[Grief]

Gorefest, on 15 March 2019 - 03:50 PM, said:

I believe they won't formally request an extension until May

That's definitely too late though

[Macros]

http://youtu.be/v2OsF-tmGpQ

[Illuyankas]

Reminded me to (re)post this

[Maark Abbott]

https://www.bbc.co.u...litics-47636011

Insular right wing racists have brought us here. Just cancel the fucking thing and be done with it. Where the fuck is LH Ozzy when we need him?

[TheRetiredBridgeburner]

Maark Abbott, on 20 March 2019 - 07:00 AM, said:

Just cancel the fucking thing and be done with it.

I honestly don't think they can. I don't like it any more than you, but if the current situation isn't damaging the perception of Parliament enough, imagine what cancelling the whole thing after nearly three years would do. 52% of the country, whatever their reasons for voting, would have every right to be furious.

Whether I think the whole thing is a disaster or not (I do), that way surely madness lies.

[Maark Abbott]

TheRetiredBridgeburner, on 20 March 2019 - 07:47 AM, said:

Maark Abbott, on 20 March 2019 - 07:00 AM, said:

Just cancel the fucking thing and be done with it.

I honestly don't think they can. I don't like it any more than you, but if the current situation isn't damaging the perception of Parliament enough, imagine what cancelling the whole thing after nearly three years would do. 52% of the country, whatever their reasons for voting, would have every right to be furious.

Whether I think the whole thing is a disaster or not (I do), that way surely madness lies.

There's an inconsistency there. 52% of the voters, yes, but only 2/3 of the country actually voted, so we can't say 52% of the country. It's more along the lines of 34% at a best estimate.

They can be furious if they want - but if a majority of voters decide "let's shoot our feet", should those who voted not to shoot their feet also be forced to shoot their feet for the mad gunpowder foot lust of their countrymen?

This is what gets me about the whole cry of "traitors" - politicians are now actually starting to consider the national interest, which is outside of what these brainlet right-wingers want, so they're caught between riots because racists don't like brown people or Poles, and riots because the country becomes significantly weaker, food shortages, medicine shortages etc.

[Silencer]

It was also non binding and there is no reason a second referendum could not be held.

Choices:
No Deal Brexit
Remain

Because that's the reality. Not the lies that got the first outcome.
Hell, at this point civil unrest from some angry voters is probably safer and less damaging long term than no deal hard Brexit.

[Tiste Simeon]

And remember a vast majority of them would likely never have even thought about the EU until 2016...

[Maark Abbott]

Silencer, on 20 March 2019 - 08:27 AM, said:

It was also non binding and there is no reason a second referendum could not be held.

Choices:
No Deal Brexit
Remain

Because that's the reality. Not the lies that got the first outcome.
Hell, at this point civil unrest from some angry voters is probably safer and less damaging long term than no deal hard Brexit.

Agreed. On the BOP, some angry gammons are much preferable to long term economic slaughter.

Tiste Simeon, on 20 March 2019 - 08:34 AM, said:

And remember a vast majority of them would likely never have even thought...

Agreed 100%.

[TheRetiredBridgeburner]

Correct on the 52% thing - my lazy phrasing.

Yes, sure, voters can be angry. I was thinking more widely in terms of how the media will portray it (because our media in this country are frankly dangerous in themselves, as the last two years alone has proven). Sure, sensible intelligent people will see it for the spin it is and continue with their informed opinions, but too many people suck up whatever Murdoch & Co tell them.

I'm aware it wasn't binding. However the government have chosen for the last nearly three years to behave as if it was and continue to this day to spout the "delivering the will of the people" nonsense as if it was.

Don't get me wrong, I don't disagree with any of you. But my faith in the general British public is non-existent and with them lies the issue.

I'd personally love to see a second referendum - I just don't think we'll get one. Here's to being pleasantly surprised eh?

This post has been edited by TheRetiredBridgeburner: 20 March 2019 - 09:03 AM

[Illuyankas]

I never see any People's Vote peeps explain what they'll do if the result comes back as Leave again (possible just on how poorly they've run the second referendum campaign)

I mean, besides push for a third referendum

This post has been edited by Illuyankas: 20 March 2019 - 08:49 PM

[Mezla PigDog]

If it happens then I'll be praying for a landslide one way or the other. At least then we'll know for sure.

[Grief]

Tiste Simeon, on 20 March 2019 - 08:34 AM, said:

And remember a vast majority of them would likely never have even thought about the EU until 2016...

Illuyankas, on 20 March 2019 - 08:49 PM, said:

I never see any People's Vote peeps explain what they'll do if the result comes back as Leave again

I think this is essentially because they just don't envisage that. At least the ones I know seem to think the idea of a second Leave vote just as wildly outlandish as they thought a first Leave vote. I find that it comes off a bit condescending, generally.

For all that people portray Brexit as this freak result, it lines up pretty consistently with historical opinion trends. Eurobarometer has continually found that the UK has a terrible opinion of the EU. In 2010 we find that a whole 19% of British responds held a positive image of the EU - the lowest in the Union by a distance and half of the EU average. The UK was similarly the most distrustful of the EU (64% distrusting against 20% trusting) and the only Member State where the majority would not describe the EU as democratic. Over the years preceding the referendum the responses given by Brits are not too far off those given by Greeks in the depths of the crisis.

Beyond this, UK government polls have consistently found that Leave voters would accept severe consequences in order to leave the EU (although the majority believe that leaving would not have negative consequences). For example, 61% of leave voters felt significant economic damage would be a 'price worth paying' to leave the EU. 39% felt the same about themselves or a family member losing a job.

The idea that euroscepticism is some fleeting, whimsical belief does not hold up very well to me.

[Tiste Simeon]

Ugh Theresa May has blamed everyone else for the failure of everything over the past 3 years and taken no responsibility. She is basically trying to force parliament to accept her deal. Dangerous, inflammatory comments. She is a vile woman and we'll all be better off when she goes (providing we get rid of the Tories too or we'll be stuck with someone like Boris or Rees Mogg...)

On the plus side, a "revoke A50" petition has shot up in signatures: https://petition.par...etitions/241584

77000 in the last hour!

[Silencer]

Illuyankas, on 20 March 2019 - 08:49 PM, said:

I never see any People's Vote peeps explain what they'll do if the result comes back as Leave again (possible just on how poorly they've run the second referendum campaign)

I mean, besides push for a third referendum

No, you make the next one binding provided a minimum level of participation by the population - say 75%.

And if Leave (No Deal) wins then so be it, the UK gets to build a border in Ireland and suffer the economic fallout of having almost no meaningful production and trade as agreements with no bargaining power. Godspeed.

The only reason a second referendum makes sense is that the first one was done based on lies and deception and the promise of a deal that hadn't been worked out yet, and is now shown to be impossible.
A third would not make sense. But to head that off, you make it binding.

But to proceed on the basis of a result that was non binding, a marginal victory, and where one side campaigned almost exclusively on lies, is beyond foolhardy, it's irresponsible.

So no, no third referendum. If an reasonably informed populace wants to fuck themselves and their countrymen over, so be it. Xenophobia and ignorance rule the day, god save the queen, etc, etc.

And if believing that people should not br that stupid twice is condescending, fine. The decision to Leave deserves condescension. On every level.

[TheRetiredBridgeburner]

Tiste Simeon, on 20 March 2019 - 11:20 PM, said:

Ugh Theresa May has blamed everyone else for the failure of everything over the past 3 years and taken no responsibility. She is basically trying to force parliament to accept her deal. Dangerous, inflammatory comments. She is a vile woman and we'll all be better off when she goes (providing we get rid of the Tories too or we'll be stuck with someone like Boris or Rees Mogg...)

I said in the past that I felt a bit sorry for her in an untenable position,

She's been losing that stance steadily ever since, but I think she threw it overboard along with everything but the kitchen sink after that Brexit statement.

[Maark Abbott]

Silencer, on 21 March 2019 - 03:42 AM, said:

Illuyankas, on 20 March 2019 - 08:49 PM, said:

I never see any People's Vote peeps explain what they'll do if the result comes back as Leave again (possible just on how poorly they've run the second referendum campaign)

I mean, besides push for a third referendum

No, you make the next one binding provided a minimum level of participation by the population - say 75%.

And if Leave (No Deal) wins then so be it, the UK gets to build a border in Ireland and suffer the economic fallout of having almost no meaningful production and trade as agreements with no bargaining power. Godspeed.

The only reason a second referendum makes sense is that the first one was done based on lies and deception and the promise of a deal that hadn't been worked out yet, and is now shown to be impossible.
A third would not make sense. But to head that off, you make it binding.

But to proceed on the basis of a result that was non binding, a marginal victory, and where one side campaigned almost exclusively on lies, is beyond foolhardy, it's irresponsible.

So no, no third referendum. If an reasonably informed populace wants to fuck themselves and their countrymen over, so be it. Xenophobia and ignorance rule the day, god save the queen, etc, etc.

And if believing that people should not br that stupid twice is condescending, fine. The decision to Leave deserves condescension. On every level.

Please make my house a protectorate state of New Zealand?

[Maark Abbott]

https://www.bbc.co.u...litics-47663031

Recent happenings - the EU decided not to omegacuck us and so we have an extension.

The gammons are predictably riled and there's an HGV protest planned to gum up motorways et al, because stopping people getting to places in the North etc will really stick it to the gumbmint in London.

May also says MPs have a "clear choice" - I'm sure that she also said something about the working class and brioche, so Ole Gill is suddenly looking a lot more promising.

[Tiste Simeon]

Yep and while this sounds like it could be good, it just means May will bully everyone to accepting her terrible deal.

[Gorefest]

Clever of the EU. May's last throw of the dice was to try and scapegoat the EU for a possible no deal result, but the EU has sidestepped her feeble attempts and thrown the ball directly back at parliament. Either no deal Brexit in april 12th or soft brexit through a new parliamentary plan B on May 22nd. Ball is back in the UK court and it is all fully on their heads now. Well played.