Jump to content
BANGKOK

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

snoop1130

May is said to withdraw parliamentary vote on her Brexit deal

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

It may have escaped your notice, but we had a referendum in 2016 to decide whether or not to continue with the result of that one!

 

If the result of the 1975 referendum can be overturned by another one, why not the result of the 2016 one? Especially now that the true effects of Brexit are becoming more widely known.

 

What is it about another referendum that you Brexiteers are so afraid of? Surely if you are right then you will win again!

It seems to be that remainers want to overturned the 2016 EU referendum because they claim is was subject to manipulation 

but don't wish to overturn the 1975 referendum which some reports claim was also subject to manipulation

If both the 2016 EU referendum and the 1975 referendum are both overturned then we will back to where we are now 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Read this thread - it's worth it!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, vogie said:

I thought you were againgst referendums, which cap have you got on today.

Referendums should never be used to take opinions

 

Ratification of constitutional issues is correct.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, tebee said:

But in the UK referendums are only advisory - so what is wrong with asking someone twice ?

 

If they cannot act on the first one, what makes you think they will act on a second, unless they get the result they want of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, vinny41 said:

It seems to be that remainers want to overturned the 2016 EU referendum because they claim is was subject to manipulation 

but don't wish to overturn the 1975 referendum which some reports claim was also subject to manipulation

If both the 2016 EU referendum and the 1975 referendum are both overturned then we will back to where we are now 

 The result of the 1975 referendum was to remain.

 

The result of the 2016 referendum was to leave; which overturned the result of the 1975 referendum.

 

If you can say what it is you still fail to understand about that, I'm sorry; but I don't see how it can be put any simpler.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, vogie said:

But for those of us who believe in a Parliamentary Democracy I don't think a second referendum would fair to our constitution.

I agree

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Grouse said:

I have no objection to that.

 

How could that be delivered?

 

10 minutes ago, tebee said:

But in the UK referendums are only advisory - so what is wrong with asking someone twice ?

 

If thats the case why not ask people every 5 years the question on EU membership Yes / No

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Grouse said:

Referendums should never be used to take opinions

 

Ratification of constitutional issues is correct.

 

 

But you miss the point, you say should never, but it was agreed by Parliament to have one, they passed a bill to allow the British electorate to have a vote whether to leave or remain in the EU. As we all know now the British public voted to leave. It was also promised to the British public that whatever the result was it would be enacted on, not we will think about what you said and remain all the same, but thanks for turning up and wasting 2 hours of your valuable time, time that could have been put to better use like washing our whippets or getting the thumb marks off our flat caps where we have doffed them to our superiors.

But I've said it once and I'll say it again, some people on here are so selfish, brexit is all about them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, vogie said:

These are the posts that you claim again and again that the vote was rigged, you have been told on many occassion that both sides lied but you chose to ignore it, I wonder why.

Since “both sides lied” as “been told on many occasion” my “claim (...) that the vote was rigged” is correct. 

 

Quote

Whatever you think, can I remind you that it was a British vote and our Parliament chose to act on it (not very proficiently as it happens) however they chose to act on it. So repeating in every post 'it was rigged' does not make any difference.

What of the things that people post here actually make any difference? The constant whining of some Brexiteers that their so-called “democratic” vote is being “overturned” maybe? Newsflash: None of our posts here makes any difference, whatever your opinion, whatever side you take. 

 

Quote

 

If you cannot see that you are either very obtuse or very obstinate.

I also believe how a country runs itself is really up to that country and that country alone, but by all means have opinions,

Oh, of course. If the U.K. wants run its country based on manipulated votes, it can do that. I never questioned that. 

Quote

but yours are becoming disturbingly obsessive.

So do many of yours. I guess we both have to accept that things are being repeated here again and again. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

Since “both sides lied” as “been told on many occasion” my “claim (...) that the vote was rigged” is correct. 

 

What of the things that people post here actually make any difference? The constant whining of some Brexiteers that their so-called “democratic” vote is being “overturned” maybe? Newsflash: None of our posts here makes any difference, whatever your opinion, whatever side you take. 

 

Oh, of course. If the U.K. wants run its country based on manipulated votes, it can do that. I never questioned that. 

So do many of yours. I guess we both have to accept that things are being repeated here again and again. 

"So do many of yours. I guess we both have to accept that things are being repeated here again and again."

 

I try not to repeat myself, when people do it, it becomes tedious and extremely boring. Anyway if it hasn't sunk in by now, it probably never will. Keep up the mantra.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

It seems to be that remainers want to overturned the 2016 EU referendum because they claim is was subject to manipulation 

but don't wish to overturn the 1975 referendum which some reports claim was also subject to manipulation

If both the 2016 EU referendum and the 1975 referendum are both overturned then we will back to where we are now 

The difference between the 1975 referendum and the 2016 one is that the negotiating was done before the vote in the 1975 one, so was based on facts, whereas the 2016 one was voted for based on fantasy promises.   That is the simple truth.

 

However all the bickering doesn't matter a jot to the outcome that will eventually come.  This is political and without a peoples vote we will continue to be lead by the nose and have our future decided by the political ambitions of fools and charlatans. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, vogie said:

But you miss the point, you say should never, but it was agreed by Parliament to have one, they passed a bill to allow the British electorate to have a vote whether to leave or remain in the EU. As we all know now the British public voted to leave. It was also promised to the British public that whatever the result was it would be enacted on, not we will think about what you said and remain all the same, but thanks for turning up and wasting 2 hours of your valuable time, time that could have been put to better use like washing our whippets or getting the thumb marks off our flat caps where we have doffed them to our superiors.

But I've said it once and I'll say it again, some people on here are so selfish, brexit is all about them.

 

The wording in the bill which put the referendum in law said it was an advisory referendum.

 

Cameron promised he would act on the result. He did not say he would simply follow the result, probably because he knew that a PM can't just decide to do that. He then bottled it and buggered off. May kept repeating the mantra and tried to do it by misusing the Royal Prerogative, and when rightly challenged took it all the way to the Supreme Court - and lost. Had she won, she would have simply agreed her deal, and that would be the terms the UK exited on. But she lost. 

 

Corbyn was always anti EU and did little to provide much opposition to leaving, rather concentrating on exploiting the mess hoping to get a GE and get his now very left wing cabinet into government. LD's are lost in the wilderness.

 

Given this shambolic situation, the lying that went on during the campaigns, the clearer information now available and the very obvious lack of effective political control or politicians with balls in the House of Commons, a second referendum would seem quite sensible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

The wording in the bill which put the referendum in law said it was an advisory referendum.

 

Cameron promised he would act on the result. He did not say he would simply follow the result, probably because he knew that a PM can't just decide to do that. He then bottled it and buggered off. May kept repeating the mantra and tried to do it by misusing the Royal Prerogative, and when rightly challenged took it all the way to the Supreme Court - and lost. Had she won, she would have simply agreed her deal, and that would be the terms the UK exited on. But she lost. 

 

Corbyn was always anti EU and did little to provide much opposition to leaving, rather concentrating on exploiting the mess hoping to get a GE and get his now very left wing cabinet into government. LD's are lost in the wilderness.

 

Given this shambolic situation, the lying that went on during the campaigns, the clearer information now available and the very obvious lack of effective political control or politicians with balls in the House of Commons, a second referendum would seem quite sensible.

Your post is so biased my computer has just turned on it's side.😂

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

Cameron promised he would act on the result. He did not say he would simply follow the result, probably because he knew that a PM can't just decide to do that. He then bottled it and buggered off. May kept repeating the mantra and tried to do it by misusing the Royal Prerogative, and when rightly challenged took it all the way to the Supreme Court - and lost. Had she won, she would have simply agreed her deal, and that would be the terms the UK exited on. But she lost. 

That is an extremely good point.  I remember the uproar from the Brexiteers when she lost in the supreme Court.  How unjust they said it was.  And you are right that if she had won she would have just pushed this deal through and then the Brexiteers would really have something to cry about!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, dick dasterdly said:

I assume you mean ensure the minions never know the way their elected representatives voted?

So you think that whipping them into submission is preferable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...