The Next General Election.

[oowee]

2 hours ago, panoma1 said:

To interpret the result of the question choice on the referendum correctly, leave or remain....... leave means leave! It does not mean partly leave, our leave in name only staying in a customs union, leave but only with a deal or anything else!....it means leave! Remainers Never accepted the result of the referendum because they want to stay in the EU, so they have used any tactic they can, to prevent the UK leaving the EU!....this is evidenced by the fact remainers tried to push for another vote (2nd referendum) and wanted remain as an option! I could accept a consultative vote by the UK electorate, with a choice of the options, leave with a negotiated deal (terms on offer stipulated and explained) or leave with no deal....but not with remain as an option on the ballot paper!.....

I can see that you think there is only 'one version of out' and cut all ties but I am sure you would agree that there are many leavers with different perspectives. Leave must mean leave membership of the EU it did not mean dig a trench put up a wall or drift out into the Atlantic. It is totally illogical to assume otherwise from the evidence of the last three years. The only logical step must be to identify what type of leave satisfies the most people. 

Or as I would suggest given the time that has now passed and the facts are laid bare, that it would be logical to check that people still want to leave with any of the options at the same time. Otherwise we risk going against the views of the majority which by any logic we would want to avoid.

[panoma1]

No! The UK should be able to leave on terms which suit the future well-being of our country, If as is the case, the EU will not negotiate terms which suit the UK........contrary to what remainers would have us believe, that is no reason to remain!....... So we should leave anyway!
It’s the remainers who have attached strings to us leaving, not the leavers, the democratic will of the majority of the electorate of the UK has not been carried out yet, due solely to the undemocratic actions of the leavers, until the result of the 2016 referendum has been carried out, there should be no further vote on stay or leave!....after this  been done, leavers can campaign all they like for another referendum, that would be their democratic right!

The only thing that should be put to another public vote is how we leave (the terms agreed between our government and the EU) not whether we leave!...........That ship has already sailed!

The UK will not be digging any trenches or walls or drifting out into the Atlantic, that is remainer scare tactics! Once UK has left the EU we are free to strike trade deals with whom we like, including the EU.......if anyone, including the UK, for whatever reason doesn’t want to strike a trade deal.......that’s their choice!.....but do you seriously think the EU and other countries will not want to strike trade deal with the UK just because we left the EU? 

Edited November 3, 2019 by panoma1

[oldypigeonpopper]

1 hour ago, panoma1 said:

No! The UK should be able to leave on terms which suit the future well-being of our country, If as is the case, the EU will not negotiate terms which suit the UK........contrary to what remainers would have us believe, that is no reason to remain!....... So we should leave anyway!
It’s the remainers who have attached strings to us leaving, not the leavers, the democratic will of the majority of the electorate of the UK has not been carried out yet, due solely to the undemocratic actions of the leavers, until the result of the 2016 referendum has been carried out, there should be no further vote on stay or leave!....after this  been done, leavers can campaign all they like for another referendum, that would be their democratic right!

The only thing that should be put to another public vote is how we leave (the terms agreed between our government and the EU) not whether we leave!...........That ship has already sailed!

The UK will not be digging any trenches or walls or drifting out into the Atlantic, that is remainer scare tactics! Once UK has left the EU we are free to strike trade deals with whom we like, including the EU.......if anyone, including the UK, for whatever reason doesn’t want to strike a trade deal.......that’s their choice!.....but do you seriously think the EU and other countries will not want to strike trade deal with the UK just because we left the EU? 

hello, good post panoma 1

[oowee]

3 hours ago, panoma1 said:

No! The UK should be able to leave on terms which suit the future well-being of our country, If as is the case, the EU will not negotiate terms which suit the UK........contrary to what remainers would have us believe, that is no reason to remain!....... So we should leave anyway!
It’s the remainers who have attached strings to us leaving, not the leavers, the democratic will of the majority of the electorate of the UK has not been carried out yet, due solely to the undemocratic actions of the leavers, until the result of the 2016 referendum has been carried out, there should be no further vote on stay or leave!....after this  been done, leavers can campaign all they like for another referendum, that would be their democratic right!

The only thing that should be put to another public vote is how we leave (the terms agreed between our government and the EU) not whether we leave!...........That ship has already sailed!

The UK will not be digging any trenches or walls or drifting out into the Atlantic, that is remainer scare tactics! Once UK has left the EU we are free to strike trade deals with whom we like, including the EU.......if anyone, including the UK, for whatever reason doesn’t want to strike a trade deal.......that’s their choice!.....but do you seriously think the EU and other countries will not want to strike trade deal with the UK just because we left the EU? 

So you ignore the will of those that voted leave wanting a deal. Indeed you do not know what type of leaving arrangement they envisaged because you do not want to ask them. That is not logical. 

Of course the EU will want a deal. Imagine we leave with no deal and no strings attached. We then start the process of negotiating with the EU for the deal that we want on our terms. The EU will insist on strings that they will want with any future trade deal, as will every other country with which we want to have a trade deal. Now we are alone in our negotiation and we can see a gradual bleed of prosperity as we pay the cost of tariff on exports and face the subsequent pressure on prices. Nothing wrong with that but the economic pressure will increase over time encouraging us to do a deal. The Eu of course will be in the same boat but for them but unlike the UK and the US they will dictate the terms of that deal and will set the trading standards for our compliance. Every large trading nation does this of course. We will have to decide do we want to adopt the standards or the trading block that deals with 40% of our trade or with that of another nation. 

 

Edited November 3, 2019 by oowee

[panoma1]

This is a waste of time! No one voted for anything but what was on the ballot paper....that was leave or remain.....the UK voted by a majority to leave, end of !

[panoma1]

1 hour ago, oowee said:

So you ignore the will of those that voted leave wanting a deal. Indeed you do not know what type of leaving arrangement they envisaged because you do not want to ask them. That is not logical. 

Of course the EU will want a deal. Imagine we leave with no deal and no strings attached. We then start the process of negotiating with the EU for the deal that we want on our terms. The EU will insist on strings that they will want with any future trade deal, as will every other country with which we want to have a trade deal. Now we are alone in our negotiation and we can see a gradual bleed of prosperity as we pay the cost of tariff on exports and face the subsequent pressure on prices. Nothing wrong with that but the economic pressure will increase over time encouraging us to do a deal. The Eu of course will be in the same boat but for them but unlike the UK and the US they will dictate the terms of that deal and will set the trading standards for our compliance. Every large trading nation does this of course. We will have to decide do we want to adopt the standards or the trading block that deals with 40% of our trade or with that of another nation. 

 

Those who voted in the referendum “to leave wanting a deal” we’re unfortunately, voting for something that was NOT on offer or an option on the ballot paper! Leaving with a deal was a possibility, only if the UK could get a good deal from the EU, the default position was always that we leave without a deal!

“No deal was better than a bad deal”...remember that?

[oowee]

22 minutes ago, panoma1 said:

Those who voted in the referendum “to leave wanting a deal” we’re unfortunately, voting for something that was NOT on offer or an option on the ballot paper! Leaving with a deal was a possibility, only if the UK could get a good deal from the EU, the default position was always that we leave without a deal!

“No deal was better than a bad deal”...remember that?

“No deal was better than a bad deal”...remember that? Not on the ballot paper.

Leaving with a deal was a possibility, only if the UK could get a good deal from the EU ..... Not on the ballot paper.

the default position was always that we leave without a deal! Not on the ballot paper.

 

The only option on the ballot paper was leaving the only logical way forward is to agree what it looks like. Adding words or rules to the vote is not logical and was not agreed.

 

[panoma1]

20 minutes ago, oowee said:

“No deal was better than a bad deal”...remember that? Not on the ballot paper.

Leaving with a deal was a possibility, only if the UK could get a good deal from the EU ..... Not on the ballot paper.

the default position was always that we leave without a deal! Not on the ballot paper.

 

The only option on the ballot paper was leaving the only logical way forward is to agree what it looks like. Adding words or rules to the vote is not logical and was not agreed.

 

No the only logical way forward is to leave, because that’s what the UK electorate voted for! Leave means leave!....no other options...nothing else!

Agreed they are not on the ballot paper, I didn’t claim they were, however....Once the decision to leave had been made......

logic says if we can leave getting good terms...great!
logic says if we cant get a good deal, we leave without one!
logic says the default position is (if we can’t get a good deal) we leave without one!....it certainly isn’t remain! Lol!

It is not I trying to add words or rules that were not included on the ballot paper, but remainers!

Edited November 3, 2019 by panoma1

[TIGHTCHOKE]

L E A V E!

[London Best]

1 hour ago, TIGHTCHOKE said:

L E A V E!

Could you be a little more specific?

[Raja Clavata]

This thread is starting to look a lot like the other one.

[TIGHTCHOKE]

Another one gone!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-50280667

[bluesj]

The biggest dangers I see in our future as country sports people and my way of life are

1 labour getting in

2 the conservatives getting in. or more to the point boris's other half telling boris he's not getting any until he does what she wants!

3 Europe

 

[Scully]

2 hours ago, Raja Clavata said:

This thread is starting to look a lot like the other one.

Well it would wouldn’t it; the GE is basically a second referendum. 

[Rewulf]

20 hours ago, oowee said:

Or as I would suggest given the time that has now passed and the facts are laid bare, that it would be logical to check that people still want to leave with any of the options at the same time. Otherwise we risk going against the views of the majority which by any logic we would want to avoid.

 

6 hours ago, oowee said:

So you ignore the will of those that voted leave wanting a deal. Indeed you do not know what type of leaving arrangement they envisaged because you do not want to ask them. That is not logical.

You pose questions about what we we were asked or not asked.

At what point were we asked if we wanted a referendum?  How did government know we needed one ?

Do you think the 4 million UKIP voters swayed them? The fact that most of our MEPs were eurosceptic? 

No , they did it to silence the eurosceptics in parliament, UKIP and the electorate once and for all . Parliament voted for it because they are mostly remain, and they believed they had a healthy majority to remain, they never envisaged a deal, because they didn't need one, both labour and Tories agreed on the strategy. 

When that strategy went awry,  because they dont have a clue what their electorate wants, they went to plan b, use Miller to give the vote to parliament, and tie itself in knots after an election wrecks the Tory majority. 

Now we're back to 2017 , and another election , will we be fooled again ?

Is boris stupid , is Farage? 

Corbyn and swinson definitely are, and will both be battered,  because they offer nothing. 

The choice is back with the people of which flavour Brexit they would like. 

Should be interesting. 

[oowee]

49 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

 

You pose questions about what we we were asked or not asked.

At what point were we asked if we wanted a referendum?  How did government know we needed one ?

Do you think the 4 million UKIP voters swayed them? The fact that most of our MEPs were eurosceptic? 

No , they did it to silence the eurosceptics in parliament, UKIP and the electorate once and for all . Parliament voted for it because they are mostly remain, and they believed they had a healthy majority to remain, they never envisaged a deal, because they didn't need one, both labour and Tories agreed on the strategy. 

When that strategy went awry,  because they dont have a clue what their electorate wants, they went to plan b, use Miller to give the vote to parliament, and tie itself in knots after an election wrecks the Tory majority. 

Now we're back to 2017 , and another election , will we be fooled again ?

Is boris stupid , is Farage? 

Corbyn and swinson definitely are, and will both be battered,  because they offer nothing. 

The choice is back with the people of which flavour Brexit they would like. 

Should be interesting. 

But its not is it? 

[Scully]

6 minutes ago, oowee said:

But its not is it? 

Is it not? 
Deal= Conservative Party

No deal = Brexit Party

Ignore referendum result and remain = Libundems

Labour = Have they decided yet? Or oblivion. 
Simples. 😃

[JohnfromUK]

1 minute ago, Scully said:

Simples.

It is - and it is very likely to result in another hung parliament.  Result - another 5 years of chaos.

[Scully]

2 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

It is - and it is very likely to result in another hung parliament.  Result - another 5 years of chaos.

👍 I think you may be right. 🙂

[Raja Clavata]

1 hour ago, Scully said:

Well it would wouldn’t it; the GE is basically a second referendum. 

 

8 minutes ago, Scully said:

Is it not? 
Deal= Conservative Party

No deal = Brexit Party

Ignore referendum result and remain = Libundems

Labour = Have they decided yet? Or oblivion. 
Simples. 😃

If it's basically a second referendum then does the outcome not supersede the first one?

The obvious problem with it being wrapped into a GE is that party politics and tactical voting come into play, difficult to predict the effect of each in this instance as we are in uncharted territory, Very risky for all sides.

9 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

It is - and it is very likely to result in another hung parliament.  Result - another 5 years of chaos.

This seems the most likely outcome but I don't see another 5 years of chaos under that scenario, I think a hung Parliament will quickly lead to a formalised second referendum

[JohnfromUK]

2 minutes ago, Raja Clavata said:

I think a hung Parliament will quickly lead to a formalised second referendum

Which will lead to a small leave majority - and back to square 1.

[oowee]

16 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

It is - and it is very likely to result in another hung parliament.  Result - another 5 years of chaos.

^^^^^^ This. 

[Scully]

1 minute ago, Raja Clavata said:

 

If it's basically a second referendum then does the outcome not supersede the first one?

The obvious problem with it being wrapped into a GE is that party politics and tactical voting come into play, difficult to predict the effect of each in this instance as we are in uncharted territory, Very risky for all sides.

This seems the most likely outcome but I don't see another 5 years of chaos under that scenario, I think a hung Parliament will quickly lead to a formalised second referendum

No, because it’s a GE, and only another referendum by inference only. It’s inevitable and understandable that people will treat it as one. 

[oowee]

1 minute ago, Scully said:

No, because it’s a GE, and only another referendum by inference only. It’s inevitable and understandable that people will treat it as one. 

But the party with the majority would have the mandate and the majority to deliver whatever action was voted in. Mixing the GE with a ref is simply madness. 

[Scully]

6 minutes ago, oowee said:

But the party with the majority would have the mandate and the majority to deliver whatever action was voted in. Mixing the GE with a ref is simply madness. 

Yes, it’s called democracy. It may be alien to some,  but for better or worse that’s how it works.  
Given the reason for the GE, people are bound to be influenced by either the way they voted in the referendum or the result they would now like to see. That’s how it goes.