Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » How people would feel if the government cancelled Brexit & Bri

SystemSystem Posts: 11,002
edited December 2018 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » How people would feel if the government cancelled Brexit & Britain stayed in the EU?

Interesting polling out today from YouGov which could just become increasingly important.

Read the full story here


«13

Comments

  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,082
    first to vote?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,096
    Second like the referendum
  • kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 3,911
    Third like UKIP on 24%
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    Aroused 2
    Dirty 5
    Hungry 13
  • Delighted to have dodged May's deal, Betrayed because Brexit gets cancelled...
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,921
    What on earth? Russel-Moyle grabbed the mace. Couldn’t work out context from the clips. Anyone?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408
    edited December 2018
    Surely not, the continuity remainers assure us nothing will ever be problematic again once we remain. Note:This is totally not the same thing leavers making vague, overly simplified promises.

    Frankly I'm surprised the betrayed and delighted figures are as low as they are, that should both encourage and discourage both sides.
  • nielhnielh Posts: 1,307
    the 24% must also reflect the ageing Brexit demographic.
  • Remainers never advocate violence against Leavers........

    https://twitter.com/theneweuropean/status/926767308021710853
  • Russell-Moyle is a prick and I hope they ban him for the rest of the season

    Trying to be funny or clever or meaningful but is as shallow as a raindrop and as thick as pigshit
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,096
    Mortimer said:

    What on earth? Russel-Moyle grabbed the mace. Couldn’t work out context from the clips. Anyone?

    The guardian live feed describes what happenned

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2018/dec/10/brexit-deal-vote-latest-theresa-may-ecj-government-says-ecj-ruling-irrelevant-because-uk-leaving-eu-anyway-politics-live

    It doesn't spell out his motives but the implication is some sort of protest at MPs being denied a say?
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    Befuddled 95
    Miffed 45
    Ennui 32
  • nielhnielh Posts: 1,307
    I think Brexit could be cancelled without riots.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,096
    Cabbages 21
    Seaside 35
    Llamas 42
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408
    tyson said:

    kle4 said:

    chloe said:

    We need to revoke A50 and hold a referendum if MPs can’t ageee a deal. No deal was not on the ballot paper last time.

    Yes it was. Remain warned everyone there could be huge chaos and disruption by leaving, and that it was a massive leap in the dark. It would be a perfectly legitimate outcome to no deal, especially since parliament agreed to it in legislative form in the event nothing else was agreed.

    I don't want no deal, and I think parliament has failed to agree anything and thus a referendum is probably necessary, but there is nothing illegitimate about no deal, and we were warned something like this was possible, and parliament accepted it as well no matter how they bleat now about how horrible that would be.
    No deal is illegitimate in all but name...we cannot morally press ahead with something that our country is ill equipped for...
    I agree, though if it happens I hope those saying it will not be as bad as we think are right, but the more unacceptable it is, the lower the justification for a public vote.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,590
    24% is quite a big percentage to feel betrayed.

    The totals for positive and negative reactions are 43% and 38% respectively, which is also interesting.
    A not insignificant difference.

    The extreme reactions seem to reflect our national politics, with somewhere around a quarter of the electorate at opposing poles.

  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395

    Russell-Moyle is a prick and I hope they ban him for the rest of the season

    Trying to be funny or clever or meaningful but is as shallow as a raindrop and as thick as pigshit

    I'm sure a place can be found for him in the Tower of London.
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    Hmm... not sure what word I'd personally choose from that selection. Maybe "relieved", but also "uneasy".
  • IanB2 said:

    Mortimer said:

    What on earth? Russel-Moyle grabbed the mace. Couldn’t work out context from the clips. Anyone?

    The guardian live feed describes what happenned

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2018/dec/10/brexit-deal-vote-latest-theresa-may-ecj-government-says-ecj-ruling-irrelevant-because-uk-leaving-eu-anyway-politics-live

    It doesn't spell out his motives but the implication is some sort of protest at MPs being denied a say?
    Ooooh, really deep and meaningful isn't he, the clever boy?

    Er, no, he's a dick. Ban him for life
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256
    Sorry Mike - I will have to disagree with you on this. cancelling it is the only safe option. Referendums can deliver the wring result e.g Cameron and 2016
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,096
    Nigelb said:

    24% is quite a big percentage to feel betrayed.

    The totals for positive and negative reactions are 43% and 38% respectively, which is also interesting.
    A not insignificant difference.

    The extreme reactions seem to reflect our national politics, with somewhere around a quarter of the electorate at opposing poles.

    Opposing poles hasn't helped from the beginning.
  • Disenchanted.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,074
    "In any case the chances of Brexit just being cancelled are zilch. A u-turn like this really does require another vote."

    To be provocative, does it? We are a Parliamentary democracy.

    If Parliament won't vote for the deal which has been reached and doesn't want to let No Deal happen, then let it take a decision.

    I worry that if a No-Deal Brexit goes through, even though Parliamentarians are against it and think it should not happen, and if it causes the sort of economic disruption we've been warned about, such a result would be just as corrosive of public belief in democracy and, indeed, the role of Parliament, as a revocation of Brexit. Voters will not blame themselves. They will blame MPs for having allowed something bad to happen even though they knew it was potentially harmful. They will blame those who misled them or those who used improper tactics to win the referendum. Etc etc.

    There are no cost free easy options left. My feeling is that there will be a backlash from some group, whatever happens. I do wonder whether it might be better for Parliament to take the decision it feels is best for the nation and, if that means revoking Article 50, taking the consequences of that. It might, I realise, lead to a backlash from the Farages and Tommy Robinsons of this world but, maybe, best to face these people down rather than go along with a course of action you think deeply unwise.

    There is a deal which could be accepted as @RichardTyndall (fpt) has pointed out. And if that were agreed, I could live with it.

    If, OTOH, the choice is revocation, face down those who disagree and explain why you have done what you have done. If that means explaining that the referendum should not have been done or that the options were too vague or that the government adopted the wrong red lines and failed at negotiating a deal or that the sort of Brexit that was sold was unachievable or irreconcilable, so be it. Have a bit of courage.

    Deal - and really do this - with some of the concerns which animated many leavers. Many of these will not be alleviated by Brexit but made worse. And some are (and always have been) within Britain's control. Level with voters. Be honest. Be brutally truthful. Speak some hard truths to the voters. And face down those who threaten violence or who have hidden agendas or ulterior motives.

    But to refuse to do what you think best for the country because you are scared of the voters or because you feel that you have to intone "Will of the People" repeatedly as if we were some Ruritanian country in the 1930's is pathetic. It shames Parliament.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,842
    Extra road to kick can down. Built swiftly, efficiently and comprehensively in just one day!
    Other infrastructure, not so.
  • DruttDrutt Posts: 1,093
    edited December 2018
    Cyclefree FPT:

    I worry that if a No-Deal Brexit goes through, even though Parliamentarians are against it and think it should not happen, and if it causes the sort of economic disruption we've been warned about, such a result would be just as corrosive of public belief in democracy and, indeed, the role of Parliament, as a revocation of Brexit. Voters will not blame themselves. They will blame MPs for having allowed something bad to happen even though they knew it was potentially harmful. They will blame those who misled them or those who used improper tactics to win the referendum. Etc etc.

    There are no cost free easy options left. I do wonder whether it might be better for Parliament to take the decision it feels is best for the nation and, if that means revoking Article 50, taking the consequences of that. It might, I realise, lead to a backlash from the Farages and Tommy Robinsons of this world but, maybe, best to face these people down rather than go along with a course of action you think deeply unwise and still face a backlash.


    Parliament can't revoke it - it's an executive power. I don't even think there's a majority in parliament for revocation. I think there's nearly a majority in parliament for forcing someone else to call it if they could so force them, but that's not the same thing at all on three fronts:

    1) "nearly": John Rentoul tweeted today that the MPs were split No deal 127, Deal 207, Remain/ref 303.

    2) "if they could force them" but Parliament can't force through the primary legislation needed to pull A50 or call a referendum

    3) "someone else" This is the big one. Nobody wants to be That Guy. That Guy says "you were wrong last time. I haven't listened to you. You will vote again. The defeated option might even be on the ballot paper this time. The successful one (or at least your interpretation of it) might not be. This is more democratic than following the result of the first vote, because I might get what I want. I am prepared to put aside the most fundamental point of democracy - we vote and we implement votes - in order to get a second shot at this". That Guy, importantly, doesn't get elected.

    After all, if you cut a swathe through the law to get to the devil, then when the last law was down, and the devil turned round on you, where would you hide then? Could you really stand upright in the winds that followed?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408
    edited December 2018
    IanB2 said:

    Mortimer said:

    What on earth? Russel-Moyle grabbed the mace. Couldn’t work out context from the clips. Anyone?

    The guardian live feed describes what happenned

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2018/dec/10/brexit-deal-vote-latest-theresa-may-ecj-government-says-ecj-ruling-irrelevant-because-uk-leaving-eu-anyway-politics-live

    It doesn't spell out his motives but the implication is some sort of protest at MPs being denied a say?
    I've never been a fan of that kind of 'look at me' protest. I get sometimes you need to draw attention, but I don't think the opposition as a whole, and many Tories, will have a problem getting across the message that they have been denied a say on withdrawing the vote, particularly with a news handy clip of Bercow saying that option would be discourteous to the house.

    And yes, the whole Mace thing is silly anyway, but it's harmless trappings that add to the idiosyncrasies of our democratic processes, acting like a baby about it is not cool, you're not going to be the next Cromwell.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,289

    Remainers never advocate violence against Leavers........

    https://twitter.com/theneweuropean/status/926767308021710853

    Sweeping generalisations are never 100% correct.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,096
    Cyclefree said:

    "In any case the chances of Brexit just being cancelled are zilch. A u-turn like this really does require another vote."

    To be provocative, does it? We are a Parliamentary democracy.

    If Parliament won't vote for the deal which has been reached and doesn't want to let No Deal happen, then let it take a decision.

    I worry that if a No-Deal Brexit goes through, even though Parliamentarians are against it and think it should not happen, and if it causes the sort of economic disruption we've been warned about, such a result would be just as corrosive of public belief in democracy and, indeed, the role of Parliament, as a revocation of Brexit. Voters will not blame themselves. They will blame MPs for having allowed something bad to happen even though they knew it was potentially harmful. They will blame those who misled them or those who used improper tactics to win the referendum. Etc etc.

    There are no cost free easy options left. My feeling is that there will be a backlash from some group, whatever happens. I do wonder whether it might be better for Parliament to take the decision it feels is best for the nation and, if that means revoking Article 50, taking the consequences of that. It might, I realise, lead to a backlash from the Farages and Tommy Robinsons of this world but, maybe, best to face these people down rather than go along with a course of action you think deeply unwise.

    There is a deal which could be accepted as @RichardTyndall (fpt) has pointed out. And if that were agreed, I could live with it.

    If, OTOH, the choice is revocation, face down those who disagree and explain why you have done what you have done. If that means explaining that the referendum should not have been done or that the options were too vague or that the government adopted the wrong red lines and failed at negotiating a deal or that the sort of Brexit that was sold was unachievable or irreconcilable, so be it. Have a bit of courage.

    Deal - and really do this - with some of the concerns which animated many leavers. Many of these will not be alleviated by Brexit but made worse. And some are (and always have been) within Britain's control. Level with voters. Be honest. Be brutally truthful. Speak some hard truths to the voters. And face down those who threaten violence or who have hidden agendas or ulterior motives.

    But to refuse to do what you think best for the country because you are scared of the voters or because you feel that you have to intone "Will of the People" repeatedly as if we were some Ruritanian country in the 1930's is pathetic. It shames Parliament.

    Yes, but it is clearly easier to justify not proceeding with one referendum if it's the voters making that choice in another.
  • I am the 2%.

    If a quarter of the country feels betrayed by a political move, that will find an outlet. Leavers have been in a feedback loop getting steadily more extreme. The 24% would not go quietly.
  • nielhnielh Posts: 1,307

    Sorry Mike - I will have to disagree with you on this. cancelling it is the only safe option. Referendums can deliver the wring result e.g Cameron and 2016

    creates a load of other problems unless there is overwhelming public support for such a course of action
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,289
    Cyclefree said:

    "In any case the chances of Brexit just being cancelled are zilch. A u-turn like this really does require another vote."

    To be provocative, does it? We are a Parliamentary democracy.

    If Parliament won't vote for the deal which has been reached and doesn't want to let No Deal happen, then let it take a decision.

    I worry that if a No-Deal Brexit goes through, even though Parliamentarians are against it and think it should not happen, and if it causes the sort of economic disruption we've been warned about, such a result would be just as corrosive of public belief in democracy and, indeed, the role of Parliament, as a revocation of Brexit. Voters will not blame themselves. They will blame MPs for having allowed something bad to happen even though they knew it was potentially harmful. They will blame those who misled them or those who used improper tactics to win the referendum. Etc etc.

    There are no cost free easy options left. My feeling is that there will be a backlash from some group, whatever happens. I do wonder whether it might be better for Parliament to take the decision it feels is best for the nation and, if that means revoking Article 50, taking the consequences of that. It might, I realise, lead to a backlash from the Farages and Tommy Robinsons of this world but, maybe, best to face these people down rather than go along with a course of action you think deeply unwise.

    There is a deal which could be accepted as @RichardTyndall (fpt) has pointed out. And if that were agreed, I could live with it.

    If, OTOH, the choice is revocation, face down those who disagree and explain why you have done what you have done. If that means explaining that the referendum should not have been done or that the options were too vague or that the government adopted the wrong red lines and failed at negotiating a deal or that the sort of Brexit that was sold was unachievable or irreconcilable, so be it. Have a bit of courage.

    Deal - and really do this - with some of the concerns which animated many leavers. Many of these will not be alleviated by Brexit but made worse. And some are (and always have been) within Britain's control. Level with voters. Be honest. Be brutally truthful. Speak some hard truths to the voters. And face down those who threaten violence or who have hidden agendas or ulterior motives.

    But to refuse to do what you think best for the country because you are scared of the voters or because you feel that you have to intone "Will of the People" repeatedly as if we were some Ruritanian country in the 1930's is pathetic. It shames Parliament.

    This is a great post.
  • I suspect had the referendum been on an 8 point scale like this poll, the results would have been similar... 20 per cent at either end who really give a toss; 60 in the middle who aren’t quite as fussed as JRM and Andrew Adonis believe. The binary choice both forced and allowed people to hover over the ballot paper and shrug before sticking their X wherever.

    Maybe a third box marked “you lot decide.. that’s what we pay you for and you have researchers’n’shit so you can get it right” should be a prerequisite in future...
  • nielhnielh Posts: 1,307
    also , betrayed or angry = 30%
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408

    I am the 2%.

    If a quarter of the country feels betrayed by a political move, that will find an outlet. Leavers have been in a feedback loop getting steadily more extreme. The 24% would not go quietly.

    Nah, it'll be fine. As I was myself told, no one wants Brexit at all. Being a coward and a Bregretful soft leave deal supporter, I merely mumbled in reply that reasonably people might come to different conclusions on that score.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    The Tory front bench looks incredibly tired and aged.
  • eekeek Posts: 24,797
    edited December 2018
    IanB2 said:



    Yes, but it is clearly easier to justify not proceeding with one referendum if it's the voters making that choice in another.

    There is also a timing issue here. To revoke A50 it probably needs to be done before March 28th 2019 and there isn't enough time left for a referendum to be called and completed.

    I'm starting to think that the only way out of the mess we are going to find ourselves in is to revoke A50, for Parliament to suffer the consequences and for it all to start again 3 years hence when we know what we actually want to fix...
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408
    I am genuinely surprised 'worried' is not on this list.
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487
    Drowsy 11
    Intoxicated 15
    Horny 34
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,963
    nielh said:

    the 24% must also reflect the ageing Brexit demographic.

    They may also reflect about half the Tory vote.....
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408
    AndyJS said:

    The Tory front bench looks incredibly tired and aged.

    Government is hard. Particularly minority government in a time of crisis beset by internal divisions. While I cannot say I have been particularly enthused by the quality of debate or focus of our politicians at this time, parliament has been pursuing its role in discussing big issues more than they often do.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408
    I vote for incandescent. I'll decide later if with rage or with excitement.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,074
    IanB2 said:

    Cyclefree said:





    I worry that if a No-Deal Brexit goes through, even though Parliamentarians are against it and think it should not happen, and if it causes the sort of economic disruption we've been warned about, such a result would be just as corrosive of public belief in democracy and, indeed, the role of Parliament, as a revocation of Brexit. Voters will not blame themselves. They will blame MPs for having allowed something bad to happen even though they knew it was potentially harmful. They will blame those who misled them or those who used improper tactics to win the referendum. Etc etc.

    There are no cost free easy options left. My feeling is that there will be a backlash from some group, whatever happens. I do wonder whether it might be better for Parliament to take the decision it feels is best for the nation and, if that means revoking Article 50, taking the consequences of that. It might, I realise, lead to a backlash from the Farages and Tommy Robinsons of this world but, maybe, best to face these people down rather than go along with a course of action you think deeply unwise.

    There is a deal which could be accepted as @RichardTyndall (fpt) has pointed out. And if that were agreed, I could live with it.

    If, OTOH, the choice is revocation, face down those who disagree and explain why you have done what you have done. If that means explaining that the referendum should not have been done or that the options were too vague or that the government adopted the wrong red lines and failed at negotiating a deal or that the sort of Brexit that was sold was unachievable or irreconcilable, so be it. Have a bit of courage.

    Deal - and really do this - with some of the concerns which animated many leavers. Many of these will not be alleviated by Brexit but made worse. And some are (and always have been) within Britain's control. Level with voters. Be honest. Be brutally truthful. Speak some hard truths to the voters. And face down those who threaten violence or who have hidden agendas or ulterior motives.

    But to refuse to do what you think best for the country because you are scared of the voters or because you feel that you have to intone "Will of the People" repeatedly as if we were some Ruritanian country in the 1930's is pathetic. It shames Parliament.

    Yes, but it is clearly easier to justify not proceeding with one referendum if it's the voters making that choice in another.
    Yes - it would be easier. But sometimes, you know, if you are in a position of leadership and MPs are, they need to make hard decisions not outsource them to others. Or we can become like Switzerland and have referenda on bloody everything and get rid of MPs.

    But the irony of MPs bleating about Parliamentary sovereignty and wanting to make laws instead of those pesky Europeans and then running away from the biggest decision they have to take.......
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408
    Cyclefree said:

    IanB2 said:

    Cyclefree said:





    I worry that if a No-Deal Brexit goes through, even though Parliamentarians are against it and think it should not happen, and if it causes the sort of economic disruption we've been warned about, such a result would be just as corrosive of public belief in democracy and, indeed, the role of Parliament, as a revocation of Brexit. Voters will not blame themselves. They will blame MPs for having allowed something bad to happen even though they knew it was potentially harmful. They will blame those who misled them or those who used improper tactics to win the referendum. Etc etc.

    There are no cost free easy options left. My feeling is that there will be a backlash from some group, whatever happens. I do wonder whether it might be better for Parliament to take the decision it feels is best for the nation and, if that means revoking Article 50, taking the consequences of that. It might, I realise, lead to a backlash from the Farages and Tommy Robinsons of this world but, maybe, best to face these people down rather than go along with a course of action you think deeply unwise.

    There is a deal which could be accepted as @RichardTyndall (fpt) has pointed out. And if that were agreed, I could live with it.

    If, OTOH, the choice is revocation, face down those who disagree and explain why you have done what you have done. If that means explaining that the referendum should not have been done or that the options were too vague or that the government adopted the wrong red lines and failed at negotiating a deal or that the sort of Brexit that was sold was unachievable or irreconcilable, so be it. Have a bit of courage.

    Deal - and really do this - with some of the concerns which animated many leavers. Many of these will not be alleviated by Brexit but made worse. And some are (and always have been) within Britain's control. Level with voters. Be honest. Be brutally truthful. Speak some hard truths to the voters. And face down those who threaten violence or who have hidden agendas or ulterior motives.

    But to refuse to do what you think best for the country because you are scared of the voters or because you feel that you have to intone "Will of the People" repeatedly as if we were some Ruritanian country in the 1930's is pathetic. It shames Parliament.

    Yes, but it is clearly easier to justify not proceeding with one referendum if it's the voters making that choice in another.
    But the irony of MPs bleating about Parliamentary sovereignty and wanting to make laws instead of those pesky Europeans and then running away from the biggest decision they have to take.......
    They tend to conveniently flip from lauding the will of the people to ignoring it as unnecessary or wrong depending on the issue.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,289
    For those muttering darkly about Leavers rioting in the event of Brexit being cancelled, it's worth reflecting that the power to get people out on the street seems to rest mainly on the Remain side if recent marches are a guide.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,405
    kle4 said:

    I vote for incandescent. I'll decide later if with rage or with excitement.

    Sorry, but incandescent was banned by the EU. Have to use low energy bulbs these days.
  • TomsToms Posts: 2,478
    I'd feel
    vindicated,
    but weary.
  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,831
    kle4 said:

    AndyJS said:

    The Tory front bench looks incredibly tired and aged.

    Government is hard. Particularly minority government in a time of crisis beset by internal divisions. While I cannot say I have been particularly enthused by the quality of debate or focus of our politicians at this time, parliament has been pursuing its role in discussing big issues more than they often do.
    But the quality of debate has been so poor, positions so entrenched that there has been zero point to the debating/questioning. There is so little willingness to compromise, and so much determination to play politics rather than engage in meaningful contemplation.

    Is this a perfect deal? No.

    Was a perfect deal possible? No.

    Is there any realistic prospect of a better deal? No.

    Do we want to crash out without a deal? No.

    Yet people are not facing that reality and pretending that their posturing will deliver something that doesn't exist.

    It is all so infantile. And this isn't party political - all parties are indulging in pathetic posturing.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    Irked and peeved should both be on the list.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,082

    nielh said:

    the 24% must also reflect the ageing Brexit demographic.

    They may also reflect about half the Tory vote.....
    The self destruction of the Tory party is not something that keeps me up at night, apart from toasting its downfall of course.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    AndyJS said:

    Russell-Moyle is a prick and I hope they ban him for the rest of the season

    Trying to be funny or clever or meaningful but is as shallow as a raindrop and as thick as pigshit

    I'm sure a place can be found for him in the Tower of London.
    That was a joke by the way. I don't want to end up in the Tower myself.
  • kle4 said:

    I vote for incandescent. I'll decide later if with rage or with excitement.

    Sorry, but incandescent was banned by the EU. Have to use low energy bulbs these days.
    "I'm 4w but as bright as 40w with rage !" doesn't cut it
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408

    For those muttering darkly about Leavers rioting in the event of Brexit being cancelled, it's worth reflecting that the power to get people out on the street seems to rest mainly on the Remain side if recent marches are a guide.

    Brexit was still happening at the time. No matter how some were unhappy with the 'proper' nature of Brexit, it was happening and people knew that. If remain happens, people will have more to get furious about.

    Now as it happens I don't think there would be riot, I think it would just cause some protests and a big group of people justifiably giving up on politics altogether. But there are perhaps reasons people have not been feeling it necessary to march for something that was already on track.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408

    kle4 said:

    I vote for incandescent. I'll decide later if with rage or with excitement.

    Sorry, but incandescent was banned by the EU. Have to use low energy bulbs these days.
    Godsdamit it. Screw it, no deal it is!
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487
    I think in reality you might get up to 50% ‘indifferent’. Much of the country is utterly bored with Brexit.

    A handful of knuckle draggers will continue to threaten violence and make sinister gambits, but will be largely ignored.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 15,547
    Cyclefree said:


    To be provocative, does it? We are a Parliamentary democracy.

    If Parliament won't vote for the deal which has been reached and doesn't want to let No Deal happen, then let it take a decision.

    I worry that if a No-Deal Brexit goes through, even though Parliamentarians are against it and think it should not happen, and if it causes the sort of economic disruption we've been warned about, such a result would be just as corrosive of public belief in democracy and, indeed, the role of Parliament, as a revocation of Brexit. Voters will not blame themselves. They will blame MPs for having allowed something bad to happen even though they knew it was potentially harmful. They will blame those who misled them or those who used improper tactics to win the referendum. Etc etc.

    There are no cost free easy options left. My feeling is that there will be a backlash from some group, whatever happens. I do wonder whether it might be better for Parliament to take the decision it feels is best for the nation and, if that means revoking Article 50, taking the consequences of that. It might, I realise, lead to a backlash from the Farages and Tommy Robinsons of this world but, maybe, best to face these people down rather than go along with a course of action you think deeply unwise.

    There is a deal which could be accepted as @RichardTyndall (fpt) has pointed out. And if that were agreed, I could live with it.

    If, OTOH, the choice is revocation, face down those who disagree and explain why you have done what you have done. If that means explaining that the referendum should not have been done or that the options were too vague or that the government adopted the wrong red lines and failed at negotiating a deal or that the sort of Brexit that was sold was unachievable or irreconcilable, so be it. Have a bit of courage.

    Deal - and really do this - with some of the concerns which animated many leavers. Many of these will not be alleviated by Brexit but made worse. And some are (and always have been) within Britain's control. Level with voters. Be honest. Be brutally truthful. Speak some hard truths to the voters. And face down those who threaten violence or who have hidden agendas or ulterior motives.

    But to refuse to do what you think best for the country because you are scared of the voters or because you feel that you have to intone "Will of the People" repeatedly as if we were some Ruritanian country in the 1930's is pathetic. It shames Parliament.

    There are three immediate options available: proceed with deal, crash out or cancel A50. A second referendum would have to follow the cancellation of A50. I think cancelling A50 with the intention of never having a referendum or serious rethink would be unacceptable. A cancellation while we take stock and try to work out a tolerable Brexit, never actually to get there, is possible, I think.
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487
    52% disgruntled
    48% gruntled
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,289
    kle4 said:

    I vote for incandescent. I'll decide later if with rage or with excitement.

    That poll is a metaphor for the challenge of Brexit - whatever options are presented someone always thinks they have a better one.
  • kle4 said:

    I vote for incandescent. I'll decide later if with rage or with excitement.

    Sorry, but incandescent was banned by the EU. Have to use low energy bulbs these days.
    "I'm 4w but as bright as 40w with rage !" doesn't cut it
    Is that an Andrew Bridgen quote? He strikes me as a four-watter.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408

    kle4 said:

    AndyJS said:

    The Tory front bench looks incredibly tired and aged.

    Government is hard. Particularly minority government in a time of crisis beset by internal divisions. While I cannot say I have been particularly enthused by the quality of debate or focus of our politicians at this time, parliament has been pursuing its role in discussing big issues more than they often do.
    But the quality of debate has been so poor, positions so entrenched that there has been zero point to the debating/questioning. There is so little willingness to compromise, and so much determination to play politics rather than engage in meaningful contemplation.

    Is this a perfect deal? No.

    Was a perfect deal possible? No.

    Is there any realistic prospect of a better deal? No.

    Do we want to crash out without a deal? No.

    Yet people are not facing that reality and pretending that their posturing will deliver something that doesn't exist.

    It is all so infantile. And this isn't party political - all parties are indulging in pathetic posturing.
    You're right, there's been far far too much of that. But it helps with the verisimilitude which can allow me to dream they are engaging in contemplative debate.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901

    kle4 said:

    AndyJS said:

    The Tory front bench looks incredibly tired and aged.

    Government is hard. Particularly minority government in a time of crisis beset by internal divisions. While I cannot say I have been particularly enthused by the quality of debate or focus of our politicians at this time, parliament has been pursuing its role in discussing big issues more than they often do.
    But the quality of debate has been so poor, positions so entrenched that there has been zero point to the debating/questioning. There is so little willingness to compromise, and so much determination to play politics rather than engage in meaningful contemplation.

    Is this a perfect deal? No.

    Was a perfect deal possible? No.

    Is there any realistic prospect of a better deal? No.

    Do we want to crash out without a deal? No.

    Yet people are not facing that reality and pretending that their posturing will deliver something that doesn't exist.

    It is all so infantile. And this isn't party political - all parties are indulging in pathetic posturing.
    Is this deal what people want? No
    Will the deal makes us better off? No
    Will the deal take back control? No
    Is this the only way? No
    Do we have to leave? No

  • Jonathan said:

    Irked and peeved should both be on the list.


    “Needing a second cup of strong tea. And a bloody *chocolate* digestive”
  • FPT

    chloe said:

    We need to revoke A50 and hold a referendum if MPs can’t ageee a deal. No deal was not on the ballot paper last time.

    But Remain was and it was rejected.
    Cameron's deal was rejected. "Hard Remain" wasn't on the ballot.
    Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,289
    Anazina said:

    52% disgruntled
    48% gruntled

    Actually the poll shows:
    38% disgruntled
    43% gruntled
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,096
    We send Northern Ireland £250 million a week. Let's fund the NHS instead.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901

    Jonathan said:

    Irked and peeved should both be on the list.


    “Needing a second cup of strong tea. And a bloody *chocolate* digestive”
    Finally someone talks sense.
  • IanB2 said:

    We send Northern Ireland £250 million a week. Let's fund the NHS instead.

    We should have a lottery every week, make 350 millionaires every week. Now that really would look good on the side of a bus.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,074
    Drutt said:

    Cyclefree FPT:

    I worry that if a No-Deal Brexit goes through, even though Parliamentarians are against it and think it should not happen, and if it causes the sort of economic disruption we've been warned about, such a result would be just as corrosive of public belief in democracy and, indeed, the role of Parliament, as a revocation of Brexit. Voters will not blame themselves. They will blame MPs for having allowed something bad to happen even though they knew it was potentially harmful. They will blame those who misled them or those who used improper tactics to win the referendum. Etc etc.

    There are no cost free easy options left. I do wonder whether it might be better for Parliament to take the decision it feels is best for the nation and, if that means revoking Article 50, taking the consequences of that.


    Parliament can't revoke it - it's an executive power. I don't even think there's a majority in parliament for revocation. I think there's nearly a majority in parliament for forcing someone else to call it if they could so force them, but that's not the same thing at all on three fronts:

    1) "nearly": John Rentoul tweeted today that the MPs were split No deal 127, Deal 207, Remain/ref 303.

    2) "if they could force them" but Parliament can't force through the primary legislation needed to pull A50 or call a referendum

    3) "someone else" This is the big one. Nobody wants to be That Guy. That Guy says "you were wrong last time. I haven't listened to you. You will vote again. The defeated option might even be on the ballot paper this time. The successful one (or at least your interpretation of it) might not be. This is more democratic than following the result of the first vote, because I might get what I want. I am prepared to put aside the most fundamental point of democracy - we vote and we implement votes - in order to get a second shot at this". That Guy, importantly, doesn't get elected.

    After all, if you cut a swathe through the law to get to the devil, then when the last law was down, and the devil turned round on you, where would you hide then? Could you really stand upright in the winds that followed?

    You are not cutting down the laws. You are upholding Parliamentary democracy. Parliament decides. Voters can then give their verdict at the next election.

    And voters vote all the time for all sorts of things which don't get implemented. Manifestos are rarely implemented in full or at all. And governments do things which the voters did not first get a say on. That is what Parliamentary democracy is. If we believe in it, let's uphold it.

    I am not against a second referendum. It may be a way to get out of this mess. I am just querying - partly for debate's sake - whether it is the only way.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,096
    FF43 said:

    Cyclefree said:


    To be provocative, does it? We are a Parliamentary democracy.

    If Parliament won't vote for the deal which has been reached and doesn't want to let No Deal happen, then let it take a decision.

    I worry that if a No-Deal Brexit goes through, even though Parliamentarians are against it and think it should not happen, and if it causes the sort of economic disruption we've been warned about, such a result would be just as corrosive of public belief in democracy and, indeed, the role of Parliament, as a revocation of Brexit. Voters will not blame themselves. They will blame MPs for having allowed something bad to happen even though they knew it was potentially harmful. They will blame those who misled them or those who used improper tactics to win the referendum. Etc etc.

    There are no cost free easy options left. My feeling is that there will be a backlash from some group, whatever happens. I do wonder whether it might be better for Parliament to take the decision it feels is best for the nation and, if that means revoking Article 50, taking the consequences of that. It might, I realise, lead to a backlash from the Farages and Tommy Robinsons of this world but, maybe, best to face these people down rather than go along with a course of action you think deeply unwise.

    There is a deal which could be accepted as @RichardTyndall (fpt) has pointed out. And if that were agreed, I could live with it.

    If, OTOH, the choice is revocation, face down those who disagree and explain why you have done what you have

    Deal - and really do this - with some of the concerns which animated many leavers. Many of these will not be alleviated by Brexit but made worse. And some are (and always have been) within Britain's control. Level with voters. Be honest. Be brutally truthful. Speak some hard truths to the voters. And face down those who threaten violence or who have hidden agendas or ulterior motives.

    But to refuse to do what you think best for the country because you are scared of the voters or because you feel that you have to intone "Will of the People" repeatedly as if we were some Ruritanian country in the 1930's is pathetic. It shames Parliament.

    There are three immediate options available: proceed with deal, crash out or cancel A50. A second referendum would have to follow the cancellation of A50. I think cancelling A50 with the intention of never having a referendum or serious rethink would be unacceptable. A cancellation while we take stock and try to work out a tolerable Brexit, never actually to get there, is possible, I think.
    It would be better to extend A50 for a referendum and then cancel it afterwards if Remain wins, implementing the deal afterwards if deal wins
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,963
    Jonathan said:

    kle4 said:

    AndyJS said:

    The Tory front bench looks incredibly tired and aged.

    Government is hard. Particularly minority government in a time of crisis beset by internal divisions. While I cannot say I have been particularly enthused by the quality of debate or focus of our politicians at this time, parliament has been pursuing its role in discussing big issues more than they often do.
    But the quality of debate has been so poor, positions so entrenched that there has been zero point to the debating/questioning. There is so little willingness to compromise, and so much determination to play politics rather than engage in meaningful contemplation.

    Is this a perfect deal? No.

    Was a perfect deal possible? No.

    Is there any realistic prospect of a better deal? No.

    Do we want to crash out without a deal? No.

    Yet people are not facing that reality and pretending that their posturing will deliver something that doesn't exist.

    It is all so infantile. And this isn't party political - all parties are indulging in pathetic posturing.
    Is this deal what people want? No
    Will the deal makes us better off? No
    Will the deal take back control? No
    Is this the only way? No
    Do we have to leave? No

    Do you respect democracy? No
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 24,603
    Anazina said:

    I think in reality you might get up to 50% ‘indifferent’. Much of the country is utterly bored with Brexit.

    A handful of knuckle draggers will continue to threaten violence and make sinister gambits, but will be largely ignored.

    I listened to IDS and his call to arms yesterday in the event of a second referendum. I have my tin hat and broom handle at the ready!
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901

    Jonathan said:

    kle4 said:

    AndyJS said:

    The Tory front bench looks incredibly tired and aged.

    Government is hard. Particularly minority government in a time of crisis beset by internal divisions. While I cannot say I have been particularly enthused by the quality of debate or focus of our politicians at this time, parliament has been pursuing its role in discussing big issues more than they often do.
    But the quality of debate has been so poor, positions so entrenched that there has been zero point to the debating/questioning. There is so little willingness to compromise, and so much determination to play politics rather than engage in meaningful contemplation.

    Is this a perfect deal? No.

    Was a perfect deal possible? No.

    Is there any realistic prospect of a better deal? No.

    Do we want to crash out without a deal? No.

    Yet people are not facing that reality and pretending that their posturing will deliver something that doesn't exist.

    It is all so infantile. And this isn't party political - all parties are indulging in pathetic posturing.
    Is this deal what people want? No
    Will the deal makes us better off? No
    Will the deal take back control? No
    Is this the only way? No
    Do we have to leave? No

    Do you respect democracy? No
    Do you disrespect democracy through more democracy? No
  • tysontyson Posts: 6,049

    FPT

    chloe said:

    We need to revoke A50 and hold a referendum if MPs can’t ageee a deal. No deal was not on the ballot paper last time.

    But Remain was and it was rejected.
    Cameron's deal was rejected. "Hard Remain" wasn't on the ballot.
    Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?
    That question was very confusing
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408
    Cyclefree said:

    Drutt said:

    Cyclefree FPT:

    I worry that if a No-Deal Brexit goes through, even though Parliamentarians are against it and think it should not happen, and if it causes the sort of economic disruption we've been warned about, such a result would be just as corrosive of public belief in democracy and, indeed, the role of Parliament, as a revocation of Brexit. Voters will not blame themselves. They will blame MPs for having allowed something bad to happen even though they knew it was potentially harmful. They will blame those who misled them or those who used improper tactics to win the referendum. Etc etc.

    There are no cost free easy options left. I do wonder whether it might be better for Parliament to take the decision it feels is best for the nation and, if that means revoking Article 50, taking the consequences of that.


    Parliament can't revoke it - it's an executive power. I don't even think there's a majority in parliament for revocation. I think there's nearly a majority in parliament for forcing someone else to call it if they could so force them, but that's not the same thing at all on three fronts:

    1) "nearly": John Rentoul tweeted today that the MPs were split No deal 127, Deal 207, Remain/ref 303.

    2) "if they could force them" but Parliament can't force through the primary legislation needed to pull A50 or call a referendum

    3) "solowed?

    You are not cutting down the laws. You are upholding Parliamentary democracy. Parliament decides. Voters can then give their verdict at the next election.

    And voters vote all the time for all sorts of things which don't get implemented. Manifestos are rarely implemented in full or at all. And governments do things which the voters did not first get a say on. That is what Parliamentary democracy is. If we believe in it, let's uphold it.

    I am not against a second referendum. It may be a way to get out of this mess. I am just querying - partly for debate's sake - whether it is the only way.
    It is not. They do not seem prepared to take that leap, however. Not yet at any rate. I almost wish we do not get a referendum (I see it as the most likely way out for all sides) just to see if they will, in the end, be prepared to say "I know what we all said, and what we legislated for, but this house is charged with the best interests of this country and we cannot do this. I am prepared to face the consequences of us making that decision'.
  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,831
    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    kle4 said:

    AndyJS said:

    The Tory front bench looks incredibly tired and aged.

    Government is hard. Particularly minority government in a time of crisis beset by internal divisions. While I cannot say I have been particularly enthused by the quality of debate or focus of our politicians at this time, parliament has been pursuing its role in discussing big issues more than they often do.
    But the quality of debate has been so poor, positions so entrenched that there has been zero point to the debating/questioning. There is so little willingness to compromise, and so much determination to play politics rather than engage in meaningful contemplation.

    Is this a perfect deal? No.

    Was a perfect deal possible? No.

    Is there any realistic prospect of a better deal? No.

    Do we want to crash out without a deal? No.

    Yet people are not facing that reality and pretending that their posturing will deliver something that doesn't exist.

    It is all so infantile. And this isn't party political - all parties are indulging in pathetic posturing.
    Is this deal what people want? No
    Will the deal makes us better off? No
    Will the deal take back control? No
    Is this the only way? No
    Do we have to leave? No

    Do you respect democracy? No
    Do you disrespect democracy through more democracy? No
    How many referenda would be necessary for Remain to admit defeat and move on?

    If they lost a second, would they call for a third? a fourth?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,096

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    kle4 said:

    AndyJS said:

    The Tory front bench looks incredibly tired and aged.

    Government is hard. Particularly minority government in a time of crisis beset by internal divisions. While I cannot say I have been particularly enthused by the quality of debate or focus of our politicians at this time, parliament has been pursuing its role in discussing big issues more than they often do.
    But the quality of debate has been so poor, positions so entrenched that there has been zero point to the debating/questioning. There is so little willingness to compromise, and so much determination to play politics rather than engage in meaningful contemplation.

    Is this a perfect deal? No.

    Was a perfect deal possible? No.

    Is there any realistic prospect of a better deal? No.

    Do we want to crash out without a deal? No.

    Yet people are not facing that reality and pretending that their posturing will deliver something that doesn't exist.

    It is all so infantile. And this isn't party political - all parties are indulging in pathetic posturing.
    Is this deal what people want? No
    Will the deal makes us better off? No
    Will the deal take back control? No
    Is this the only way? No
    Do we have to leave? No

    Do you respect democracy? No
    Do you disrespect democracy through more democracy? No
    How many referenda would be necessary for Remain to admit defeat and move on?

    If they lost a second, would they call for a third? a fourth?
    We stop after the first referendum that decides between two propositions both of which we can actually do.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,590
    IanB2 said:

    FF43 said:

    Cyclefree said:


    To be provocative, does it? We are a Parliamentary democracy.

    If Parliament won't vote for the deal which has been reached and doesn't want to let No Deal happen, then let it take a decision.

    There are no cost free easy options left. My feeling is that there will be a backlash from some group, whatever happens. I do wonder whether it might be better for Parliament to take the decision it feels is best for the nation and, if that means revoking Article 50, taking the consequences of that. It might, I realise, lead to a backlash from the Farages and Tommy Robinsons of this world but, maybe, best to face these people down rather than go along with a course of action you think deeply unwise.

    There is a deal which could be accepted as @RichardTyndall (fpt) has pointed out. And if that were agreed, I could live with it.

    If, OTOH, the choice is revocation, face down those who disagree and explain why you have done what you have

    Deal - and really do this - with some of the concerns which animated many leavers. Many of these will not be alleviated by Brexit but made worse. And some are (and always have been) within Britain's control. Level with voters. Be honest. Be brutally truthful. Speak some hard truths to the voters. And face down those who threaten violence or who have hidden agendas or ulterior motives.

    But to refuse to do what you think best for the country because you are scared of the voters or because you feel that you have to intone "Will of the People" repeatedly as if we were some Ruritanian country in the 1930's is pathetic. It shames Parliament.

    There are three immediate options available: proceed with deal, crash out or cancel A50. A second referendum would have to follow the cancellation of A50. I think cancelling A50 with the intention of never having a referendum or serious rethink would be unacceptable. A cancellation while we take stock and try to work out a tolerable Brexit, never actually to get there, is possible, I think.
    It would be better to extend A50 for a referendum and then cancel it afterwards if Remain wins, implementing the deal afterwards if deal wins
    In a perfect world, perhaps. But choreographing that in the time available - particularly since A50 extension isn’t under our control - would be near impossible.

  • FF43FF43 Posts: 15,547
    IanB2 said:

    FF43 said:

    There are three immediate options available: proceed with deal, crash out or cancel A50. A second referendum would have to follow the cancellation of A50. I think cancelling A50 with the intention of never having a referendum or serious rethink would be unacceptable. A cancellation while we take stock and try to work out a tolerable Brexit, never actually to get there, is possible, I think.

    It would be better to extend A50 for a referendum and then cancel it afterwards if Remain wins, implementing the deal afterwards if deal wins
    Extending A50 requires unanimity of EU27 while we can cancel unilaterally. But you're right, if we cancel it will be hard to exit on any other turns than the current ones, which makes a pause for a better Brexit, rather than a possible Remain, difficult to execute.

    No easy answers.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    edited December 2018

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    kle4 said:

    AndyJS said:

    The Tory front bench looks incredibly tired and aged.

    Government is hard. Particularly minority government in a time of crisis beset by internal divisions. While I cannot say I have been particularly enthused by the quality of debate or focus of our politicians at this time, parliament has been pursuing its role in discussing big issues more than they often do.
    But the quality of debate has been so poor, positions so entrenched that there has been zero point to the debating/questioning. There is so little willingness to compromise, and so much determination to play politics rather than engage in meaningful contemplation.

    Is this a perfect deal? No.

    Was a perfect deal possible? No.

    Is there any realistic prospect of a better deal? No.

    Do we want to crash out without a deal? No.

    Yet people are not facing that reality and pretending that their posturing will deliver something that doesn't exist.

    It is all so infantile. And this isn't party political - all parties are indulging in pathetic posturing.
    Is this deal what people want? No
    Will the deal makes us better off? No
    Will the deal take back control? No
    Is this the only way? No
    Do we have to leave? No

    Do you respect democracy? No
    Do you disrespect democracy through more democracy? No
    How many referenda would be necessary for Remain to admit defeat and move on?

    If they lost a second, would they call for a third? a fourth?
    Depends if there is new information. We had about as much information in the last two years as we did between the first referendum (1975) and the second (2016).

    Let’s just get on with it.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408
    Theresa May needs to survive until the end of February to last longer as PM than Spencer Percival, and to around June to overtake Gordon Brown.

    No bets are being accepted on these possibilities at this time.
  • Revoke A50, dissolve parliament and have an immediate GE, then take off and nuke the entire Westminster site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408

    Revoke A50, dissolve parliament and have an immediate GE, then take off and nuke the entire Westminster site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.

    There are some lovely buildings there, is there no other way?
    IanB2 said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    kle4 said:

    AndyJS said:

    The Tory front bench looks incredibly tired and aged.

    Government is hard. Particularly minority government in a time of crisis beset by internal divisions. While I cannot say I have been particularly enthused by the quality of debate or focus of our politicians at this time, parliament has been pursuing its role in discussing big issues more than they often do.
    But the quality of debate has been so poor, positions so entrenched that there has been zero point to the debating/questioning. There is so little willingness to compromise, and so much determination to play politics rather than engage in meaningful contemplation.

    Is this a perfect deal? No.

    Was a perfect deal possible? No.

    Is there any realistic prospect of a better deal? No.

    Do we want to crash out without a deal? No.

    Yet people are not facing that reality and pretending that their posturing will deliver something that doesn't exist.

    It is all so infantile. And this isn't party political - all parties are indulging in pathetic posturing.
    Is this deal what people want? No
    Will the deal makes us better off? No
    Will the deal take back control? No
    Is this the only way? No
    Do we have to leave? No

    Do you respect democracy? No
    Do you disrespect democracy through more democracy? No
    How many referenda would be necessary for Remain to admit defeat and move on?

    If they lost a second, would they call for a third? a fourth?
    We stop after the first referendum that decides between two propositions both of which we can actually do.
    Yeah right. If it were remain and no deal and no deal won, and we could do it, there's no way parliament would agree to it, nor would most of the peoples vote crowd. Remember the cry, let's have a people vote to stop brexit, that's the goal, not to decide between two propositions both which we can actually do.
  • El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 3,870

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    kle4 said:

    AndyJS said:

    The Tory front bench looks incredibly tired and aged.

    Government is hard. Particularly minority government in a time of crisis beset by internal divisions. While I cannot say I have been particularly enthused by the quality of debate or focus of our politicians at this time, parliament has been pursuing its role in discussing big issues more than they often do.
    But the quality of debate has been so poor, positions so entrenched that there has been zero point to the debating/questioning. There is so little willingness to compromise, and so much determination to play politics rather than engage in meaningful contemplation.

    Is this a perfect deal? No.

    Was a perfect deal possible? No.

    Is there any realistic prospect of a better deal? No.

    Do we want to crash out without a deal? No.

    Yet people are not facing that reality and pretending that their posturing will deliver something that doesn't exist.

    It is all so infantile. And this isn't party political - all parties are indulging in pathetic posturing.
    Is this deal what people want? No
    Will the deal makes us better off? No
    Will the deal take back control? No
    Is this the only way? No
    Do we have to leave? No

    Do you respect democracy? No
    Do you disrespect democracy through more democracy? No
    How many referenda would be necessary for Remain to admit defeat and move on?

    If they lost a second, would they call for a third? a fourth?
    How many elections are necessary for the Conservatives to accept they’re never going to win Oxford City Council and move on?

    If you believe in something you keep fighting.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,789
    YouGov also have first preferences in a three-way referendum as:

    Remain: 54%
    Deal: 18%
    No Deal: 28%
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408

    YouGov also have first preferences in a three-way referendum as:

    Remain: 54%
    Deal: 18%
    No Deal: 28%

    Oof, the deal is so dead it is not even funny.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,072

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    kle4 said:

    AndyJS said:

    The Tory front bench looks incredibly tired and aged.

    Government is hard. Particularly minority government in a time of crisis beset by internal divisions. While I cannot say I have been particularly enthused by the quality of debate or focus of our politicians at this time, parliament has been pursuing its role in discussing big issues more than they often do.
    But the quality of debate has been so poor, positions so entrenched that there has been zero point to the debating/questioning. There is so little willingness to compromise, and so much determination to play politics rather than engage in meaningful contemplation.

    Is this a perfect deal? No.

    Was a perfect deal possible? No.

    Is there any realistic prospect of a better deal? No.

    Do we want to crash out without a deal? No.

    Yet people are not facing that reality and pretending that their posturing will deliver something that doesn't exist.

    It is all so infantile. And this isn't party political - all parties are indulging in pathetic posturing.
    Is this deal what people want? No
    Will the deal makes us better off? No
    Will the deal take back control? No
    Is this the only way? No
    Do we have to leave? No

    Do you respect democracy? No
    Do you disrespect democracy through more democracy? No
    How many referenda would be necessary for Remain to admit defeat and move on?

    If they lost a second, would they call for a third? a fourth?
    What a stupid argument.
    Why don’t we find out?
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502

    Revoke A50, dissolve parliament and have an immediate GE, then take off and nuke the entire Westminster site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.

    Absolutely brilliant . That’s so funny and great to see a fellow Aliens fan !
  • For those muttering darkly about Leavers rioting in the event of Brexit being cancelled, it's worth reflecting that the power to get people out on the street seems to rest mainly on the Remain side if recent marches are a guide.

    If reversing Brexit can be met with equanimity and no violence, why not a hard UK/Ireland border?
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 24,603

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    kle4 said:

    AndyJS said:

    The Tory front bench looks incredibly tired and aged.

    Government is hard. Particularly minority government in a time of crisis beset by internal divisions. While I cannot say I have been particularly enthused by the quality of debate or focus of our politicians at this time, parliament has been pursuing its role in discussing big issues more than they often do.
    But the quality of debate has been so poor, positions so entrenched that there has been zero point to the debating/questioning. There is so little willingness to compromise, and so much determination to play politics rather than engage in meaningful contemplation.

    Is this a perfect deal? No.

    Was a perfect deal possible? No.

    Is there any realistic prospect of a better deal? No.

    Do we want to crash out without a deal? No.

    Yet people are not facing that reality and pretending that their posturing will deliver something that doesn't exist.

    It is all so infantile. And this isn't party political - all parties are indulging in pathetic posturing.
    Is this deal what people want? No
    Will the deal makes us better off? No
    Will the deal take back control? No
    Is this the only way? No
    Do we have to leave? No

    Do you respect democracy? No
    Do you disrespect democracy through more democracy? No
    How many referenda would be necessary for Remain to admit defeat and move on?

    If they lost a second, would they call for a third? a fourth?
    Best of three? Having had two already.

    The thing is Leavers told us 'you lost, suck it up' and for the most part we did. We were assured by Davis and Johnson how easy it would all be, but here we are some 90 days before we leave and we have a diabolical deal before us that even Leavers don't like! To cap it all no one, NO ONE has made any preparation for a no deal which Mrs May says is our only other option. And you think we are being unreasonable?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    kle4 said:

    AndyJS said:

    The Tory front bench looks incredibly tired and aged.

    Government is hard. Particularly minority government in a time of crisis beset by internal divisions. While I cannot say I have been particularly enthused by the quality of debate or focus of our politicians at this time, parliament has been pursuing its role in discussing big issues more than they often do.
    But the quality of debate has been so poor, positions so entrenched that there has been zero point to the debating/questioning. There is so little willingness to compromise, and so much determination to play politics rather than engage in meaningful contemplation.

    Is this a perfect deal? No.

    Was a perfect deal possible? No.

    Is there any realistic prospect of a better deal? No.

    Do we want to crash out without a deal? No.

    Yet people are not facing that reality and pretending that their posturing will deliver something that doesn't exist.

    It is all so infantile. And this isn't party political - all parties are indulging in pathetic posturing.
    Is this deal what people want? No
    Will the deal makes us better off? No
    Will the deal take back control? No
    Is this the only way? No
    Do we have to leave? No

    Do you respect democracy? No
    Do you disrespect democracy through more democracy? No
    How many referenda would be necessary for Remain to admit defeat and move on?

    If they lost a second, would they call for a third? a fourth?
    How many elections are necessary for the Conservatives to accept they’re never going to win Oxford City Council and move on?

    If you believe in something you keep fighting.
    Not a good analogy - the Conservatives there are presumably not fighting to nullify the results of the last election so the winners do not take up their seats at all.

    I don't regard there as anything inherently wrong with arguing for another vote, democracy is democracy, but it is not the same as fighting the next regularly scheduled election.
  • grabcocquegrabcocque Posts: 4,234
    Frasmotic: 52%
    Anaspeptic: 38%
    Pericombobulated: 89%
  • AndrewAndrew Posts: 2,900


    If they lost a second, would they call for a third? a fourth?

    You can guarantee there would be people demanding a 3rd (to rejoin), at the end of the transition period in 2022.
  • DruttDrutt Posts: 1,093
    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    kle4 said:

    AndyJS said:

    The Tory front bench looks incredibly tired and aged.

    Government is hard. Particularly minority government in a time of crisis beset by internal divisions. While I cannot say I have been particularly enthused by the quality of debate or focus of our politicians at this time, parliament has been pursuing its role in discussing big issues more than they often do.
    But the quality of debate has been so poor, positions so entrenched that there has been zero point to the debating/questioning. There is so little willingness to compromise, and so much determination to play politics rather than engage in meaningful contemplation.

    Is this a perfect deal? No.

    Was a perfect deal possible? No.

    Is there any realistic prospect of a better deal? No.

    Do we want to crash out without a deal? No.

    Yet people are not facing that reality and pretending that their posturing will deliver something that doesn't exist.

    It is all so infantile. And this isn't party political - all parties are indulging in pathetic posturing.
    Is this deal what people want? No
    Will the deal makes us better off? No
    Will the deal take back control? No
    Is this the only way? No
    Do we have to leave? No

    Do you respect democracy? No
    Do you disrespect democracy through more democracy? No
    A second vote is not 'more democracy', otherwise a third vote would be more democratic than that, and so on. It's nonsense. Democracy is (1) having votes (2) implementing them.

    If you are prepared to put aside those central tenets of in pursuit of your goals, what business do you have in Parliament, or in any democracy? What else, what other mainstays of civil society, are you willing to sacrifice to get your way?
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,072
    kle4 said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    kle4 said:

    AndyJS said:

    The Tory front bench looks incredibly tired and aged.

    Government is hard. Particularly minority government in a time of crisis beset by internal divisions. While I cannot say I have been particularly enthused by the quality of debate or focus of our politicians at this time, parliament has been pursuing its role in discussing big issues more than they often do.
    But the quality of debate has been so poor, positions so entrenched that there has been zero point to the debating/questioning. There is so little willingness to compromise, and so much determination to play politics rather than engage in meaningful contemplation.

    Is this a perfect deal? No.

    Was a perfect deal possible? No.

    Is there any realistic prospect of a better deal? No.

    Do we want to crash out without a deal? No.

    Yet people are not facing that reality and pretending that their posturing will deliver something that doesn't exist.

    It is all so infantile. And this isn't party political - all parties are indulging in pathetic posturing.
    Is this deal what people want? No
    Will the deal makes us better off? No
    Will the deal take back control? No
    Is this the only way? No
    Do we have to leave? No

    Do you respect democracy? No
    Do you disrespect democracy through more democracy? No
    How many referenda would be necessary for Remain to admit defeat and move on?

    If they lost a second, would they call for a third? a fourth?
    How many elections are necessary for the Conservatives to accept they’re never going to win Oxford City Council and move on?

    If you believe in something you keep fighting.
    Not a good analogy - the Conservatives there are presumably not fighting to nullify the results of the last election so the winners do not take up their seats at all.

    I don't regard there as anything inherently wrong with arguing for another vote, democracy is democracy, but it is not the same as fighting the next regularly scheduled election.
    If the voters elected Mr Blobby but then Tinky Winky showed up at Parliament then maybe they would be fighting to nullify the result?

  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    A small anecdote ... or why I stopped voting for the LibDems.

    The LibDems wanted some traffic calming measures installed in some side-roads in a place I lived.

    They caused a small plebiscite to be held in the affected streets.

    Unhappily for the LibDems, the result of the plebiscite was that most of the residents didn’t want the traffic calming measures.

    The LibDems at that time controlled the council, so they ignored the result of the plebiscite and installed the traffic calming measures anyhow.

    When the local councillor came round for re-election, I explained why I was not voting for him.

    “Oh, I am pleased he said, it’s such a little thing. You’ll come round by next time”.

    The ward is now free of LibDem councillors.
  • Frasmotic: 52%
    Anaspeptic: 38%
    Pericombobulated: 89%

    Sausage!
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    edited December 2018
    With everything that's happened over recent years I think we all need to take polls with a hefty pinch of salt - though, FWIW, you tot up the positive and negative reactions and you get what (I believe) the right/wrong tracker has been coming out with for some time: a lead for Remain, but not a vast one.

    Nor does a crude set of figures like this tell us how those surveyed voted last time, whether they've changed their minds, and how likely they would be to vote again.

    My take on a second referendum is as follows:

    1. It'll be a mass bloodletting exercise that will make referendum Mk.1 look tame by comparison. By the time it's over the current situation - two warring camps that detest one another, with the rest of the population stuck inbetween either trying to ignore it or wishing to God it would stop - will be ten times worse
    2. It is unlikely to generate a decisive result, one way or another, and nor will it settle any arguments. Given that it's obvious that a negotiated deal can only be done with the EU on terms that are advantageous to it and keep us closely aligned to its system, only a Hard Brexit can provide any resolution to this endless dispute - except, if there is a Hard Brexit decision then Parliament still won't implement it. And nobody will be stupid enough to trust this Parliament to implement it, either
    3. Consequently, the next General Election will probably be the third referendum by proxy, anyway - so why not just cut the crap and skip straight to the election?
  • grabcocquegrabcocque Posts: 4,234
    kle4 said:

    YouGov also have first preferences in a three-way referendum as:

    Remain: 54%
    Deal: 18%
    No Deal: 28%

    Oof, the deal is so dead it is not even funny.
    One in five people still support the deal, whether out of some sort of pity, ironic detachment, severe psychosis, or masochistic contrarianism is unclear.

    Possibly all of the above.
  • kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    I vote for incandescent. I'll decide later if with rage or with excitement.

    Sorry, but incandescent was banned by the EU. Have to use low energy bulbs these days.
    Godsdamit it. Screw it, no deal it is!
    Bayonet it. [After showing previous quotes]
  • YouGov also have first preferences in a three-way referendum as:

    Remain: 54%
    Deal: 18%
    No Deal: 28%

    How the hell are we in the crazy position of being held to ransom by TM for something that parliament clearly doesn't want and only 18 per cent of the public support?
This discussion has been closed.