Brexit (Old)

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

A referendum on EU membership is a bit different from an election as an election it changes things more profoundly.

A Referendum is a once in a lifetime event. As it should be. We don’t keep having the same Referendum because the losers side didn’t like the result of the first.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Mick

A Referendum is a once in a lifetime event. As it should be. We don’t keep having the same Referendum because the losers side didn’t like the result of the first.

That's exactly what Nigel Farage suggested if he lost 48-52!

---------- Post added at 08:41 ---------- Previous post was at 08:40 ----------

Originally Posted by Mick

A Referendum is a once in a lifetime event. As it should be. We don’t keep having the same Referendum because the losers side didn’t like the result of the first.

No one is suggesting we keep having the same referendum.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Angua

In a general election we know in five years time (or whenever otherwise agreed) we get to vote for a different party.
.

Exactly, and if a party puts in its manifesto that it will re-join the EU, you can vote for them then.

---------- Post added at 08:50 ---------- Previous post was at 08:50 ----------

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

No one is suggesting we keep having the same referendum.

What are you suggesting then?

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

[/COLOR]No one is suggesting we keep having the same referendum.

Yes, they most certainly are Andrew. Anything which gives the losing side a chance to vote again and again and again, until they get what they want.

One vote is all that was required and the decision taken was to leave the EU and that is exactly what is and should be happening.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by ianch99

Let's be honest here: the poll did not have the answer you like so it is "Fake News". As Angua mentioned, no amount of information, evidence, etc. will change the minds of those that are closed.

I didn't say the poll was fake news. I said it was contrived to produce the result they wanted.

Choose any subject and ask the public to put a number on it and it will make that public look stupid, because unless they study the subject intently, people are bound to get it wrong.

However, considering the Angua principle, it would appear that your mind is closed to any pro-Brexit article or response, despite this option having been selected by the British electorate.

Not very democratic of you, old chap.

---------- Post added at 09:25 ---------- Previous post was at 09:17 ----------

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

No one is suggesting we keep having the same referendum.

So, once again we come back to this desire to see choices given to the public on the kind of Brexit they want. What's that, then?

I'll tell you. It's between whether we run with the best deal Theresa May can get with the EU or it's a Brexit with no deal.

Given that a Brexit with no deal is not what you want and will not resolve your precious Northern Ireland/Republic of Ireland border issue, I would have thought that you would have abandoned that wish to give the electorate another say, Andrew. If you want to believe the media take on this, nobody likes the Chequers arrangement and we'd get a 'hard Brexit' (or just Brexit, pure and simple), however you want to look at it.

Why would you be advocating a vote when the public is unlikely to go for the EU deal? I think it's time you re-thought this, because you're starting to unravel.

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

That's twisted logic. People go to the ballot box - whether for Referendum or Election. Nation is split to whatever close degree on approval of the outcome. Whingers start pushing for a People's Vote to settle the hope of a rethink.

Mmmmm ... *thinks* do I reply with the same childlike name calling or try and debate like adult *thinks*

Ok, let's try the grown up route (again): you are so wrong on this count. Trying to equate a supposed once-a-generation referendum with a 5 yearly General Election is just daft. You are comparing apples with oranges and saying they are the same.

There is large part of this country who believe that a vote run by Criminals, lead by Liars and Political Charlatans, based on deceit & misinformation needs validating in light of the reality only now being faced by the country.

[Carth]

Originally Posted by ianch99

. . a vote run by Criminals, lead by Liars and Political Charlatans, based on deceit & misinformation needs validating . .

Crikey, I've never heard Dave Camerons lot be described like that before

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Carth

Crikey, I've never heard Dave Camerons lot be described like that before

You've heard of Spreadsheet Phil? Have you not heard of Cameron's mate -Spread lies Boris?

[Sephiroth]

[QUOTE=ianch99;35968463]Mmmmm ... *thinks* do I reply with the same childlike name calling or try and debate like adult *thinks*

Ok, let's try the grown up route (again): you are so wrong on this count. Trying to equate a supposed once-a-generation referendum with a 5 yearly General Election is just daft. You are comparing apples with oranges and saying they are the same.

<SNIP>
QUOTE]

No I'm not. At the centre of this lies the electorate - be it Referendum or Election. They'll grumble and whinge whenever they want to.

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by ianch99

Mmmmm ... *thinks* do I reply with the same childlike name calling or try and debate like adult *thinks*

Ok, let's try the grown up route (again): you are so wrong on this count. Trying to equate a supposed once-a-generation referendum with a 5 yearly General Election is just daft. You are comparing apples with oranges and saying they are the same.

There is large part of this country who believe that a vote run by Criminals, lead by Liars and Political Charlatans, based on deceit & misinformation needs validating in light of the reality only now being faced by the country.

Nice bit of grown up name calling there.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

<SNIP>

Given that a Brexit with no deal is not what you want and will not resolve your precious Northern Ireland/Republic of Ireland border issue, I would have thought that you would have abandoned that wish to give the electorate another say, Andrew. If you want to believe the media take on this, nobody likes the Chequers arrangement and we'd get a 'hard Brexit' (or just Brexit, pure and simple), however you want to look at it.

<SNIP>

On that Northern Ireland point, I'd just like to bring to the Remainers' attention what's really going on.

Given that neither the UK nor Ireland are going to erect a border (that's their policy), why are we bothered with a backstop? The EU are lying through their teeth that they wish to protect the GFA (which doesn't mention the border).

The issue is entirely based on Ireland's desire to continue to have free access to the UK market for their exports. I told you that Varadka was perfidious, so he is.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

I didn't say the poll was fake news. I said it was contrived to produce the result they wanted.

Choose any subject and ask the public to put a number on it and it will make that public look stupid, because unless they study the subject intently, people are bound to get it wrong.

However, considering the Angua principle, it would appear that your mind is closed to any pro-Brexit article or response, despite this option having been selected by the British electorate.

Not very democratic of you, old chap.

Old Boy, you can't pretend that everything you disagree with is a conspiracy to make Brexit look like bad news!
You must get your head out of the Reddit sand and accept that the world isn't some kind of George Soros globalist plot and accept that independent analysis is just that. Your mind seems to be entirely shut to the possibility that our civil servants and academics are actually doing their jobs properly!

[Carth]

Andrew, you seem to place a great deal of trust and faith in polls & analysis carried out by civil servants, academics, and independent polling companies.

I wonder if your cats eat Whiskers (9 out of 10 prefer it), and your wife (or partner) uses the anti wrinkle cream that 47 of the 61 people polled say actually makes them look younger.

I also doubt you have 2.4 children

I'm sure that the people behind these things believe the results achieved, otherwise there would be no point to them.

PS, apparently in the next 50 years or so my house could be under 6ft of water (global warming) but up to now I have refrained from building an Ark

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by ianch99

Trying to equate a supposed once-a-generation referendum

Well done, you’ve finally understood.

There is large part of this country who believe that a vote run by Criminals, lead by Liars and Political Charlatans, based on deceit & misinformation needs validating in light of the reality only now being faced by the country.

Mmmmmm *thinks* should I reply to that spew of verbal diarrhoea * thinks*

Nope, there’s nothing intelligent enough in there to reply to.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Carth

Andrew, you seem to place a great deal of trust and faith in polls & analysis carried out by civil servants, academics, and independent polling companies.

I wonder if your cats eat Whiskers (9 out of 10 prefer it), and your wife (or partner) uses the anti wrinkle cream that 47 of the 61 people polled say actually makes them look younger.

I also doubt you have 2.4 children

I'm sure that the people behind these things believe the results achieved, otherwise there would be no point to them.

PS, apparently in the next 50 years or so my house could be under 6ft of water (global warming) but up to now I have refrained from building an Ark

The intelligent approach is to look at the purpose of the research. If it's independent advice to the government on scenario-planning then I put weight on it, for sure. If it's outpurt from academic specialists which studies this area then yes.
If it's something to sell consumer goods then I put my professional sceptic hat on.
It's knowing when to wear which hat which is important and not wearing one hat all the time.