Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » It had to come. West Virginia becomes the first state where pe

SystemSystem Posts: 11,017
edited October 2018 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » It had to come. West Virginia becomes the first state where people can vote by smartphone

Politco is reporting that West Virginia will become the first state in the US where it will be possible to vote by smartphone in the crucial election on November 6th.

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • Options
    First - and you'd have thought they'd have learned after the hanging chads.
  • Options
    John_MJohn_M Posts: 7,503
    Madness.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,976
    Dumb idea. Old fashioned voting has the cost of a short walk once every few years and the advantage of being highly secure. Bringing in technology will reduce the 'effort' from minimal to practically zero, whilst also costing security.

    They're worried about Russian hacking, yet allow electronic voting it's daft.
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,974

    Dumb idea. Old fashioned voting has the cost of a short walk once every few years and the advantage of being highly secure. Bringing in technology will reduce the 'effort' from minimal to practically zero, whilst also costing security.

    They're worried about Russian hacking, yet allow electronic voting it's daft.

    +1
  • Options
    archer101auarcher101au Posts: 1,612
    I think the last few days are very instructive about the real problem facing Brexit.

    May promised Chequers and explained it was that or nothing. It has been rejected. There appears to be no progress at all on a trade deal whether Chequers or anything else. Meanwhile, May is trying to come up with a ‘backstop’ which is certain to be implemented.

    Yet the Remainers here are all in ageement that we must accept the deal, without having the slightest idea what that deal is! Is it Chequers, is it CETA? They don’t care. We just have to accept it.

    The remainers on PB, even those who say we must accept Brexit, are just showing the reality - they don’t accept Brexit at all. And in this they are reflective of Theresa May. The only people who would accept a deal without knowing what it is are people who, in truth, just expect the deal to obstruct Brexit rather than deliver it. We are not arguing any more about what sort of Brexit people may want. We are seeing people support a ‘deal’ simply because it makes any real Brexit impossible. And if they can’t get a deal that obstructs Brexit, they demand a referendum to reverse it.

    It is not possible to make peace with remainers. They won’t accept the result. They are undemocratic. They have learned nothing since the referendum. They don’t really care if the deal is in the national interest at all, because in their mind they are the national interest.

    The fundamental division which produced Brexit has not changed at all, no matter what polls some people might like to quote. It is still the Elite vs the People. And behind the outward certainty that is characteristic of the Elite, they are terrified the situation is about to get out of their control, forever.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,962
    PB Tories will be watching this trial with great interest. Combined with gerrymandering, a thousand years of rule is assured.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,986
    Smartphone voting would likely help youth turnout
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,986
    RobD said:

    PB Tories will be watching this trial with great interest. Combined with gerrymandering, a thousand years of rule is assured.

    A millennium please
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,986
    edited October 2018

    I think the last few days are very instructive about the real problem facing Brexit.

    May promised Chequers and explained it was that or nothing. It has been rejected. There appears to be no progress at all on a trade deal whether Chequers or anything else. Meanwhile, May is trying to come up with a ‘backstop’ which is certain to be implemented.

    Yet the Remainers here are all in ageement that we must accept the deal, without having the slightest idea what that deal is! Is it Chequers, is it CETA? They don’t care. We just have to accept it.

    The remainers on PB, even those who say we must accept Brexit, are just showing the reality - they don’t accept Brexit at all. And in this they are reflective of Theresa May. The only people who would accept a deal without knowing what it is are people who, in truth, just expect the deal to obstruct Brexit rather than deliver it. We are not arguing any more about what sort of Brexit people may want. We are seeing people support a ‘deal’ simply because it makes any real Brexit impossible. And if they can’t get a deal that obstructs Brexit, they demand a referendum to reverse it.

    It is not possible to make peace with remainers. They won’t accept the result. They are undemocratic. They have learned nothing since the referendum. They don’t really care if the deal is in the national interest at all, because in their mind they are the national interest.

    The fundamental division which produced Brexit has not changed at all, no matter what polls some people might like to quote. It is still the Elite vs the People. And behind the outward certainty that is characteristic of the Elite, they are terrified the situation is about to get out of their control, forever.

    The median voter voted Leave but wants a Deal.

    It is they you need to win over, you already have the Diehard Brexiteer No Deal straight to WTO terms voters and you will never have Remain voters, certainly without a Deal
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,976
    Mr. HYUFD, improving turnout is worthless if it diminishes the legitimacy of the vote.

    The Soviets often had great tractor production statistics.
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,955

    Dumb idea. Old fashioned voting has the cost of a short walk once every few years and the advantage of being highly secure. Bringing in technology will reduce the 'effort' from minimal to practically zero, whilst also costing security.

    They're worried about Russian hacking, yet allow electronic voting it's daft.

    Depends what you class as "short". It is nearly 2 miles for me, but I am in decent physical shape. One bus a week here on Tuesdays.
    But, in general, couldn't agree more. Voting is a special, quasi-sacred event. It shouldn't be equated to how you vote for your favourite crisp flavour.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,960
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,960
    HYUFD said:

    Smartphone voting would likely help youth turnout

    And hacker turnout. And out of state hacker turnout.

    But, you know what, this might be the future.

    No longer will the votes of the dumb be as worth as much as the votes of the smart. The side with the best hackers wins.
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    I’d have thought the US would do better to focus on improving registration rather than innovative methods of voting.
  • Options

    I think the last few days are very instructive about the real problem facing Brexit.

    May promised Chequers and explained it was that or nothing. It has been rejected. There appears to be no progress at all on a trade deal whether Chequers or anything else. Meanwhile, May is trying to come up with a ‘backstop’ which is certain to be implemented.

    Yet the Remainers here are all in ageement that we must accept the deal, without having the slightest idea what that deal is! Is it Chequers, is it CETA? They don’t care. We just have to accept it.

    The remainers on PB, even those who say we must accept Brexit, are just showing the reality - they don’t accept Brexit at all. And in this they are reflective of Theresa May. The only people who would accept a deal without knowing what it is are people who, in truth, just expect the deal to obstruct Brexit rather than deliver it. We are not arguing any more about what sort of Brexit people may want. We are seeing people support a ‘deal’ simply because it makes any real Brexit impossible. And if they can’t get a deal that obstructs Brexit, they demand a referendum to reverse it.

    It is not possible to make peace with remainers. They won’t accept the result. They are undemocratic. They have learned nothing since the referendum. They don’t really care if the deal is in the national interest at all, because in their mind they are the national interest.

    The fundamental division which produced Brexit has not changed at all, no matter what polls some people might like to quote. It is still the Elite vs the People. And behind the outward certainty that is characteristic of the Elite, they are terrified the situation is about to get out of their control, forever.

    You are still sounding like you speak for the majority when the move to Norway ++ has increased significantly over the last few weeks. The Brexiteers were described by Peter O'bourne in the daily mail today as largely English and with little care for the union and the damage their idealistic exit would do to the economy

    I voted remain and as a conservative member accept the democratic view that we must leave but as has been commented on here endlessly there are different flavours of Brexit

    I will not support your Brexit or the hard Brexiteers views and I will not support in any shape or form a no deal.

    I have no idea how this pans out, how long TM survives in post, whether there will be a vnoc, or a GE or a second referendum but the mps in the HOC have to act in the national interest and either accept TM deal, if she gets one, or facilitate a second referendum.

    And to those Brexiteers who think they will lose a second referendum it is just possible leave could win again, especially as someone in Brussels said yesterday that if we stayed we would lose our rebate
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,974
    dixiedean said:

    Dumb idea. Old fashioned voting has the cost of a short walk once every few years and the advantage of being highly secure. Bringing in technology will reduce the 'effort' from minimal to practically zero, whilst also costing security.

    They're worried about Russian hacking, yet allow electronic voting it's daft.

    Depends what you class as "short". It is nearly 2 miles for me, but I am in decent physical shape. One bus a week here on Tuesdays.
    But, in general, couldn't agree more. Voting is a special, quasi-sacred event. It shouldn't be equated to how you vote for your favourite crisp flavour.
    I take it you have a postal vote? I’ve no issues with those in your sort of circumstances, although I draw the line when it’s a question of ‘convenience'; too easy, I understand, to interfere with.
  • Options
    Is this the first ever occasion when West Virginia has been at the fore in technological innovation ?
  • Options
    archer101auarcher101au Posts: 1,612
    HYUFD said:

    I think the last few days are very instructive about the real problem facing Brexit.

    May promised Chequers and explained it was that or nothing. It has been rejected. There appears to be no progress at all on a trade deal whether Chequers or anything else. Meanwhile, May is trying to come up with a ‘backstop’ which is certain to be implemented.

    Yet the Remainers here are all in ageement that we must accept the deal, without having the slightest idea what that deal is! Is it Chequers, is it CETA? They don’t care. We just have to accept it.

    The remainers on PB, even those who say we must accept Brexit, are just showing the reality - they don’t accept Brexit at all. And in this they are reflective of Theresa May. The only people who would accept a deal without knowing what it is are people who, in truth, just expect the deal to obstruct Brexit rather than deliver it. We are not arguing any more about what sort of Brexit people may want. We are seeing people support a ‘deal’ simply because it makes any real Brexit impossible. And if they can’t get a deal that obstructs Brexit, they demand a referendum to reverse it.

    It is not possible to make peace with remainers. They won’t accept the result. They are undemocratic. They have learned nothing since the referendum. They don’t really care if the deal is in the national interest at all, because in their mind they are the national interest.

    The fundamental division which produced Brexit has not changed at all, no matter what polls some people might like to quote. It is still the Elite vs the People. And behind the outward certainty that is characteristic of the Elite, they are terrified the situation is about to get out of their control, forever.

    The median voter voted Leave but wants a Deal.

    It is they you need to win over, you already have the Diehard Brexiteer No Deal straight to WTO terms voters and you will never have Remain voters, certainly without a Deal
    Thank you for missing the point. And proving my point.

    There is no deal. There is a backstop to frustrate Brexit. There is a pile of money being paid that we don't owe. And there is nothing else. And yet you all insist that we have to accept this because, well, you never really wanted Brexit anyway.

    You have all moved on from defending Chequers to defending a totally non-existent solution.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,986

    Mr. HYUFD, improving turnout is worthless if it diminishes the legitimacy of the vote.

    The Soviets often had great tractor production statistics.

    If more voters vote that improves the legitimacy of the vote provided there are appropriate security checks around smartphone voting
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,986
    rcs1000 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Smartphone voting would likely help youth turnout

    And hacker turnout. And out of state hacker turnout.

    But, you know what, this might be the future.

    No longer will the votes of the dumb be as worth as much as the votes of the smart. The side with the best hackers wins.
    It should be on a trial basis first to see if problems like hacking can be contained
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,960

    They're worried about Russian hacking, yet allow electronic voting it's daft.

    Your comment makes no sense.

    They're worried that the Russians won't be able to hack the 2020 elections. This helps with that.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,191

    Is this the first ever occasion when West Virginia has been at the fore in technological innovation ?

    TBF, they're in the cutting edge on many political matters at the moment. Their constitutional crisis is not only hilarious (thank you @Nigelb for the best laugh I've had in years) but presages the epic clusterfuck shortly to engulf the Supreme Court.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,541

    I’d have thought the US would do better to focus on improving registration rather than innovative methods of voting.

    I think what might constitute an improvement is something of a contested issue over there...

  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,955

    dixiedean said:

    Dumb idea. Old fashioned voting has the cost of a short walk once every few years and the advantage of being highly secure. Bringing in technology will reduce the 'effort' from minimal to practically zero, whilst also costing security.

    They're worried about Russian hacking, yet allow electronic voting it's daft.

    Depends what you class as "short". It is nearly 2 miles for me, but I am in decent physical shape. One bus a week here on Tuesdays.
    But, in general, couldn't agree more. Voting is a special, quasi-sacred event. It shouldn't be equated to how you vote for your favourite crisp flavour.
    I take it you have a postal vote? I’ve no issues with those in your sort of circumstances, although I draw the line when it’s a question of ‘convenience'; too easy, I understand, to interfere with.
    No I don't, but will need one when I'm older. Right now I don't mind the walk. It is once ever few years anyways.
    Also, it means I can reserve the right to change my mind at the last minute.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,986
    edited October 2018

    HYUFD said:

    I think the last few days are very instructive about the real problem facing Brexit.

    May promised Chequers and explained it was that or nothing. It has been rejected. There appears to be no progress at all on a trade deal whether Chequers or anything else. Meanwhile, May is trying to come up with a ‘backstop’ which is certain to be implemented.

    Yet the Remainers here are all in ageement that we must accept the deal, ause it makes any real Brexit impossible. And if they can’t get a deal that obstructs Brexit, they demand a referendum to reverse it.

    It is not possible to make peace with remainers. They won’t accept the result. They are undemocratic. They have learned nothing since the referendum. They don’t really care if the deal is in the national interest at all, because in their mind they are the national interest.

    The fundamental division which produced Brexit has not changed at all, no matter what polls some people might like to quote. It is still the Elite vs the People. And behind the outward certainty that is characteristic of the Elite, they are terrified the situation is about to get out of their control, forever.

    The median voter voted Leave but wants a Deal.

    It is they you need to win over, you already have the Diehard Brexiteer No Deal straight to WTO terms voters and you will never have Remain voters, certainly without a Deal
    Thank you for missing the point. And proving my point.

    There is no deal. There is a backstop to frustrate Brexit. There is a pile of money being paid that we don't owe. And there is nothing else. And yet you all insist that we have to accept this because, well, you never really wanted Brexit anyway.

    You have all moved on from defending Chequers to defending a totally non-existent solution.
    No you have missed the point and proved nothing.

    There is a commitment to avoid a hard border in Ireland by staying in a Customs Union until a technical solution is found to the Irish border, only once we have given that commitment and paid our exit bill will the EU engage in FTA talks and agree to a transition period.

    The straight to WTO terms No Deal Brexit you support only has about 40% support amongst the voters, poling shows about 20% of Leave voters would switch to Remain if No Deal and No Deal would likely see EUref2 before the Brexit date in March 2019 potentially leading to No Brexit at all
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    O/T

    "Europe Elects
    @EuropeElects
    2m2 minutes ago

    Belgium: Hundreds of expat and foreign-born voters could find themselves unable to vote in local elections in Brussels tomorrow after an administrative mishap, Politico Europe reports. #Belgium #Brussels"
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,976
    Mr. HYUFD, anything online can be hacked. How could we know if safeguards are compromised?

    The Russians are very skilled at cyberwarfare. Creating exciting new opportunities for young officers in their cyber division to prove themselves may do wonders for morale in Moscow, but it's not terribly clever.
  • Options
    archer101auarcher101au Posts: 1,612


    You are still sounding like you speak for the majority when the move to Norway ++ has increased significantly over the last few weeks. The Brexiteers were described by Peter O'bourne in the daily mail today as largely English and with little care for the union and the damage their idealistic exit would do to the economy

    I voted remain and as a conservative member accept the democratic view that we must leave but as has been commented on here endlessly there are different flavours of Brexit

    I will not support your Brexit or the hard Brexiteers views and I will not support in any shape or form a no deal.

    I have no idea how this pans out, how long TM survives in post, whether there will be a vnoc, or a GE or a second referendum but the mps in the HOC have to act in the national interest and either accept TM deal, if she gets one, or facilitate a second referendum.

    And to those Brexiteers who think they will lose a second referendum it is just possible leave could win again, especially as someone in Brussels said yesterday that if we stayed we would lose our rebate

    Even Theresa May says that Norway is not Brexit. Was she lying then?

    So, with that ruled out, why are you supporting a deal that does not even exist?

    After Salzberg, you said that the EU had to engage with TM on Chequers or we would need to leave anyway with no deal. They have not engaged on Chequers. They have thrown it in her face and told her she must accept CETA, although with the backstop it is not deliverable.

    Yet now, we have to accept literally anything?

    All that has changed is that it is now clear that the backstop that May wants to agree will stop Brexit happening. So, all the remainers are clear that we must do it.

    Can you really say that you actually accept the referendum result?
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,962
    ydoethur said:

    Is this the first ever occasion when West Virginia has been at the fore in technological innovation ?

    TBF, they're in the cutting edge on many political matters at the moment. Their constitutional crisis is not only hilarious (thank you @Nigelb for the best laugh I've had in years) but presages the epic clusterfuck shortly to engulf the Supreme Court.
    What crisis is this?
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,974
    edited October 2018
    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    Dumb idea. Old fashioned voting has the cost of a short walk once every few years and the advantage of being highly secure. Bringing in technology will reduce the 'effort' from minimal to practically zero, whilst also costing security.

    They're worried about Russian hacking, yet allow electronic voting it's daft.

    Depends what you class as "short". It is nearly 2 miles for me, but I am in decent physical shape. One bus a week here on Tuesdays.
    But, in general, couldn't agree more. Voting is a special, quasi-sacred event. It shouldn't be equated to how you vote for your favourite crisp flavour.
    I take it you have a postal vote? I’ve no issues with those in your sort of circumstances, although I draw the line when it’s a question of ‘convenience'; too easy, I understand, to interfere with.
    No I don't, but will need one when I'm older. Right now I don't mind the walk. It is once ever few years anyways.
    Also, it means I can reserve the right to change my mind at the last minute.
    Quite agree. One of the advantages of living where I do is that the doctor, the pharmacy, the grocery and the barber are all within easy walking distance. Also two decent pubs and two good restaurants.
    Plus, every year or so, the polling place.
  • Options

    HYUFD said:

    I think the last few days are very instructive about the real problem facing Brexit.

    May promised Chequers and explained it was that or nothing. It has been rejected. There appears to be no progress at all on a trade deal whether Chequers or anything else. Meanwhile, May is trying to come up with a ‘backstop’ which is certain to be implemented.

    Yet the Remainers here are all in ageement that we must accept the deal, without having the slightest idea what that deal is! Is it Chequers, is it CETA? They don’t care. We just have to accept it.

    The remainers on PB, even those who say we must accept Brexit, are just showing the reality - they don’t accept Brexit at all. And in this they are reflective of Theresa May. The only people who would accept a deal without knowing what it is are people who, in truth, just expect the deal to obstruct Brexit rather than deliver it. We are not arguing any more about what sort of Brexit people may want. We are seeing people support a ‘deal’ simply because it makes any real Brexit impossible. And if they can’t get a deal that obstructs Brexit, they demand a referendum to reverse it.

    It is not possible to make peace with remainers. They won’t accept the result. They are undemocratic. They have learned nothing since the referendum. They don’t really care if the deal is in the national interest at all, because in their mind they are the national interest.

    The fundamental division which produced Brexit has not changed at all, no matter what polls some people might like to quote. It is still the Elite vs the People. And behind the outward certainty that is characteristic of the Elite, they are terrified the situation is about to get out of their control, forever.

    The median voter voted Leave but wants a Deal.

    It is they you need to win over, you already have the Diehard Brexiteer No Deal straight to WTO terms voters and you will never have Remain voters, certainly without a Deal
    Thank you for missing the point. And proving my point.

    There is no deal. There is a backstop to frustrate Brexit. There is a pile of money being paid that we don't owe. And there is nothing else. And yet you all insist that we have to accept this because, well, you never really wanted Brexit anyway.

    You have all moved on from defending Chequers to defending a totally non-existent solution.
    Maybe we just want to make the best out of a complete horlicks
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,986

    Mr. HYUFD, anything online can be hacked. How could we know if safeguards are compromised?

    The Russians are very skilled at cyberwarfare. Creating exciting new opportunities for young officers in their cyber division to prove themselves may do wonders for morale in Moscow, but it's not terribly clever.

    As I said it should be done on a trial basis first to see if firewalls and passwords etc are secure enough to prevent hacking.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,960
    Am I the only person really looking forward to Hitman 2?

    https://www.engadget.com/2018/10/12/hitman-2-ghost-mode-multiplayer-versus/
  • Options
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    I think the last few days are very instructive about the real problem facing Brexit.

    May promised Chequers and explained it was that or nothing. It has been rejected. There appears to be no progress at all on a trade deal whether Chequers or anything else. Meanwhile, May is trying to come up with a ‘backstop’ which is certain to be implemented.

    Yet the Remainers here are all in ageement that we must accept the deal, ause it makes any real Brexit impossible. And if they can’t get a deal that obstructs Brexit, they demand a referendum to reverse it.

    It is not possible to make peace with remainers. They won’t accept the result. They are undemocratic. They have learned nothing since the referendum. They don’t really care if the deal is in the national interest at all, because in their mind they are the national interest.

    The fundamental division which produced Brexit has not changed at all, no matter what polls some people might like to quote. It is still the Elite vs the People. And behind the outward certainty that is characteristic of the Elite, they are terrified the situation is about to get out of their control, forever.

    The median voter voted Leave but wants a Deal.

    It is they you need to win over, you already have the Diehard Brexiteer No Deal straight to WTO terms voters and you will never have Remain voters, certainly without a Deal
    Thank you for missing the point. And proving my point.

    There is no deal. There is a backstop to frustrate Brexit. There is a pile of money being paid that we don't owe. And there is nothing else. And yet you all insist that we have to accept this because, well, you never really wanted Brexit anyway.

    You have all moved on from defending Chequers to defending a totally non-existent solution.
    No you have missed the point and proved nothing.

    There is a commitment to avoid a hard border in Ireland by staying in a Customs Union until a technical solution is found to the Irish border, only once we have given that commitment and paid our exit bill will the EU engage in FTA talks and agree to a transition period.

    The straight to WTO terms No Deal Brexit you support only has about 40% support amongst the voters, poling shows about 20% of Leave voters would switch to Remain if No Deal and No Deal would likely see EUref2 before the Brexit date in March 2019 potentially leading to No Brexit at all
    Are you sure no deal wto has 40% support.

    I do not believe it is anywhere near that
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,283
    @archer101au Chequers most certainly hasn’t been rejected. There has been a lot of huffing and puffing but other than that nothing. Not even too many resignations.

    As for Remainers accepting any deal you are right because any deal is better than no deal.

    Any deal that claws back even scant few of the benefits and advantages we had with EU membership is better than no deal for which no amount of Tongan FTAs will compensate.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,960
    RobD said:

    ydoethur said:

    Is this the first ever occasion when West Virginia has been at the fore in technological innovation ?

    TBF, they're in the cutting edge on many political matters at the moment. Their constitutional crisis is not only hilarious (thank you @Nigelb for the best laugh I've had in years) but presages the epic clusterfuck shortly to engulf the Supreme Court.
    What crisis is this?
    https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/10/west-virginia-supreme-court-impeachment-constitutional-crisis.html
  • Options
    archer101auarcher101au Posts: 1,612
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:



    The median voter voted Leave but wants a Deal.

    It is they you need to win over, you already have the Diehard Brexiteer No Deal straight to WTO terms voters and you will never have Remain voters, certainly without a Deal

    Thank you for missing the point. And proving my point.

    There is no deal. There is a backstop to frustrate Brexit. There is a pile of money being paid that we don't owe. And there is nothing else. And yet you all insist that we have to accept this because, well, you never really wanted Brexit anyway.

    You have all moved on from defending Chequers to defending a totally non-existent solution.
    No you have missed the point and proved nothing.

    There is a commitment to avoid a hard border in Ireland by staying in a Customs Union until a technical solution is found to the Irish border, only once we have given that commitment and paid our exit bill will the EU engage in FTA talks and agree to a transition period.

    The straight to WTO terms No Deal Brexit you support only has about 40% support amongst the voters, poling shows about 20% of Leave voters would switch to Remain if No Deal and No Deal would likely see EUref2 before the Brexit date in March 2019 potentially leading to No Brexit at all
    The EU have already declared that there is no technical solution to the NI border, other than staying in the CU and SM indefinitely. That is the whole point.

    So truth check time. Do you believe that the EU needs to accept, as part of the legally binding withdrawal agreement, that the ultimate solution to the NI border needs to be that the customs and regulatory border will be at the NI/ROI land border and that both sides need to commit to this as the objective? Yes, or no?
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,960

    Even Theresa May says that Norway is not Brexit. Was she lying then?

    Being incorrect and lying are two different things.

    Are you denying that there were Leave voters who wanted Norway?
  • Options


    You are still sounding like you speak for the majority when the move to Norway ++ has increased significantly over the last few weeks. The Brexiteers were described by Peter O'bourne in the daily mail today as largely English and with little care for the union and the damage their idealistic exit would do to the economy

    I voted remain and as a conservative member accept the democratic view that we must leave but as has been commented on here endlessly there are different flavours of Brexit

    I will not support your Brexit or the hard Brexiteers views and I will not support in any shape or form a no deal.

    I have no idea how this pans out, how long TM survives in post, whether there will be a vnoc, or a GE or a second referendum but the mps in the HOC have to act in the national interest and either accept TM deal, if she gets one, or facilitate a second referendum.

    And to those Brexiteers who think they will lose a second referendum it is just possible leave could win again, especially as someone in Brussels said yesterday that if we stayed we would lose our rebate

    Even Theresa May says that Norway is not Brexit. Was she lying then?

    So, with that ruled out, why are you supporting a deal that does not even exist?

    After Salzberg, you said that the EU had to engage with TM on Chequers or we would need to leave anyway with no deal. They have not engaged on Chequers. They have thrown it in her face and told her she must accept CETA, although with the backstop it is not deliverable.

    Yet now, we have to accept literally anything?

    All that has changed is that it is now clear that the backstop that May wants to agree will stop Brexit happening. So, all the remainers are clear that we must do it.

    Can you really say that you actually accept the referendum result?
    I would suggest you need to respect other views and stop making insinuations as to posters integrity.

    You are not going to see a hard brexiteer exit and I await TM comments after the Council meetings
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,960

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    I think the last few days are very instructive about the real problem facing Brexit.

    May promised Chequers and explained it was that or nothing. It has been rejected. There appears to be no progress at all on a trade deal whether Chequers or anything else. Meanwhile, May is trying to come up with a ‘backstop’ which is certain to be implemented.

    Yet the Remainers here are all in ageement that we must accept the deal, ause it makes any real Brexit impossible. And if they can’t get a deal that obstructs Brexit, they demand a referendum to reverse it.

    It is not possible to make peace with remainers. They won’t accept the result. They are undemocratic. They have learned nothing since the referendum. They don’t really care if the deal is in the national interest at all, because in their mind they are the national interest.

    The fundamental division which produced Brexit has not changed at all, no matter what polls some people might like to quote. It is still the Elite vs the People. And behind the outward certainty that is characteristic of the Elite, they are terrified the situation is about to get out of their control, forever.

    The median voter voted Leave but wants a Deal.

    It is they you need to win over, you already have the Diehard Brexiteer No Deal straight to WTO terms voters and you will never have Remain voters, certainly without a Deal
    Thank you for missing the point. And proving my point.

    There is no deal. There is a backstop to frustrate Brexit. There is a pile of money being paid that we don't owe. And there is nothing else. And yet you all insist that we have to accept this because, well, you never really wanted Brexit anyway.

    You have all moved on from defending Chequers to defending a totally non-existent solution.
    No you have missed the point and proved nothing.

    There is a commitment to avoid a hard border in Ireland by staying in a Customs Union until a technical solution is found to the Irish border, only once we have given that commitment and paid our exit bill will the EU engage in FTA talks and agree to a transition period.

    The straight to WTO terms No Deal Brexit you support only has about 40% support amongst the voters, poling shows about 20% of Leave voters would switch to Remain if No Deal and No Deal would likely see EUref2 before the Brexit date in March 2019 potentially leading to No Brexit at all
    Are you sure no deal wto has 40% support.

    I do not believe it is anywhere near that
    I think there is a confusion between No Deal WTO, and transitioned WTO. The first would be disruptive and unpleasant. The second would probably be OK.
  • Options
    archer101auarcher101au Posts: 1,612

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:



    The median voter voted Leave but wants a Deal.

    It is they you need to win over, you already have the Diehard Brexiteer No Deal straight to WTO terms voters and you will never have Remain voters, certainly without a Deal

    Thank you for missing the point. And proving my point.

    There is no deal. There is a backstop to frustrate Brexit. There is a pile of money being paid that we don't owe. And there is nothing else. And yet you all insist that we have to accept this because, well, you never really wanted Brexit anyway.

    You have all moved on from defending Chequers to defending a totally non-existent solution.
    No you have missed the point and proved nothing.

    There is a commitment to avoid a hard border in Ireland by staying in a Customs Union until a technical solution is found to the Irish border, only once we have given that commitment and paid our exit bill will the EU engage in FTA talks and agree to a transition period.

    The straight to WTO terms No Deal Brexit you support only has about 40% support amongst the voters, poling shows about 20% of Leave voters would switch to Remain if No Deal and No Deal would likely see EUref2 before the Brexit date in March 2019 potentially leading to No Brexit at all
    Are you sure no deal wto has 40% support.

    I do not believe it is anywhere near that
    At one point it was 45% No Deal 55% Remain.

    By the time this is done, I predict that No Deal will have a majority over May's deal. Having said that, polls are irrelevant. Many, many Governments have pushed through policies that have less than 40-45% support. You make out it would be an outrage, yet it happens all the time. If HYUFD wants to poll very existing Tory policy he would be hard pressed to find many that had that level of support!
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,974

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    I think the last few days are very instructive about the real problem facing Brexit.

    May promised Chequers and explained it was that or nothing. It has been rejected. There appears to be no progress at all on a trade deal whether Chequers or anything else. Meanwhile, May is trying to come up with a ‘backstop’ which is certain to be implemented.

    Yet the Remainers here are all in ageement that we must accept the deal, ause it makes any real Brexit impossible. And if they can’t get a deal that obstructs Brexit, they demand a referendum to reverse it.

    It is not possible to make peace with remainers. They won’t accept the result. They are undemocratic. They have learned nothing since the referendum. They don’t really care if the deal is in the national interest at all, because in their mind they are the national interest.

    The fundamental division which produced Brexit has not changed at all, no matter what polls some people might like to quote. It is still the Elite vs the People. And behind the outward certainty that is characteristic of the Elite, they are terrified the situation is about to get out of their control, forever.

    The median voter voted Leave but wants a Deal.

    It is they you need to win over, you already have the Diehard Brexiteer No Deal straight to WTO terms voters and you will never have Remain voters, certainly without a Deal
    Thank you for missing the point. And proving my point.

    There is no deal. There is a backstop to frustrate Brexit. There is a pile of money being paid that we don't owe. And there is nothing else. And yet you all insist that we have to accept this because, well, you never really wanted Brexit anyway.

    You have all moved on from defending Chequers to defending a totally non-existent solution.
    No you have missed the point and proved nothing.

    There is a commitment to avoid a hard border in Ireland by staying in a Customs Union until a technical solution is found to the Irish border, only once we have given that commitment and paid our exit bill will the EU engage in FTA talks and agree to a transition period.

    The straight to WTO terms No Deal Brexit you support only has about 40% support amongst the voters, poling shows about 20% of Leave voters would switch to Remain if No Deal and No Deal would likely see EUref2 before the Brexit date in March 2019 potentially leading to No Brexit at all
    Are you sure no deal wto has 40% support.

    I do not believe it is anywhere near that
    I suspect it could be, but only because it is only now that the horrid prospects are being spelled out in a fashion which most people can understand.
  • Options
    HYUFD said:

    Mr. HYUFD, anything online can be hacked. How could we know if safeguards are compromised?

    The Russians are very skilled at cyberwarfare. Creating exciting new opportunities for young officers in their cyber division to prove themselves may do wonders for morale in Moscow, but it's not terribly clever.

    As I said it should be done on a trial basis first to see if firewalls and passwords etc are secure enough to prevent hacking.
    Not worth trying to hack until its rolled out. So the pilot will not be a tru test.
  • Options
    archer101auarcher101au Posts: 1,612
    rcs1000 said:

    Even Theresa May says that Norway is not Brexit. Was she lying then?

    Being incorrect and lying are two different things.

    Are you denying that there were Leave voters who wanted Norway?
    No, of course not. I don't ignore reality. But Leave won, and Leave needs to be interpreted in a manner which is consistent with the campaign that Leave ran, which ruled out a Norway exit.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,960

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:



    The median voter voted Leave but wants a Deal.

    It is they you need to win over, you already have the Diehard Brexiteer No Deal straight to WTO terms voters and you will never have Remain voters, certainly without a Deal

    Thank you for missing the point. And proving my point.

    There is no deal. There is a backstop to frustrate Brexit. There is a pile of money being paid that we don't owe. And there is nothing else. And yet you all insist that we have to accept this because, well, you never really wanted Brexit anyway.

    You have all moved on from defending Chequers to defending a totally non-existent solution.
    No you have missed the point and proved nothing.

    There is a commitment to avoid a hard border in Ireland by staying in a Customs Union until a technical solution is found to the Irish border, only once we have given that commitment and paid our exit bill will the EU engage in FTA talks and agree to a transition period.

    The straight to WTO terms No Deal Brexit you support only has about 40% support amongst the voters, poling shows about 20% of Leave voters would switch to Remain if No Deal and No Deal would likely see EUref2 before the Brexit date in March 2019 potentially leading to No Brexit at all
    Are you sure no deal wto has 40% support.

    I do not believe it is anywhere near that
    At one point it was 45% No Deal 55% Remain.

    By the time this is done, I predict that No Deal will have a majority over May's deal. Having said that, polls are irrelevant. Many, many Governments have pushed through policies that have less than 40-45% support. You make out it would be an outrage, yet it happens all the time. If HYUFD wants to poll very existing Tory policy he would be hard pressed to find many that had that level of support!
    I think a lot of people would be very happy with WTO relations with the EU. However, I think the disruption that would accompany that happening in a Non Transition way would be extremely unpleasant.
  • Options
    HYUFD said:

    Smartphone voting would likely help youth turnout


    It will also help personation.
  • Options

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:



    The median voter voted Leave but wants a Deal.

    It is they you need to win over, you already have the Diehard Brexiteer No Deal straight to WTO terms voters and you will never have Remain voters, certainly without a Deal

    Thank you for missing the point. And proving my point.

    There is no deal. There is a backstop to frustrate Brexit. There is a pile of money being paid that we don't owe. And there is nothing else. And yet you all insist that we have to accept this because, well, you never really wanted Brexit anyway.

    You have all moved on from defending Chequers to defending a totally non-existent solution.
    No you have missed the point and proved nothing.

    There is a commitment to avoid a hard border in Ireland by staying in a Customs Union until a technical solution is found to the Irish border, only once we have given that commitment and paid our exit bill will the EU engage in FTA talks and agree to a transition period.

    The straight to WTO terms No Deal Brexit you support only has about 40% support amongst the voters, poling shows about 20% of Leave voters would switch to Remain if No Deal and No Deal would likely see EUref2 before the Brexit date in March 2019 potentially leading to No Brexit at all
    Are you sure no deal wto has 40% support.

    I do not believe it is anywhere near that
    At one point it was 45% No Deal 55% Remain.

    By the time this is done, I predict that No Deal will have a majority over May's deal. Having said that, polls are irrelevant. Many, many Governments have pushed through policies that have less than 40-45% support. You make out it would be an outrage, yet it happens all the time. If HYUFD wants to poll very existing Tory policy he would be hard pressed to find many that had that level of support!
    You are entitled to your view

    However, ERG only have max 100 mps out of 650.

    They are a big minority.

    However, there is little point going to and from each other when it will become clearer in the next couple of months. Patience is a virtue as my Grandmother used to say
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,960
    edited October 2018

    rcs1000 said:

    Even Theresa May says that Norway is not Brexit. Was she lying then?

    Being incorrect and lying are two different things.

    Are you denying that there were Leave voters who wanted Norway?
    No, of course not. I don't ignore reality. But Leave won, and Leave needs to be interpreted in a manner which is consistent with the campaign that Leave ran, which ruled out a Norway exit.
    No Brexit needs to be carried out in a way that commands the greatest support among the British people.

    This is not an election where one side won, and 51% of the 52% get to choose the outcome.

    The Brexit that gets the greatest support of the British people is the morally right answer.
  • Options
    archer101auarcher101au Posts: 1,612
    edited October 2018
    TOPPING said:

    @archer101au Chequers most certainly hasn’t been rejected. There has been a lot of huffing and puffing but other than that nothing. Not even too many resignations.

    As for Remainers accepting any deal you are right because any deal is better than no deal.

    Any deal that claws back even scant few of the benefits and advantages we had with EU membership is better than no deal for which no amount of Tongan FTAs will compensate.

    Even Marley has more life than Chequers.

    But, thank you for being honest. Your only interest is in stopping Brexit as far as possible because you do not accept the result of the referendum. Which is exactly the point I was making about remainers generally.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,960
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,960

    TOPPING said:

    @archer101au Chequers most certainly hasn’t been rejected. There has been a lot of huffing and puffing but other than that nothing. Not even too many resignations.

    As for Remainers accepting any deal you are right because any deal is better than no deal.

    Any deal that claws back even scant few of the benefits and advantages we had with EU membership is better than no deal for which no amount of Tongan FTAs will compensate.

    Even Marley has more life than Chequers.

    But, thank you for being honest. Your only interest is in stopping Brexit as far as possible because you do not accept the result of the referendum. Which is exactly the point I was making about remainers generally.
    And thank you for being honest earlier. You are not interested in the Brexit that has the most legitimacy and support among the whole British people, only your "true" Brexit.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,283

    TOPPING said:

    @archer101au Chequers most certainly hasn’t been rejected. There has been a lot of huffing and puffing but other than that nothing. Not even too many resignations.

    As for Remainers accepting any deal you are right because any deal is better than no deal.

    Any deal that claws back even scant few of the benefits and advantages we had with EU membership is better than no deal for which no amount of Tongan FTAs will compensate.

    Even Marley has more life than Chequers.

    But, thank you for being honest. Your only interest is in stopping Brexit as far as possible because you do not accept the result of the referendum. Which is exactly the point I was making about remainers generally.
    Not so. I want to leave the EU in a way that is as least disruptive as possible.

    As we all know Norway is not in the EU but manages to benefit from many EU elements.
  • Options
    archer101auarcher101au Posts: 1,612
    edited October 2018
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Even Theresa May says that Norway is not Brexit. Was she lying then?

    Being incorrect and lying are two different things.

    Are you denying that there were Leave voters who wanted Norway?
    No, of course not. I don't ignore reality. But Leave won, and Leave needs to be interpreted in a manner which is consistent with the campaign that Leave ran, which ruled out a Norway exit.
    No Brexit needs to be carried out in a way that commands the greatest support among the British people.

    This is not an election where one side won, and 51% of the 52% get to choose the outcome.

    The Brexit that gets the greatest support of the British people is the morally right answer.
    I am sorry, but I completely disagree. Brexit went to a binary referendum because there was no middle ground. We had been arguing about it for 40 years. Cameron tried and failed to find a middle ground.

    The manifesto of the winning side has to be implemented. What you are basically saying is that the losers of the referendum have the right to dictate how the winners can proceed. That is the default remainer position, and it is wrong.

    Every election and every vote involves multiple motivations. After a GE many policies will be implemented that do not have the support of even a significant minority of voters. The side that wins gets to implement their policies. That is how democracy works.
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,974

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Even Theresa May says that Norway is not Brexit. Was she lying then?

    Being incorrect and lying are two different things.

    Are you denying that there were Leave voters who wanted Norway?
    No, of course not. I don't ignore reality. But Leave won, and Leave needs to be interpreted in a manner which is consistent with the campaign that Leave ran, which ruled out a Norway exit.
    No Brexit needs to be carried out in a way that commands the greatest support among the British people.

    This is not an election where one side won, and 51% of the 52% get to choose the outcome.

    The Brexit that gets the greatest support of the British people is the morally right answer.
    I am sorry, but I completely disagree. Brexit went to a binary referendum because there was no middle ground. We had been arguing about it for 40 years. Cameron tried and failed to find a middle ground.

    The manifesto of the winning side has to be implemented. What you are basically saying is that the losers of the referendum have the right to dictate how the winners can proceed. That is the default remainer position, and it is wrong.

    Every election and every vote involves multiple motivations. After a GE many policies will be implemented that do not have the support of even a significant minority of voters. The side that wins gets to implement their policies. That is how democracy works.
    The side that wins gets to try to implement their policies. If those policies prove impossible to implement sensibly, then they may be abandoned.
    Such is Brexit.
  • Options
    archer101auarcher101au Posts: 1,612

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Even Theresa May says that Norway is not Brexit. Was she lying then?

    Being incorrect and lying are two different things.

    Are you denying that there were Leave voters who wanted Norway?
    No, of course not. I don't ignore reality. But Leave won, and Leave needs to be interpreted in a manner which is consistent with the campaign that Leave ran, which ruled out a Norway exit.
    No Brexit needs to be carried out in a way that commands the greatest support among the British people.

    This is not an election where one side won, and 51% of the 52% get to choose the outcome.

    The Brexit that gets the greatest support of the British people is the morally right answer.
    I am sorry, but I completely disagree. Brexit went to a binary referendum because there was no middle ground. We had been arguing about it for 40 years. Cameron tried and failed to find a middle ground.

    The manifesto of the winning side has to be implemented. What you are basically saying is that the losers of the referendum have the right to dictate how the winners can proceed. That is the default remainer position, and it is wrong.

    Every election and every vote involves multiple motivations. After a GE many policies will be implemented that do not have the support of even a significant minority of voters. The side that wins gets to implement their policies. That is how democracy works.
    The side that wins gets to try to implement their policies. If those policies prove impossible to implement sensibly, then they may be abandoned.
    Such is Brexit.
    Fine. Then declare your support for getting rid of May, putting a Leaver in charge and see if Brexit can be delivered. If it can't, then you can have another say.

    Of course, Brexit can be implemented. We activate A50 and leave on 31 March 2019.
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,814

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:



    The median voter voted Leave but wants a Deal.

    It is they you need to win over, you already have the Diehard Brexiteer No Deal straight to WTO terms voters and you will never have Remain voters, certainly without a Deal

    Thank you for missing the point. And proving my point.

    There is no deal. There is a backstop to frustrate Brexit. There is a pile of money being paid that we don't owe. And there is nothing else. And yet you all insist that we have to accept this because, well, you never really wanted Brexit anyway.

    You have all moved on from defending Chequers to defending a totally non-existent solution.
    No you have missed the point and proved nothing.

    There is a commitment to avoid a hard border in Ireland by staying in a Customs Union until a technical solution is found to the Irish border, only once we have given that commitment and paid our exit bill will the EU engage in FTA talks and agree to a transition period.

    The straight to WTO terms No Deal Brexit you support only has about 40% support amongst the voters, poling shows about 20% of Leave voters would switch to Remain if No Deal and No Deal would likely see EUref2 before the Brexit date in March 2019 potentially leading to No Brexit at all
    Are you sure no deal wto has 40% support.

    I do not believe it is anywhere near that
    At one point it was 45% No Deal 55% Remain.

    By the time this is done, I predict that No Deal will have a majority over May's deal. Having said that, polls are irrelevant. Many, many Governments have pushed through policies that have less than 40-45% support. You make out it would be an outrage, yet it happens all the time. If HYUFD wants to poll very existing Tory policy he would be hard pressed to find many that had that level of support!
    Tories would have to actually have some policies for that to work mind... :D
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,986

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:



    The median voter voted Leave but wants a Deal.

    It is they you need to win over, you already have the Diehard Brexiteer No Deal straight to WTO terms voters and you will never have Remain voters, certainly without a Deal

    Thank you for missing the point. And proving my point.

    There is no deal. There is a backstop to frustrate Brexit. There is a pile of money being paid that we don't owe. And there is nothing else. And yet you all insist that we have to accept this because, well, you never really wanted Brexit anyway.

    You have all moved on from defending Chequers to defending a totally non-existent solution.
    No you have missed the point and proved nothing.

    There is a commitment to avoid a hard border in Ireland by staying in a Customs Union until a technical solution is found to the Irish border, only once we have given that commitment and paid our exit bill will the EU engage in FTA talks and agree to a transition period.

    The straight to WTO terms No Deal Brexit you support only has about 40% support amongst the voters, poling shows about 20% of Leave voters would switch to Remain if No Deal and No Deal would likely see EUref2 before the Brexit date in March 2019 potentially leading to No Brexit at all
    The EU have already declared that there is no technical solution to the NI border, other than staying in the CU and SM indefinitely. That is the whole point.

    So truth check time. Do you believe that the EU needs to accept, as part of the legally binding withdrawal agreement, that the ultimate solution to the NI border needs to be that the customs and regulatory border will be at the NI/ROI land border and that both sides need to commit to this as the objective? Yes, or no?
    Which would of course break the Good Friday Agreement
  • Options
    archer101auarcher101au Posts: 1,612
    rcs1000 said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:



    The median voter voted Leave but wants a Deal.

    It is they you need to win over, you already have the Diehard Brexiteer No Deal straight to WTO terms voters and you will never have Remain voters, certainly without a Deal

    Thank you for missing the point. And proving my point.

    There is no deal. There is a backstop to frustrate Brexit. There is a pile of money being paid that we don't owe. And there is nothing else. And yet you all insist that we have to accept this because, well, you never really wanted Brexit anyway.

    You have all moved on from defending Chequers to defending a totally non-existent solution.
    No you have missed the point and proved nothing.

    There is a commitment to avoid a hard border in Ireland by staying in a Customs Union until a technical solution is found to the Irish border, only once we have given that commitment and paid our exit bill will the EU engage in FTA talks and agree to a transition period.

    The straight to WTO terms No Deal Brexit you support only has about 40% support amongst the voters, poling shows about 20% of Leave voters would switch to Remain if No Deal and No Deal would likely see EUref2 before the Brexit date in March 2019 potentially leading to No Brexit at all
    Are you sure no deal wto has 40% support.

    I do not believe it is anywhere near that
    At one point it was 45% No Deal 55% Remain.

    By the time this is done, I predict that No Deal will have a majority over May's deal. Having said that, polls are irrelevant. Many, many Governments have pushed through policies that have less than 40-45% support. You make out it would be an outrage, yet it happens all the time. If HYUFD wants to poll very existing Tory policy he would be hard pressed to find many that had that level of support!
    I think a lot of people would be very happy with WTO relations with the EU. However, I think the disruption that would accompany that happening in a Non Transition way would be extremely unpleasant.
    I am open to a compromise. We declare that we will exit to WTO rules, we will not agree the backstop but we will pay the Brexit bill in return for the transition period and a good faith promise from the EU to manage the transition issues to avoid unnecessary disruption.

    Sound fair?
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,986

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    I think the last few days are very instructive about the real problem facing Brexit.

    May promised Chequers and explained it was that or nothing. It has been rejected. There appears to be no progress at all on a trade deal whether Chequers or anything else. Meanwhile, May is trying to come up with a ‘backstop’ which is certain to be implemented.

    Yet the Remainers here are all in ageement that we must accept the deal, ause it makes any real Brexit impossible. And if they can’t get a deal that obstructs Brexit, they demand a referendum to reverse it.

    It is not possible to make peace with remainers. They won’t accept the result. They are undemocratic. They have learned nothing since the referendum. They don’t really care if the deal is in the national interest at all, because in their mind they are the national interest.

    The fundamental division which produced Brexit has not changed at all, no matter what polls some people might like to quote. It is still the Elite vs the People. And behind the outward certainty that is characteristic of the Elite, they are terrified the situation is about to get out of their control, forever.

    The median voter voted Leave but wants a Deal.

    It is they you need to win over, you already have the Diehard Brexiteer No Deal straight to WTO terms voters and you will never have Remain voters, certainly without a Deal
    Thank you for missing the point.nding Chequers to defending a totally non-existent solution.
    No you have missed the point and proved nothing.

    There is a commitment to avoid a hard border in Ireland by staying in a Customs Union until a technical solution is found to the Irish border, only once we have given that commitment and paid our exit bill will the EU engage in FTA talks and agree to a transition period.

    The straight to WTO terms No Deal Brexit you support only has about 40% support amongst the voters, poling shows about 20% of Leave voters would switch to Remain if No Deal and No Deal would likely see EUref2 before the Brexit date in March 2019 potentially leading to No Brexit at all
    Are you sure no deal wto has 40% support.

    I do not believe it is anywhere near that
    A YouGov poll had it 55% Remain 45% Leave if Leave was on No Deal terms ie the same number of voters would support Leave on No Deal terms as voted Yes to independence in Scotland's 2014 referendum. Still a significant number but no longer a majority

    http://uk.businessinsider.com/yougov-poll-voters-would-rather-remain-in-eu-than-accept-a-no-deal-brexit-2018-7
  • Options
    archer101auarcher101au Posts: 1,612
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:



    The median voter voted Leave but wants a Deal.

    It is they you need to win over, you already have the Diehard Brexiteer No Deal straight to WTO terms voters and you will never have Remain voters, certainly without a Deal

    Thank you for missing the point. And proving my point.

    There is no deal. There is a backstop to frustrate Brexit. There is a pile of money being paid that we don't owe. And there is nothing else. And yet you all insist that we have to accept this because, well, you never really wanted Brexit anyway.

    You have all moved on from defending Chequers to defending a totally non-existent solution.
    No you have missed the point and proved nothing.

    There is a commitment to avoid a hard border in Ireland by staying in a Customs Union until a technical solution is found to the Irish border, only once we have given that commitment and paid our exit bill will the EU engage in FTA talks and agree to a transition period.

    The straight to WTO terms No Deal Brexit you support only has about 40% support amongst the voters, poling shows about 20% of Leave voters would switch to Remain if No Deal and No Deal would likely see EUref2 before the Brexit date in March 2019 potentially leading to No Brexit at all
    The EU have already declared that there is no technical solution to the NI border, other than staying in the CU and SM indefinitely. That is the whole point.

    So truth check time. Do you believe that the EU needs to accept, as part of the legally binding withdrawal agreement, that the ultimate solution to the NI border needs to be that the customs and regulatory border will be at the NI/ROI land border and that both sides need to commit to this as the objective? Yes, or no?
    Which would of course break the Good Friday Agreement
    Can you quote the relevant clause?
  • Options
    FPT



    One or two of us on here have been warning about UC for months and months.

    The few billion to fix the hole, will stop at least the issue of several million families losing up to £2.4K a year.

    That seems the bare minimum to me, to fix the UC nightmare, which, together with housing, will sink the Tories.

    I stand to lose more than £12.4k a year, never mind £2.4k a year given they announced (quietly) earlier this year that the transitional protection will only last for one year as far as the £16k asset limit being applied to tax credit recipients is concerned. The Corbynator would have to do plenty of damage to match that. Maybe I should alter the habits of a lifetime and blow all of my family's assets in advance. Or upgrade to a house worth twice as much as our current place.
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,974

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Even Theresa May says that Norway is not Brexit. Was she lying then?

    Being incorrect and lying are two different things.

    Are you denying that there were Leave voters who wanted Norway?
    No, of course not. I don't ignore reality. But Leave won, and Leave needs to be interpreted in a manner which is consistent with the campaign that Leave ran, which ruled out a Norway exit.
    No Brexit needs to be carried out in a way that commands the greatest support among the British people.

    This is not an election where one side won, and 51% of the 52% get to choose the outcome.

    The Brexit that gets the greatest support of the British people is the morally right answer.
    I am sorry, but I completely disagree. Brexit went to a binary referendum because there was no middle ground. We had been arguing about it for 40 years. Cameron tried and failed to find a middle ground.

    The manifesto of the winning side has to be implemented. What you are basically saying is that the losers of the referendum have the right to dictate how the winners can proceed. That is the default remainer position, and it is wrong.

    Every election and every vote involves multiple motivations. After a GE many policies will be implemented that do not have the support of even a significant minority of voters. The side that wins gets to implement their policies. That is how democracy works.
    The side that wins gets to try to implement their policies. If those policies prove impossible to implement sensibly, then they may be abandoned.
    Such is Brexit.
    Fine. Then declare your support for getting rid of May, putting a Leaver in charge and see if Brexit can be delivered. If it can't, then you can have another say.

    Of course, Brexit can be implemented. We activate A50 and leave on 31 March 2019.
    Implemented sensibly. It’s beyond doubt that pulling up the drawbridge late on 29th March will have dreadful consequences for many, many people.
  • Options
    archer101auarcher101au Posts: 1,612
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:


    The median voter voted Leave but wants a Deal.

    It is they you need to win over, you already have the Diehard Brexiteer No Deal straight to WTO terms voters and you will never have Remain voters, certainly without a Deal

    Thank you for missing the point.nding Chequers to defending a totally non-existent solution.
    No you have missed the point and proved nothing.

    There is a commitment to avoid a hard border in Ireland by staying in a Customs Union until a technical solution is found to the Irish border, only once we have given that commitment and paid our exit bill will the EU engage in FTA talks and agree to a transition period.

    The straight to WTO terms No Deal Brexit you support only has about 40% support amongst the voters, poling shows about 20% of Leave voters would switch to Remain if No Deal and No Deal would likely see EUref2 before the Brexit date in March 2019 potentially leading to No Brexit at all
    Are you sure no deal wto has 40% support.

    I do not believe it is anywhere near that
    A YouGov poll had it 55% Remain 45% Leave if Leave was on No Deal terms ie the same number of voters would support Leave on No Deal terms as voted Yes to independence in Scotland's 2014 referendum. Still a significant number but no longer a majority

    http://uk.businessinsider.com/yougov-poll-voters-would-rather-remain-in-eu-than-accept-a-no-deal-brexit-2018-7
    How many current Tory policies have majority support in the polls? For those that do not, can we insist that the Government stops pursuing them?
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,976
    Mr. 1000, Hitman's not my cup of tea, alas.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,986

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:



    The median voter voted Leave but wants a Deal.

    It is they you need to win over, you already have the Diehard Brexiteer No Deal straight to WTO terms voters and you will never have Remain voters, certainly without a Deal

    Thank you for missing the point. And proving my point.

    There is no deal. There is a backstop to frustrate Brexit. There is a pile of money being paid that we don't owe. And there is nothing else. And yet you all insist that we have to accept this because, well, you never really wanted Brexit anyway.

    You have all moved on from defending Chequers to defending a totally non-existent solution.
    No you have missed the point and proved nothing.

    There is a commitment to avoid a hard border in Ireland by staying in a Customs Union until a technical solution is found to the Irish border, only once we have given that commitment and paid our exit bill will the EU engage in FTA talks and agree to a transition period.

    The straight to WTO terms No Deal Brexit you support only has about 40% support amongst the voters, poling shows about 20% of Leave voters would switch to Remain if No Deal and No Deal would likely see EUref2 before the Brexit date in March 2019 potentially leading to No Brexit at all
    Are you sure no deal wto has 40% support.

    I do not believe it is anywhere near that
    At one point it was 45% No Deal 55% Remain.

    By the time this is done, I predict that No Deal will have a majority over May's deal. Having said that, polls are irrelevant. Many, many Governments have pushed through policies that have less than 40-45% support. You make out it would be an outrage, yet it happens all the time. If HYUFD wants to poll very existing Tory policy he would be hard pressed to find many that had that level of support!
    What policies have been pushed through by a government with less than 40% support? You could just about say the poll tax, that was swiftly reversed and toppled Thatcher. Certainly no constitutional change as big as a No Deal Brexit has been pushed through without at least over 50% support
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,986

    rcs1000 said:

    Even Theresa May says that Norway is not Brexit. Was she lying then?

    Being incorrect and lying are two different things.

    Are you denying that there were Leave voters who wanted Norway?
    No, of course not. I don't ignore reality. But Leave won, and Leave needs to be interpreted in a manner which is consistent with the campaign that Leave ran, which ruled out a Norway exit.
    If it is No Deal it will either be reversed at an EU referendum or we will leave via the Norway route and stay in the single market. There is no majority in either Parliament, the Cabinet or the country for a No Deal Brexit and May it is becoming increasingly clear will do all she can to avoid No Deal Brexit too
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,204

    FPT



    One or two of us on here have been warning about UC for months and months.

    The few billion to fix the hole, will stop at least the issue of several million families losing up to £2.4K a year.

    That seems the bare minimum to me, to fix the UC nightmare, which, together with housing, will sink the Tories.

    I stand to lose more than £12.4k a year, never mind £2.4k a year given they announced (quietly) earlier this year that the transitional protection will only last for one year as far as the £16k asset limit being applied to tax credit recipients is concerned. The Corbynator would have to do plenty of damage to match that. Maybe I should alter the habits of a lifetime and blow all of my family's assets in advance. Or upgrade to a house worth twice as much as our current place.
    I had not even heard of that particular twist. Blimey.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,235
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Even Theresa May says that Norway is not Brexit. Was she lying then?

    Being incorrect and lying are two different things.

    Are you denying that there were Leave voters who wanted Norway?
    No, of course not. I don't ignore reality. But Leave won, and Leave needs to be interpreted in a manner which is consistent with the campaign that Leave ran, which ruled out a Norway exit.
    No Brexit needs to be carried out in a way that commands the greatest support among the British people.

    This is not an election where one side won, and 51% of the 52% get to choose the outcome.

    The Brexit that gets the greatest support of the British people is the morally right answer.
    I agree with this which is why I will be supporting a deal that turns my stomach and which I find deeply frustrating. 48% (well, probably 46% because there is always @William_Glen and some other eccentrics) were sufficiently concerned about the implications and disruption arising from coming out of the EU to vote remain. The way we leave should respect and reflect that. That means we go for a deal which keeps some of the benefits of membership even at the cost of some of the disbenefits of membership. And the sooner the better. We've all had enough of this.
  • Options
    archer101auarcher101au Posts: 1,612

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Even Theresa May says that Norway is not Brexit. Was she lying then?

    Being incorrect and lying are two different things.

    Are you denying that there were Leave voters who wanted Norway?
    No, of course not. I don't ignore reality. But Leave won, and Leave needs to be interpreted in a manner which is consistent with the campaign that Leave ran, which ruled out a Norway exit.
    No Brexit needs to be carried out in a way that commands the greatest support among the British people.

    This is not an election where one side won, and 51% of the 52% get to choose the outcome.

    The Brexit that gets the greatest support of the British people is the morally right answer.
    I am sorry, but I completely disagree. Brexit went to a binary referendum because there was no middle ground. We had been arguing about it for 40 years. Cameron tried and failed to find a middle ground.

    The manifesto of the winning side has to be implemented. What you are basically saying is that the losers of the referendum have the right to dictate how the winners can proceed. That is the default remainer position, and it is wrong.

    Every election and every vote involves multiple motivations. After a GE many policies will be implemented that do not have the support of even a significant minority of voters. The side that wins gets to implement their policies. That is how democracy works.
    The side that wins gets to try to implement their policies. If those policies prove impossible to implement sensibly, then they may be abandoned.
    Such is Brexit.
    Fine. Then declare your support for getting rid of May, putting a Leaver in charge and see if Brexit can be delivered. If it can't, then you can have another say.

    Of course, Brexit can be implemented. We activate A50 and leave on 31 March 2019.
    Implemented sensibly. It’s beyond doubt that pulling up the drawbridge late on 29th March will have dreadful consequences for many, many people.
    Oh, silly me. The losers (remainers) get a veto on whether the winners policy is sensible. Well, we won't have to worry about Corbyn winning the next election then. If he wins, the Tories can veto all his policies by declaring them not sensible.

    Many leavers (such as myself) believe that leaving with no deal (if handled properly by the Government) would not result in major problems and that in the medium term it would provide a net benefit.

    You are free to disagree, but they are both opinions and judgements, yours is not a fact.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,986

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:


    The median voter voted Leave but wants a Deal.

    It is they you need to win over, you already have the Diehard Brexiteer No Deal straight to WTO terms voters and you will never have Remain voters, certainly without a Deal

    Thank you for missing the point.nding Chequers to defending a totally non-existent solution.
    No you have missed the point and proved nothing.

    There is a commitment to avoid a hard border in Ireland by staying in a Customs Union until a technical solution is found to the Irish border, only once we have given that commitment and paid our exit bill will the EU engage in FTA talks and agree to a transition period.

    The straight to WTO terms No Deal Brexit you support only has about 40% support amongst the voters, poling shows about 20% of Leave voters would switch to Remain if No Deal and No Deal would likely see EUref2 before the Brexit date in March 2019 potentially leading to No Brexit at all
    Are you sure no deal wto has 40% support.

    I do not believe it is anywhere near that
    A YouGov poll had it 55% Remain 45% Leave if Leave was on No Deal terms ie the same number of voters would support Leave on No Deal terms as voted Yes to independence in Scotland's 2014 referendum. Still a significant number but no longer a majority

    http://uk.businessinsider.com/yougov-poll-voters-would-rather-remain-in-eu-than-accept-a-no-deal-brexit-2018-7
    How many current Tory policies have majority support in the polls? For those that do not, can we insist that the Government stops pursuing them?
    Cutting inheritance tax, building more homes, cutting stamp duty, taking the lowest earners out of tax, reducing the welfare bill to name but a few
  • Options
    archer101auarcher101au Posts: 1,612
    HYUFD said:



    What policies have been pushed through by a government with less than 40% support? You could just about say the poll tax, that was swiftly reversed and toppled Thatcher. Certainly no constitutional change as big as a No Deal Brexit has been pushed through without at least over 50% support

    Come on then, you quote polls all the time, show us the polls that support Tory policies. How about universal credit for starters?
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,986

    HYUFD said:



    What policies have been pushed through by a government with less than 40% support? You could just about say the poll tax, that was swiftly reversed and toppled Thatcher. Certainly no constitutional change as big as a No Deal Brexit has been pushed through without at least over 50% support

    Come on then, you quote polls all the time, show us the polls that support Tory policies. How about universal credit for starters?
    Voters certainly support reducing the welfare bill and ensuring work always pays which once its teething problems are sorted out universal credit will do
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,235
    rcs1000 said:
    Doesn't really tell you very much but I think it is well recognised that the Court has a tendency towards consensus and balance. This has meant that Justices at the extremes have tended to become more moderate (or at least vote with the moderate majority) to prevent those at the other extreme or possibly even on their own extreme having excess sway. The fear is always that there might be a tipping point where the moderates are no longer the centre of gravity. If Trump got another term and another 3 nominations that might happen.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,962

    FPT



    One or two of us on here have been warning about UC for months and months.

    The few billion to fix the hole, will stop at least the issue of several million families losing up to £2.4K a year.

    That seems the bare minimum to me, to fix the UC nightmare, which, together with housing, will sink the Tories.

    I stand to lose more than £12.4k a year, never mind £2.4k a year given they announced (quietly) earlier this year that the transitional protection will only last for one year as far as the £16k asset limit being applied to tax credit recipients is concerned. The Corbynator would have to do plenty of damage to match that. Maybe I should alter the habits of a lifetime and blow all of my family's assets in advance. Or upgrade to a house worth twice as much as our current place.
    The problem is you have too much money to qualify for benefits?
  • Options
    archer101auarcher101au Posts: 1,612
    DavidL said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Even Theresa May says that Norway is not Brexit. Was she lying then?

    Being incorrect and lying are two different things.

    Are you denying that there were Leave voters who wanted Norway?
    No, of course not. I don't ignore reality. But Leave won, and Leave needs to be interpreted in a manner which is consistent with the campaign that Leave ran, which ruled out a Norway exit.
    No Brexit needs to be carried out in a way that commands the greatest support among the British people.

    This is not an election where one side won, and 51% of the 52% get to choose the outcome.

    The Brexit that gets the greatest support of the British people is the morally right answer.
    I agree with this which is why I will be supporting a deal that turns my stomach and which I find deeply frustrating. 48% (well, probably 46% because there is always @William_Glen and some other eccentrics) were sufficiently concerned about the implications and disruption arising from coming out of the EU to vote remain. The way we leave should respect and reflect that. That means we go for a deal which keeps some of the benefits of membership even at the cost of some of the disbenefits of membership. And the sooner the better. We've all had enough of this.
    I am thinking that I will now support a second referendum!

    We will contrive to lose by 4% but then insist that we cannot accept the EU treaties as they are because they do not reflect the views of the 48% who voted against. Since it will be impossible to implement the result of the referendum taking into account the views of the losers, we will have to remain outside the EU. Perfect.

    Of course, if Leave had lost, the remainers would not exactly be making the same argument about the rights of the minority....
  • Options
    archer101auarcher101au Posts: 1,612
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:



    What policies have been pushed through by a government with less than 40% support? You could just about say the poll tax, that was swiftly reversed and toppled Thatcher. Certainly no constitutional change as big as a No Deal Brexit has been pushed through without at least over 50% support

    Come on then, you quote polls all the time, show us the polls that support Tory policies. How about universal credit for starters?
    Voters certainly support reducing the welfare bill and ensuring work always pays which once its teething problems are sorted out universal credit will do
    Show me the polls!
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,960

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Even Theresa May says that Norway is not Brexit. Was she lying then?

    Being incorrect and lying are two different things.

    Are you denying that there were Leave voters who wanted Norway?
    No, of course not. I don't ignore reality. But Leave won, and Leave needs to be interpreted in a manner which is consistent with the campaign that Leave ran, which ruled out a Norway exit.
    No Brexit needs to be carried out in a way that commands the greatest support among the British people.

    This is not an election where one side won, and 51% of the 52% get to choose the outcome.

    The Brexit that gets the greatest support of the British people is the morally right answer.
    I am sorry, but I completely disagree. Brexit went to a binary referendum because there was no middle ground. We had been arguing about it for 40 years. Cameron tried and failed to find a middle ground.

    The manifesto of the winning side has to be implemented. What you are basically saying is that the losers of the referendum have the right to dictate how the winners can proceed. That is the default remainer position, and it is wrong.

    Every election and every vote involves multiple motivations. After a GE many policies will be implemented that do not have the support of even a significant minority of voters. The side that wins gets to implement their policies. That is how democracy works.
    Look, we disagree. I wrote passionately for Leave on this blog ahead of the referendum. But I also agreed with Daniel Hannan, where he said the narrowness of the victory needed to be reflected in the relationship we had with the EU.

    I would have been - and I hope you would have too - horrified if the result had been 52:48 for Remain, and we then said that as 51% of the 52% supported Euro membership, that there had been a clear mandate for it.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,204
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:



    What policies have been pushed through by a government with less than 40% support? You could just about say the poll tax, that was swiftly reversed and toppled Thatcher. Certainly no constitutional change as big as a No Deal Brexit has been pushed through without at least over 50% support

    Come on then, you quote polls all the time, show us the polls that support Tory policies. How about universal credit for starters?
    Voters certainly support reducing the welfare bill and ensuring work always pays which once its teething problems are sorted out universal credit will do
    It seems never to occur to these voters that they could wake up one day and find they need the very same benefit that they are slagging off. Illness and disability can hit anyone at any time.
  • Options
    archer101auarcher101au Posts: 1,612
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Even Theresa May says that Norway is not Brexit. Was she lying then?

    Being incorrect and lying are two different things.

    Are you denying that there were Leave voters who wanted Norway?
    No, of course not. I don't ignore reality. But Leave won, and Leave needs to be interpreted in a manner which is consistent with the campaign that Leave ran, which ruled out a Norway exit.
    No Brexit needs to be carried out in a way that commands the greatest support among the British people.

    This is not an election where one side won, and 51% of the 52% get to choose the outcome.

    The Brexit that gets the greatest support of the British people is the morally right answer.
    I am sorry, but I completely disagree. Brexit went to a binary referendum because there was no middle ground. We had been arguing about it for 40 years. Cameron tried and failed to find a middle ground.

    The manifesto of the winning side has to be implemented. What you are basically saying is that the losers of the referendum have the right to dictate how the winners can proceed. That is the default remainer position, and it is wrong.

    Every election and every vote involves multiple motivations. After a GE many policies will be implemented that do not have the support of even a significant minority of voters. The side that wins gets to implement their policies. That is how democracy works.
    Look, we disagree. I wrote passionately for Leave on this blog ahead of the referendum. But I also agreed with Daniel Hannan, where he said the narrowness of the victory needed to be reflected in the relationship we had with the EU.

    I would have been - and I hope you would have too - horrified if the result had been 52:48 for Remain, and we then said that as 51% of the 52% supported Euro membership, that there had been a clear mandate for it.
    If Remain had won, even by a vote, Remain would have implemented 100% of its manifesto. Fact.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,962
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Even Theresa May says that Norway is not Brexit. Was she lying then?

    Being incorrect and lying are two different things.

    Are you denying that there were Leave voters who wanted Norway?
    No, of course not. I don't ignore reality. But Leave won, and Leave needs to be interpreted in a manner which is consistent with the campaign that Leave ran, which ruled out a Norway exit.
    No Brexit needs to be carried out in a way that commands the greatest support among the British people.

    This is not an election where one side won, and 51% of the 52% get to choose the outcome.

    The Brexit that gets the greatest support of the British people is the morally right answer.
    I am sorry, but I completely disagree. Brexit went to a binary referendum because there was no middle ground. We had been arguing about it for 40 years. Cameron tried and failed to find a middle ground.

    The manifesto of the winning side has to be implemented. What you are basically saying is that the losers of the referendum have the right to dictate how the winners can proceed. That is the default remainer position, and it is wrong.

    Every election and every vote involves multiple motivations. After a GE many policies will be implemented that do not have the support of even a significant minority of voters. The side that wins gets to implement their policies. That is how democracy works.
    Look, we disagree. I wrote passionately for Leave on this blog ahead of the referendum. But I also agreed with Daniel Hannan, where he said the narrowness of the victory needed to be reflected in the relationship we had with the EU.

    I would have been - and I hope you would have too - horrified if the result had been 52:48 for Remain, and we then said that as 51% of the 52% supported Euro membership, that there had been a clear mandate for it.
    williamglenn’s fantasy scenario!
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,960
    DavidL said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Even Theresa May says that Norway is not Brexit. Was she lying then?

    Being incorrect and lying are two different things.

    Are you denying that there were Leave voters who wanted Norway?
    No, of course not. I don't ignore reality. But Leave won, and Leave needs to be interpreted in a manner which is consistent with the campaign that Leave ran, which ruled out a Norway exit.
    No Brexit needs to be carried out in a way that commands the greatest support among the British people.

    This is not an election where one side won, and 51% of the 52% get to choose the outcome.

    The Brexit that gets the greatest support of the British people is the morally right answer.
    I agree with this which is why I will be supporting a deal that turns my stomach and which I find deeply frustrating. 48% (well, probably 46% because there is always @William_Glen and some other eccentrics) were sufficiently concerned about the implications and disruption arising from coming out of the EU to vote remain. The way we leave should respect and reflect that. That means we go for a deal which keeps some of the benefits of membership even at the cost of some of the disbenefits of membership. And the sooner the better. We've all had enough of this.
    And, DavidL, am I right in thinking that you also voted Leave?
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,235

    DavidL said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Even Theresa May says that Norway is not Brexit. Was she lying then?

    Being incorrect and lying are two different things.

    Are you denying that there were Leave voters who wanted Norway?
    No, of course not. I don't ignore reality. But Leave won, and Leave needs to be interpreted in a manner which is consistent with the campaign that Leave ran, which ruled out a Norway exit.
    No Brexit needs to be carried out in a way that commands the greatest support among the British people.

    This is not an election where one side won, and 51% of the 52% get to choose the outcome.

    The Brexit that gets the greatest support of the British people is the morally right answer.
    I agree with this which is why I will be supporting a deal that turns my stomach and which I find deeply frustrating. 48% (well, probably 46% because there is always @William_Glen and some other eccentrics) were sufficiently concerned about the implications and disruption arising from coming out of the EU to vote remain. The way we leave should respect and reflect that. That means we go for a deal which keeps some of the benefits of membership even at the cost of some of the disbenefits of membership. And the sooner the better. We've all had enough of this.
    I am thinking that I will now support a second referendum!

    We will contrive to lose by 4% but then insist that we cannot accept the EU treaties as they are because they do not reflect the views of the 48% who voted against. Since it will be impossible to implement the result of the referendum taking into account the views of the losers, we will have to remain outside the EU. Perfect.

    Of course, if Leave had lost, the remainers would not exactly be making the same argument about the rights of the minority....
    We'll never know but my best guess is that a government that had won the referendum 52:48 would have made it crystal clear to the EU that we had reached the level of integration that we were willing to accept and no further. It would have been crazy and electoral suicide not to. I think we would even have found ourselves seeking more opt outs and a drift away inside the the tent over time.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,960

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Even Theresa May says that Norway is not Brexit. Was she lying then?

    Being incorrect and lying are two different things.

    Are you denying that there were Leave voters who wanted Norway?
    No, of course not. I don't ignore reality. But Leave won, and Leave needs to be interpreted in a manner which is consistent with the campaign that Leave ran, which ruled out a Norway exit.
    No Brexit needs to be carried out in a way that commands the greatest support among the British people.

    This is not an election where one side won, and 51% of the 52% get to choose the outcome.

    The Brexit that gets the greatest support of the British people is the morally right answer.
    I am sorry, but I completely disagree. Brexit went to a binary referendum because there was no middle ground. We had been arguing about it for 40 years. Cameron tried and failed to find a middle ground.

    The manifesto of the winning side has to be implemented. What you are basically saying is that the losers of the referendum have the right to dictate how the winners can proceed. That is the default remainer position, and it is wrong.

    Every election and every vote involves multiple motivations. After a GE many policies will be implemented that do not have the support of even a significant minority of voters. The side that wins gets to implement their policies. That is how democracy works.
    Look, we disagree. I wrote passionately for Leave on this blog ahead of the referendum. But I also agreed with Daniel Hannan, where he said the narrowness of the victory needed to be reflected in the relationship we had with the EU.

    I would have been - and I hope you would have too - horrified if the result had been 52:48 for Remain, and we then said that as 51% of the 52% supported Euro membership, that there had been a clear mandate for it.
    If Remain had won, even by a vote, Remain would have implemented 100% of its manifesto. Fact.
    This is clearly some new meaning of the word "Fact" that I was previously unaware of.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,962
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Even Theresa May says that Norway is not Brexit. Was she lying then?

    Being incorrect and lying are two different things.

    Are you denying that there were Leave voters who wanted Norway?
    No, of course not. I don't ignore reality. But Leave won, and Leave needs to be interpreted in a manner which is consistent with the campaign that Leave ran, which ruled out a Norway exit.
    No Brexit needs to be carried out in a way that commands the greatest support among the British people.

    This is not an election where one side won, and 51% of the 52% get to choose the outcome.

    The Brexit that gets the greatest support of the British people is the morally right answer.
    I am sorry, but I completely disagree. Brexit went to a binary referendum because there was no middle ground. We had been arguing about it for 40 years. Cameron tried and failed to find a middle ground.

    The manifesto of the winning side has to be implemented. What you are basically saying is that the losers of the referendum have the right to dictate how the winners can proceed. That is the default remainer position, and it is wrong.

    Every election and every vote involves multiple motivations. After a GE many policies will be implemented that do not have the support of even a significant minority of voters. The side that wins gets to implement their policies. That is how democracy works.
    Look, we disagree. I wrote passionately for Leave on this blog ahead of the referendum. But I also agreed with Daniel Hannan, where he said the narrowness of the victory needed to be reflected in the relationship we had with the EU.

    I would have been - and I hope you would have too - horrified if the result had been 52:48 for Remain, and we then said that as 51% of the 52% supported Euro membership, that there had been a clear mandate for it.
    If Remain had won, even by a vote, Remain would have implemented 100% of its manifesto. Fact.
    This is clearly some new meaning of the word "Fact" that I was previously unaware of.
    Wasn’t their manifesto simply steady as she goes?
  • Options
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Even Theresa May says that Norway is not Brexit. Was she lying then?

    Being incorrect and lying are two different things.

    Are you denying that there were Leave voters who wanted Norway?
    No, of course not. I don't ignore reality. But Leave won, and Leave needs to be interpreted in a manner which is consistent with the campaign that Leave ran, which ruled out a Norway exit.
    No Brexit needs to be carried out in a way that commands the greatest support among the British people.

    This is not an election where one side won, and 51% of the 52% get to choose the outcome.

    The Brexit that gets the greatest support of the British people is the morally right answer.
    I am sorry, but I completely disagree. Brexit went to a binary referendum because there was no middle ground. We had been arguing about it for 40 years. Cameron tried and failed to find a middle ground.

    The manifesto of the winning side has to be implemented. What you are basically saying is that the losers of the referendum have the right to dictate how the winners can proceed. That is the default remainer position, and it is wrong.

    Every election and every vote involves multiple motivations. After a GE many policies will be implemented that do not have the support of even a significant minority of voters. The side that wins gets to implement their policies. That is how democracy works.
    Look, we disagree. I wrote passionately for Leave on this blog ahead of the referendum. But I also agreed with Daniel Hannan, where he said the narrowness of the victory needed to be reflected in the relationship we had with the EU.

    I would have been - and I hope you would have too - horrified if the result had been 52:48 for Remain, and we then said that as 51% of the 52% supported Euro membership, that there had been a clear mandate for it.
    Wasn't that the plan of the Establishment ?

    Win the Referendum and then use it as a justification for decades more of EverCloserUnion ?

    I really don't think think that if it had been 52% Remain then the government would have said "Okay, its clear that much of the country wants something done about immigration so we'll put restrictions on who can come here from Eastern Europe".
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    rcs1000 said:

    The Brexit that gets the greatest support of the British people is the morally right answer.

    And which Brexit is that?

    Maybe we need a vote. Of the people. Needs a catchy name though.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,235
    rcs1000 said:

    DavidL said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Even Theresa May says that Norway is not Brexit. Was she lying then?

    Being incorrect and lying are two different things.

    Are you denying that there were Leave voters who wanted Norway?
    No, of course not. I don't ignore reality. But Leave won, and Leave needs to be interpreted in a manner which is consistent with the campaign that Leave ran, which ruled out a Norway exit.
    No Brexit needs to be carried out in a way that commands the greatest support among the British people.

    This is not an election where one side won, and 51% of the 52% get to choose the outcome.

    The Brexit that gets the greatest support of the British people is the morally right answer.
    I agree with this which is why I will be supporting a deal that turns my stomach and which I find deeply frustrating. 48% (well, probably 46% because there is always @William_Glen and some other eccentrics) were sufficiently concerned about the implications and disruption arising from coming out of the EU to vote remain. The way we leave should respect and reflect that. That means we go for a deal which keeps some of the benefits of membership even at the cost of some of the disbenefits of membership. And the sooner the better. We've all had enough of this.
    And, DavidL, am I right in thinking that you also voted Leave?
    Yes. And I am much more committed to leaving now than I was then (where concerns about losing Cameron/Osborne weighed heavily). But we need to find a consensus that we can live with on this. No one can get all they want.
  • Options
    Did they back unlimited immigration as well ?
  • Options
    archer101auarcher101au Posts: 1,612
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Even Theresa May says that Norway is not Brexit. Was she lying then?

    Being incorrect and lying are two different things.

    Are you denying that there were Leave voters who wanted Norway?
    No, of course not. I don't ignore reality. But Leave won, and Leave needs to be interpreted in a manner which is consistent with the campaign that Leave ran, which ruled out a Norway exit.
    No Brexit needs to be carried out in a way that commands the greatest support among the British people.

    This is not an election where one side won, and 51% of the 52% get to choose the outcome.

    The Brexit that gets the greatest support of the British people is the morally right answer.
    I am sorry, but I completely disagree. Brexit went to a binary referendum because there was no middle ground. We had been arguing about it for 40 years. Cameron tried and failed to find a middle ground.

    The manifesto of the winning side has to be implemented. What you are basically saying is that the losers of the referendum have the right to dictate how the winners can proceed. That is the default remainer position, and it is wrong.

    Every election and every vote involves multiple motivations. After a GE many policies will be implemented that do not have the support of even a significant minority of voters. The side that wins gets to implement their policies. That is how democracy works.
    Look, we disagree. I wrote passionately for Leave on this blog ahead of the referendum. But I also agreed with Daniel Hannan, where he said the narrowness of the victory needed to be reflected in the relationship we had with the EU.

    I would have been - and I hope you would have too - horrified if the result had been 52:48 for Remain, and we then said that as 51% of the 52% supported Euro membership, that there had been a clear mandate for it.
    If Remain had won, even by a vote, Remain would have implemented 100% of its manifesto. Fact.
    This is clearly some new meaning of the word "Fact" that I was previously unaware of.
    Are you disputing this in any way, or playing with semantics?

    The remain manifesto was to remain the EU on the basis of Cameron's agreement. This would have been implemented in full with no changes made to reflect the fact that (say) 48% voted against. You know it, I know it. It is a fact.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,976
    Mr. L, disagree on that.

    The closeness of the vote would've prevented any government from risking another such vote unless they actually wanted to leave.

    Political consensus can override common ground with the electorate, as per aid spending. It happened for decades with the EU.
  • Options
    Scott_P said:

    rcs1000 said:

    The Brexit that gets the greatest support of the British people is the morally right answer.

    And which Brexit is that?

    Maybe we need a vote. Of the people. Needs a catchy name though.
    Mogg or May ?
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,960
    I think the confusion here is about the idea of there being a genuine "manifesto" on either side. There wasn't.

    Here's the official Vote Leave pamphlet: http://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/themes/55fd82d8ebad646cec000001/attachments/original/1463496002/Why_Vote_Leave.pdf?1463496002

    This is the nearest thing to a "manifesto". It contains the line "There is a free trade zone from Iceland to Turkey and the Russian border and we will be part of it."

    So, will we be implementing that?
  • Options
    archer101auarcher101au Posts: 1,612

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Even Theresa May says that Norway is not Brexit. Was she lying then?

    Being incorrect and lying are two different things.

    Are you denying that there were Leave voters who wanted Norway?
    No, of course not. I don't ignore reality. But Leave won, and Leave needs to be interpreted in a manner which is consistent with the campaign that Leave ran, which ruled out a Norway exit.
    No Brexit needs to be carried out in a way that commands the greatest support among the British people.

    This is not an election where one side won, and 51% of the 52% get to choose the outcome.

    The Brexit that gets the greatest support of the British people is the morally right answer.
    I am sorry, but I completely disagree. Brexit went to a binary referendum because there was no middle ground. We had been arguing about it for 40 years. Cameron tried and failed to find a middle ground.

    The manifesto of the winning side has to be implemented. What you are basically saying is that the losers of the referendum have the right to dictate how the winners can proceed. That is the default remainer position, and it is wrong.

    Every election and every vote involves multiple motivations. After a GE many policies will be implemented that do not have the support of even a significant minority of voters. The side that wins gets to implement their policies. That is how democracy works.
    Look, we disagree. I wrote passionately for Leave on this blog ahead of the referendum. But I also agreed with Daniel Hannan, where he said the narrowness of the victory needed to be reflected in the relationship we had with the EU.

    I would have been - and I hope you would have too - horrified if the result had been 52:48 for Remain, and we then said that as 51% of the 52% supported Euro membership, that there had been a clear mandate for it.
    Wasn't that the plan of the Establishment ?

    Win the Referendum and then use it as a justification for decades more of EverCloserUnion ?

    I really don't think think that if it had been 52% Remain then the government would have said "Okay, its clear that much of the country wants something done about immigration so we'll put restrictions on who can come here from Eastern Europe".
    Quite. If remain had won, both parties would have used it as justification for permanent membership of the EU with whatever additional integration they saw fit. There would have been no amendment of our terms to reflect the views of leavers. It was a binary decision - although apparently only if remain won.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,235

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:


    No Brexit needs to be carried out in a way that commands the greatest support among the British people.

    This is not an election where one side won, and 51% of the 52% get to choose the outcome.

    The Brexit that gets the greatest support of the British people is the morally right answer.
    I am sorry, but I completely disagree. Brexit went to a binary referendum because there was no middle ground. We had been arguing about it for 40 years. Cameron tried and failed to find a middle ground.

    The manifesto of the winning side has to be implemented. What you are basically saying is that the losers of the referendum have the right to dictate how the winners can proceed. That is the default remainer position, and it is wrong.

    Every election and every vote involves multiple motivations. After a GE many policies will be implemented that do not have the support of even a significant minority of voters. The side that wins gets to implement their policies. That is how democracy works.
    Look, we disagree. I wrote passionately for Leave on this blog ahead of the referendum. But I also agreed with Daniel Hannan, where he said the narrowness of the victory needed to be reflected in the relationship we had with the EU.

    I would have been - and I hope you would have too - horrified if the result had been 52:48 for Remain, and we then said that as 51% of the 52% supported Euro membership, that there had been a clear mandate for it.
    Wasn't that the plan of the Establishment ?

    Win the Referendum and then use it as a justification for decades more of EverCloserUnion ?

    I really don't think think that if it had been 52% Remain then the government would have said "Okay, its clear that much of the country wants something done about immigration so we'll put restrictions on who can come here from Eastern Europe".
    I don't think so. Firstly we had Cameron's opt out from ever closer union. That was a fairly meaningless gesture at the time but after a vote of 52:48 I think it would have gained substance. I have little doubt that any UK government that wanted to be elected again would have been seeking to restrict the scale of freedom of movement within the EU and would have opposed further integration. How far they would have got with that is another question.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,986

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Even Theresa May says that Norway is not Brexit. Was she lying then?

    Being incorrect and lying are two different things.

    Are you denying that there were Leave voters who wanted Norway?
    No, of course not. I don't ignore reality. But Leave won, and Leave needs to be interpreted in a manner which is consistent with the campaign that Leave ran, which ruled out a Norway exit.
    No Brexit needs to be carried out in a way that commands the greatest support among the British people.

    This is not an election where one side won, and 51% of the 52% get to choose the outcome.

    The Brexit that gets the greatest support of the British people is the morally right answer.
    I am sorry, but I completely disagree. Brexit went to a binary referendum because there was no middle ground. We had been arguing about it for 40 years. Cameron tried and failed to find a middle ground.

    The manifesto of the winning side has to be implemented. What you are basically saying is that the losers of the referendum have the right to dictate how the winners can proceed. That is the default remainer position, and it is wrong.

    Every election and every vote involves multiple motivations. After a GE many policies will be implemented that do not have the support of even a significant minority of voters. The side that wins gets to implement their policies. That is how democracy works.
    Look, we disagree. I wrote passionately for Leave on this blog ahead of the referendum. But I also agreed with Daniel Hannan, where he said the narrowness of the victory needed to be reflected in the relationship we had with the EU.

    I would have been - and I hope you would have too - horrified if the result had been 52:48 for Remain, and we then said that as 51% of the 52% supported Euro membership, that there had been a clear mandate for it.
    Wasn't that the plan of the Establishment ?

    Win the Referendum and then use it as a justification for decades more of EverCloserUnion ?

    I really don't think think that if it had been 52% Remain then the government would have said "Okay, its clear that much of the country wants something done about immigration so we'll put restrictions on who can come here from Eastern Europe".
    We could have put restrictions on those who come here from Eastern Europe within the EU had Blair imposed transition controls on free movement from the new accession nations in 2004 as the EU allowed him too, rather than only doing so for the smaller wave of accession nations in 2007 by which time the damage had largely been done
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,960
    edited October 2018

    Quite. If remain had won, both parties would have used it as justification for permanent membership of the EU with whatever additional integration they saw fit. There would have been no amendment of our terms to reflect the views of leavers. It was a binary decision - although apparently only if remain won.

    You've just contradicted yourself.

    1. The Remain manifesto (no further integration) would have been implemented
    2. It would have been used for justification for further integration.

    Either you believe the Remain manifesto would not have been implemented, and there would have been no further integration. Or you believe it would have been used for cover by the 51% of the 52%.

    Which is it?
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,986

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:



    What policies have been pushed through by a government with less than 40% support? You could just about say the poll tax, that was swiftly reversed and toppled Thatcher. Certainly no constitutional change as big as a No Deal Brexit has been pushed through without at least over 50% support

    Come on then, you quote polls all the time, show us the polls that support Tory policies. How about universal credit for starters?
    Voters certainly support reducing the welfare bill and ensuring work always pays which once its teething problems are sorted out universal credit will do
    It seems never to occur to these voters that they could wake up one day and find they need the very same benefit that they are slagging off. Illness and disability can hit anyone at any time.
    And currently if you work more than 16 hours a week you lose all your benefits, UC will redress that
  • Options
    archer101auarcher101au Posts: 1,612
    rcs1000 said:

    I think the confusion here is about the idea of there being a genuine "manifesto" on either side. There wasn't.

    Here's the official Vote Leave pamphlet: http://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/themes/55fd82d8ebad646cec000001/attachments/original/1463496002/Why_Vote_Leave.pdf?1463496002

    This is the nearest thing to a "manifesto". It contains the line "There is a free trade zone from Iceland to Turkey and the Russian border and we will be part of it."

    So, will we be implementing that?

    Yes, it is called CETA.

    Now, this brochure says:

    1. We are keeping our money and not sending it to Brussels
    2. We will take control of our borders
    3. We will exit EU regulations
    4. We will make our own free trade deals
    5. We will not accept control of the ECJ

    So, can you tell me what parts of this are consistent with Norway?

    I am not confused.
This discussion has been closed.