The now-enacted will of (some of) the people

[blandy]

1 minute ago, bickster said:

We got exactly what we collectively as a country voted for

Not to my mind. I’ve posted this before, but “we” voted to leave, just. What we therefore should have done is left just. That is to say a soft Brexit, staying in the Single Market and possibly also the customs union. That’s, as I see it, how the vote came out, a very slight weighting to just about leave.

[Seat68]

I want you to punch yourself in the face. Now tell me, was the punch exactly as you imagined. 

[YLN]

1 hour ago, Genie said:

Last 2 quotes sum up a lot of Brexit voters.

Express

I want the thing i want. I'm not sure why, or what it is, but i want it and I'll keep voting for it because it's what i want. It's the bloody EU stopping me from getting what i want, and calling me a racist xenophobe for wanting what i want. Give me what I want or else

[Genie]

How would anyone know what to expect when nothing was offered? Yet some people are absolutely adamant they knew what they voted for.

[bickster]

1 hour ago, blandy said:

Not to my mind. I’ve posted this before, but “we” voted to leave, just. What we therefore should have done is left just. That is to say a soft Brexit, staying in the Single Market and possibly also the customs union. That’s, as I see it, how the vote came out, a very slight weighting to just about leave.

Hmmmm, no I’d say this is exactly what we voted for. In voting yes, this is what the country enabled.

It might not be what a majority thought they were voting for but it was what they were voting for regardless.

The other side to that is that this is exactly what I was voting to stop, which is why I’d be in the very small percentage.

[Nicho]

36 minutes ago, bickster said:

Hmmmm, no I’d say this is exactly what we voted for. In voting yes, this is what the country enabled.

It might not be what a majority thought they were voting for but it was what they were voting for regardless.

The other side to that is that this is exactly what I was voting to stop, which is why I’d be in the very small percentage.

Agreed, the notion of leaving and staying in the market didn’t exist. It was the “having our cake and eating it scenario”

In in fact being a member and having a say in the rules while still being in the singles market is the delicious cake. 
 

It’s nuts that people still cling to backing their vote and knowing what they voted for. Or even worse voting for something that wasn’t on the table. 

[Genie]

Yep, back to blaming the EU again. It’s like groundhog day.

[tinker]

Not to worry , a trade war will sort inflation out.

Vote for an idiot and you get stupid decisions. 

[blandy]

11 hours ago, Nicho said:

the notion of leaving and staying in the market didn’t exist.

It absolutely did exist. It was discussed loads during the run up to the ref. Loads of brexiters were saying stuff like "no one is talking about leaving the single market"

Quote

Daniel Hannan: “Absolutely nobody is talking about threatening our place in the Single Market“

Nigel Farage: “Wouldn’t it be terrible if we were like Norway and Switzerland? Really?“ “They’re rich.“  “They’re happy.“ “They’re self-governing.“

Daniel Hannan: “Outstandingly Norway.“

Owen Paterson: “Because only a madman would actually leave the Single Market.“

Luke Johnson: “We have a great independent future just as countries like Norway and Switzerland enjoy.“

Daniel Hannan: “Norway, Switzerland, all these countries have complete free trade within the EU, and by the way I can’t help noticing that they’re doing pretty well.“

Nigel Farage: “And people say, ‘well actually, Norway, Iceland and Switzerland do pretty well.’“

Matthew Elliott: “The Norwegian option, the EEA option, I think that it might be initially attractive. Some business people.“

Nigel Farage: “You know, the Norwegians have no ties in terms of foreign policy with the European Union, no ties in terms of their fishing industry where they have a 200 mile limit. They are opted out and exempted from all the things that really make the British mad.“

Arron Banks: “Increasingly the Norway option looks the best for the UK.“

Nigel Farage: “We’ll find ourselves part of their European Economic Area, and with a free trade deal.“

Daniel Hannan: “But, to repeat, absolutely nobody is talking about threatening our place in the Single Market.”

But what happened is that after the actual vote, the throbbers throbbed, T.May triggered Article 50 way too soon, before we'd worked out what we (Parliament) wanted, what its collective position was and as the clock started ticking down, the throbber tendency, because of the parliamentary maths, held way too much influence and the opportunist Johnson did his thing....and we are where we are. 

[Nicho]

1 hour ago, blandy said:

It absolutely did exist. It was discussed loads during the run up to the ref. Loads of brexiters were saying stuff like "no one is talking about leaving the single market"

But what happened is that after the actual vote, the throbbers throbbed, T.May triggered Article 50 way too soon, before we'd worked out what we (Parliament) wanted, what its collective position was and as the clock started ticking down, the throbber tendency, because of the parliamentary maths, held way too much influence and the opportunist Johnson did his thing....and we are where we are. 

People taking bollocks were told they were talking bollocks. Portrayed as project fear.

Boris is a sharlatan who benefited portraying brexit as some golden goose of being best for Britain terrible for foreigners. 

Much of the same people who fell for it then fall for it now. We will get another Tory government based on them being able to get the best deal, and only them. 

[Davkaus]

Wasn't it only not a possibility because of the unilateral red lines drawn by May to appease her backbench extremists?

Edited May 18, 2022 by Davkaus

[Chindie]

Shamelessly stolen from elsewhere, but a very straightforward take on how much of a joke this is.

[Genie]

Boris’s dad has become a French citizen. Why should he have to suffer the decisions of his son like the rest of us?

Edited May 21, 2022 by Genie

[HanoiVillan]

On 09/05/2022 at 20:51, desensitized43 said:

The solution to that is a reformed second chamber where all 4 nations have equal say - as in the United States (which admittedly might not be a popular example!!) where each state has 2 senators regardless of population and wealth.

In general, we need a proper constitutional convention of all parties and nations because in recent times the government of the day have shown a frightening willingness to tear up the rule book, lie and act like charlatans without conscience when it’s in their own party interest.

No, we don't need a second chamber organised on these lines. The 'submerged nations' already have their devolved legislatures. A second chamber organised on these lines would be - rightly - perceived as deeply anti-democratic for the vast majority of voters in the UK who live in England.

Also, a second chamber with 8 members would be absurd.

[desensitized43]

10 hours ago, HanoiVillan said:

No, we don't need a second chamber organised on these lines. The 'submerged nations' already have their devolved legislatures. A second chamber organised on these lines would be - rightly - perceived as deeply anti-democratic for the vast majority of voters in the UK who live in England.

Also, a second chamber with 8 members would be absurd.

I wasn’t suggesting a second chamber with 8 members. I was suggesting a second chamber where all the nations of the UK were represented equally, regardless of population and wealth. However many total members there would be is for discussion. If the UK is a nation of equals, then let’s be equals.

There’s a problem here where the other nations know that all the MPs of Scotland, Wales and NI could all decided to vote one way but whatever England says, goes. That can’t be right? The UK can’t survive if 3/4 of the countries feel ignored and marginalised.
 

I get that it’ll be a hard sell to the people of England given that most of the population of the UK live there and there’s definitely an argument in that scenario for some kind of Devolution to the English regions. 

[bickster]

56 minutes ago, desensitized43 said:

I wasn’t suggesting a second chamber with 8 members. I was suggesting a second chamber where all the nations of the UK were represented equally, regardless of population and wealth. However many total members there would be is for discussion. If the UK is a nation of equals, then let’s be equals.

There’s a problem here where the other nations know that all the MPs of Scotland, Wales and NI could all decided to vote one way but whatever England says, goes. That can’t be right? The UK can’t survive if 3/4 of the countries feel ignored and marginalised.
 

I get that it’ll be a hard sell to the people of England given that most of the population of the UK live there and there’s definitely an argument in that scenario for some kind of Devolution to the English regions. 

It’s still a monumentally rubbish idea and isn’t democratic

[peterw]

On 18/05/2022 at 00:31, blandy said:

Not to my mind. I’ve posted this before, but “we” voted to leave, just. What we therefore should have done is left just. That is to say a soft Brexit, staying in the Single Market and possibly also the customs union. That’s, as I see it, how the vote came out, a very slight weighting to just about leave.

That's not how it works though is it? Take away the fact that it was an advisory referendum and all that, the winner wins. Simple as. You don't see any Government elected (usually by minority) saying they'll only impose 40% or so of their manifesto on the population given that 55-60% didn't vote for them. The vagaries of first past-the-post I guess.

[sidcow]

The pass mark for the referendum should have been 50% of the voting population, not 50% of those who voted. 

[peterw]

woulda could shoulda - if we'd have had competent peope in charge we wouldn't have been in this mess.

[Genie]

It was a monumentally stupid idea from the outset.

Even at the point of deciding to offer the general public a referendum it should have been written out what type of “leave” it would be.

Its classic BJ though isn’t it, not a details man. Just win the day and worry about tomorrow later.