The Brexit aftermath thread

[Slant]

Not everyone in the UK wants a deal with the EU, not everyone in the EU wants a deal with the UK. Imagine how you would feel if Britain had sentenced your Grandfather to 15 years for war crimes then suddenly you were given the opportunity to try and punish the UK during the Brexit negotiations?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...in-Brexit.html

That's how it is being reported today. Any EU negotiator, even drunken Juncker himself, with perhaps the motivation for a no deal for whatever reason, is working on the side of the no deal Brexiteers. They might prefer to deal with Johnson, they get their no deal, brexiteers get their no deal, win win for all.

What the fuck, is this still payback for WW2? You've got to let it go man. It's becoming pathetic how some people in your nation define themselves over their victim role. Seriously, I would pity you if I cared a little more.

No deal is not a win except for drama queens like you.

[Floopa]

What the fuck, is this still payback for WW2? You've got to let it go man. It's becoming pathetic how some people in your nation define themselves over their victim role. Seriously, I would pity you if I cared a little more.

No deal is not a win except for drama queens like you.

it's not our fault every 30 years germany feels like taking over the world... it's happening again but this time much more silently and deadly. britain is europe's last stand.

[Noradin]

it's not our fault every 30 years germany feels like taking over the world... it's happening again but this time much more silently and deadly. britain is europe's last stand.

That's why you will move to France?

[Slant]

it's not our fault every 30 years germany feels like taking over the world... it's happening again but this time much more silently and deadly. britain is europe's last stand.

I am not affected by those taunts. Try harder. That one was pathetic.

[cubby]

Why is it Britain can't just have another vote? Precisely what is stopping that from happening?

[Floopa]

Why is it Britain can't just have another vote? Precisely what is stopping that from happening?

there was 1 vote, the public voted to leave 52 to 48 with the majority of leave votes being cast in England and Wales. then there was a snap election where the electorate overwhelmingly accepted the referendum result and 85% of votes cast in the general election were to parties who backed a hard Brexit - that is ending freedom of movement.

there doesn’t need to be any more votes on the subject. It has been decided by the will of the people to leave the eu. The only question now is how, and I think all support is now for a no deal. A new vote would be a spit in the face of democracy.

[cubby]

there was 1 vote, the public voted to leave 52 to 48 with the majority of leave votes being cast in England and Wales. then there was a snap election where the electorate overwhelmingly accepted the referendum result and 85% of votes cast in the general election were to parties who backed a hard Brexit - that is ending freedom of movement.

there doesn’t need to be any more votes on the subject. It has been decided by the will of the people to leave the eu. The only question now is how, and I think all support is now for a no deal. A new vote would be a spit in the face of democracy.

Ok buddy - get a grip. You really only have one hard piece of information with some pretty overwhelmingly shitty analysis.

Anyone else who is actually thinking want to chime in?

[Deleted]

Why is it Britain can't just have another vote? Precisely what is stopping that from happening?

What would be the point?

If you just have a vote on every issue until you get the "correct" answer, then whats the point in having the vote in the first place?

Technically, there was nothing in the referendum that was legally binding in the first place, the government could have completely ignored the results, but they didn't because it would invalidate any future referendum.

Now personally, I don't think we should have referendums, because I don't think the average person understands enough to make an informed decision which leads to votes being cast for emotional reasons, which will never lead us anywhere.

But ultimately, it isn't up to me.

[cubby]

What would be the point?

Why are you asking a question and then answering it? Is it because you really don't want to have a discussion? (see what i did there?)

If you just have a vote on every issue until you get the "correct" answer, then whats the point in having the vote in the first place?

What's your second guess?

Now personally, I don't think we should have referendums, because I don't think the average person understands enough to make an informed decision which leads to votes being cast for emotional reasons, which will never lead us anywhere.

Agreed.

[Kujako]

Why is it Britain can't just have another vote? Precisely what is stopping that from happening?

The law? No do overs. Same reason we can't just have another election to detrump the White House. Voting has consequences. Hopefully people will have learned this so they can make better choices next time.

Edit: I may be wrong on this... seems there are conflicting opinions. Seems like they shouldn't be able to just keep having elections until they get the result they want. Kind of undermines the whole point. But some analysts seem to be of the opinion that there is no legal barrier to revoting.

[cubby]

The law? No do overs. Same reason we can't just have another election to detrump the White House. Voting has consequences. Hopefully people will have learned this so they can make better choices next time.

Are you seriously trying to tell us that laws can't be repealed? And do we need to throw up some wikilinks so you can understand the difference between a law and an election?

[Deleted]

Why are you asking a question and then answering it? Is it because you really don't want to have a discussion? (see what i did there?)




What's your second guess?

Not sure why your responding with what feels like aggression, but whatever, i'll answer your previous question with clear and concise answers because that seems to be all you can understand.

Why is it Britain can't just have another vote?

We could have another vote.

Precisely what is stopping that from happening?

Absolutely nothing.

Discuss.

- - - Updated - - -

The law? No do overs. Same reason we can't just have another election to detrump the White House. Voting has consequences. Hopefully people will have learned this so they can make better choices next time.

Edit: I may be wrong on this... seems there are conflicting opinions. Seems like they shouldn't be able to just keep having elections until they get the result they want. Kind of undermines the whole point. But some analysts seem to be of the opinion that there is no legal barrier to revoting.

Referendums aren't legally binding, in essence all they are is a giant opinion poll.

Not really comparable to elections, which are binding by law.

[Deleted]

Why is it Britain can't just have another vote? Precisely what is stopping that from happening?

Nothing is stopping it except democratic values. Voting until you get the outcome you want is not really democratic. Even tough the Referndum was never binding, so they could ignore it, but I doubt the EU27 would just let the British remain after all the failed attempt at threats, without drawing their fair share of blood in return.

Britains population voted to leave. Their wish should be respected and they should be left to face the consequences.

My opinnion is that the Uk should not have been allowed into the EEC and not into the EU and brexit is a solution to a problem that should have been solved long ago. They are a Trojan Horse that brings discord. They have spend their entire existence making sure Continetal Europe stays weak and divided. Allowing such a Country into the Union was a error.

[cubby]

Not sure why your responding with what feels like aggression, but whatever, i'll answer your previous question with clear and concise answers because that seems to be all you can understand.

I sensed aggression on your part! I'm good with clear and concise answers - I hope to deliver the same.

We could have another vote.

Absolutely nothing.

Referendums aren't legally binding, in essence all they are is a giant opinion poll.

That was my thought as well. In that sense I was thinking perhaps with people seeing the full ramifications for Brexit, another one might solidify the sentiment.

Not really comparable to elections, which are binding by law.

Not sure why he isn't getting that point.

- - - Updated - - -

Nothing is stopping it except democratic values. Voting until you get the outcome you want is not really democratic.

I see this a lot from people who agree with Brexit - it's an interesting line of argument that pretty much ignores logic, reasoning, and history. Opinions change - that is what another vote would reflect. You're trying to make this some kind of indictment on democracy when in fact changing your mind in lieu of new facts is very democratic.

My opinnion is that the Uk should not have been allowed into the EEC and not into the EU and brexit is a solution to a problem that should have been solved long ago. They are a Trojan Horse that brings discord. They have spend their entire existence making sure Continetal Europe stays weak and divided. Allowing such a Country into the Union was a error.

Interesting position. I'm afraid I don't know enough to meet you intellectually on this discussion, but I am curious about your opinions. I've heard this said before but never got any real details. I would like to hear more.

(i know there is a "tone" difference between the first paragraph and the second - weird, but that's how i roll)

[Deleted]

That was my thought as well. In that sense I was thinking perhaps with people seeing the full ramifications for Brexit, another one might solidify the sentiment.

But then where do you end? What happens if we have another Referendum, with a majority to Remain, then a few months down the line something else happens with the EU, and we start pushing for another Referendum. You can't attempt to defend the results of the second Referendum after invalidating the first Referendum by holding a second one.

[Floopa]

you can't just have votes until "your side wins".

the will of the people have spoken. we're leaving the eu. it's a good outcome. finally we can take back control of immigration and maintain our sovereignty.

neoliberals and globalists still don't understand why they lost the referendum, it's quite sad really.

[cubby]

But then where do you end? What happens if we have another Referendum, with a majority to Remain, then a few months down the line something else happens with the EU, and we start pushing for another Referendum. You can't attempt to defend the results of the second Referendum after invalidating the first Referendum by holding a second one.

Your argument centers around the premise that we're not allowed to change our minds based on new information. I'm not sure you want to take that position.

- - - Updated - - -

you can't just have votes until "your side wins".

the will of the people have spoken. we're leaving the eu. it's a good outcome. finally we can take back control of immigration and maintain our sovereignty.

neoliberals and globalists still don't understand why they lost the referendum, it's quite sad really.

You have the same problem - you just have others as well so it's hard to see. Let me know when it's ok for people to consider new information and change their minds.

[Deleted]

I see this a lot from people who agree with Brexit - it's an interesting line of argument that pretty much ignores logic, reasoning, and history. Opinions change - that is what another vote would reflect. You're trying to make this some kind of indictment on democracy when in fact changing your mind in lieu of new facts is very democratic.

Interesting position. I'm afraid I don't know enough to meet you intellectually on this discussion, but I am curious about your opinions. I've heard this said before but never got any real details. I would like to hear more.

(i know there is a "tone" difference between the first paragraph and the second - weird, but that's how i roll)

I am not saying, you should not vote on a matter again, but atleast wait a few years or a decade before voting on a matter again.

On the other matter, it is a bit complicated but the rough example is.
It was a position held by De Gaulle after he voted against the UKs EEC membership. He voted no because he felt that Britain was a Trojan Horse, that would allow America to control the EEC and that the British would show chaos in order to keep a position of power and keep their traditional European rivals weakened.

Their even was a nickname for such a tactic"Ther Old Game" Even the British Comedy show Yes Minister talks about it a episode. “To create a disunited Europe.”

[Mayhem]

Interesting position. I'm afraid I don't know enough to meet you intellectually on this discussion, but I am curious about your opinions. I've heard this said before but never got any real details. I would like to hear more.

(i know there is a "tone" difference between the first paragraph and the second - weird, but that's how i roll)

You just have to look at what they told the population the EU was doing to the country and compare it to how their MEPs voted in EU parliament. People like dribble were furious about how the EU is destroying the UK steel industry just to flip flop as soon as he found out UKIP MEPs voted in favour of chinese steel imports and the UK being a part of blocking protection measures.

[Deleted]

Your argument centers around the premise that we're not allowed to change our minds based on new information. I'm not sure you want to take that position.

It doesn't centre round that at all, my argument centres around the fact that constantly flip flopping on issues will never achieve anything.

I think if you held another Referendum today, the vote would probably go for Remain, but then whats to stop a 3rd referendum happening another 6 months down the line? And what if that one goes for Leave again?

Do we just put the Brexit process on hold while we get best 2 out of 3? Should we expect the rest of Europe to wait while we constantly change our minds on an issue as big as Brexit?