barely tie his own bootlaces and his family, at least one of whom is Thai and just went along with her husband.

That's an example of why the country should be doomed for decades in your opinion. Purely because of numbers.

So from a very small sample (wasabi and his family - 4 people), you conclude that millions of other voters in the UK are the same, possibly drunk, possibly stupid (possibly neither)?
Do you consider them (wasabi and his family) as unfit to vote in a referendum... and by extension, millions of other voters unfit to vote?

Originally Posted by Neverna

There should not be an in/out question. We've had that vote already.

Scares you doesn't it?
It was done when no one had an idea of what a yes or no vote would mean.
We do want voters to be well informed about what they are voting for, don't we?

The referendum was a stupid idea which asked a stupid question based on a tissue of lies of an electorate which is in many cases ill equipped to answer even a sensible question.

That all combined to leave a meaningless result.

Now the electorate has had three years to try and comprehend the complexities of this question, and contemplate what an idiotic move it would be to exit.

I believe a second referendum is worth it. In countries like Switzerland they regularly have two votes on such matters. The first is to confirm that the possibility of doing something can be examined. The second enables a more informed decision on whether or not it should actually be done.

Originally Posted by lom

Scares you doesn't it?
It was done when no one had an idea of what a yes or no vote would mean.
We do want voters to be well informed about what they are voting for, don't we?

I really think it would have a hugely negative effect on the UK for many many decades to come, possibly centuries. I think it could totally fuck up the UK political system in a way that would be far far worse than any possible economic effect leaving the EU would have. That's what concerns me. To have a referendum, promise it would be implemented and then not deliver it is scandalous. But if you want another in/out question, how many should the UK go for? Best out of 3? Best out of 5? Best out of 9? First to reach double figures?

Originally Posted by cyrille

The referendum was a stupid idea which asked a stupid question

Did you argue that point before the referendum?

Originally Posted by cyrille

an electorate which is in many cases ill equipped to answer even a sensible question.

Yet you want another referendum with two difficult questions this time?

Lord Buckethead has the right idea, a referendum on whether to have a referendum or not...

Let's have a GE with the Brexit Party against the Lib Dems. The Tories and Labour can prop up the bar and watch along with the other undecided.

Also, using the swiss model, BREXIT should have had a majority in England, Scotland, Wales and N. Ireland.

The way that Scotland in particular was disempowered is shameful.

https://medium.com/reformermag/the-s...s-d3c4d9af13a4

There were so many flaws that the best way out, difficult though it is constitutionally, is ref 2.

And Nev...it's time to look for answers. That means looking to the future.

The best way out is to deliver Brexit asap. Three fucking years and still not done. Pathetic.

Some people need rather a lot of persuading to lift a revolver to their temples and shoot.

Originally Posted by cyrille

Some people need rather a lot of persuading to lift a revolver to their temples and shoot.

Project fear is still alive, I see. Why don't you put a bullet in that, cyrille?

Originally Posted by Neverna

But if you want another in/out question, how many should the UK go for? Best out of 3? Best out of 5? Best out of 9? First to reach double figures?

Strawman argument..
One more referendum is enough whatever the outcome from it becomes.
You didn't understand how divided the country (and your government) was, and how even more dived it would become, when you voted.
You had a government who was so sure that remain would win that they didn't prepare for a leave or even found it necessary to inform the voters
beforehand through a booklet the estimated pros and cons of leaving or remaining.


The first referendum was a fekking joke, one shouldn't let people vote about such important things as leaving/remaining in the union without giving them the chance to inform themselves properly.
The Brittons knows quite a bit more now so a 2nd referendum will give a better understanding of what they want today, if it still is leave then so be it.

Originally Posted by cyrille

Now the electorate has had three years to try and comprehend the complexities of this question, and contemplate what an idiotic move it would be to exit.

We've had 40+ years since the Yes/No referendum, in '76, to comprehend the complexities of a staying in the EU. And the consensus was to leave. We should have walked the day after the 2nd referendum instead of wasting 3 fcuking years.

Originally Posted by lom

One more referendum is enough whatever the outcome from it becomes.

No. One in/out referendum is enough and deliver the outcome. By all means have a vote on the deal offered and no deal.

Originally Posted by lom

You didn't understand how divided the country (and your government) was, and how even more dived it would become, when you voted.

And you think having another referendum will somehow unite the country?

Originally Posted by lom

You had a government who was so sure that remain would win that they didn't prepare for a leave or even found it necessary to inform the voters beforehand through a booklet the estimated pros and cons of leaving or remaining.

Both sides had the opportunity to canvass and make their points.The Prime Minister at the time, David Cameron, certainly campaigned hard for remain and highlighted what he viewed as the negative effects of the UK leaving the EU. There was plenty of fear mongering yet Leave still got 1.2 million more votes than Remain.

Originally Posted by lom

The first referendum was a fekking joke, one shouldn't let people vote about such important things as leaving/remaining in the union without giving them the chance to inform themselves properly.

See above.

Originally Posted by lom

The Brittons knows quite a bit more now so a 2nd referendum will give a better understanding of what they want today, if it still is leave then so be it.

See above points.

Originally Posted by lom

Questions, two of them

Now that you are more informed about the consequences of leaving the union

1. Do you still want us to leave the union?

2. If yes, do you want us to leave without a deal with EU if so needed?

1 - The intro presumes all Ref1 voters were ill informed and voted on a coin toss.

2 - 'Still' presumes the whole country voted leave in Ref1.

3 - Only leavers answer Q2?

4 - 'if so needed' is subjective, noncommital and therefore meaningless, leading to another 3-year round of nothingness.

5 - The options on any legitimate Ref2 could only be leave with or without a deal, but don't tell squirrel or the Belgian.

Originally Posted by cyrille

That would be better, imo.

It's a tricky one though, given how dumb the British electorate proved itself the first time around.

Perhaps an internet style 'robot' spotter could be used also.

Something like 'tick the box with the car in it'.

Not to spot robots of course, but to weed out a few of the terminally moronic.

That's not fair, even you are entitled to vote!