This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
The Brexit Thread (LOCKED)
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
 Lyons550  Shirley 29 Mar 19 4.07pm |
  |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Maine Eagle
I agree it solves nothing at all. The 'how' is the problem. Frankly my view is the only way to solve this now is a second referendum on brexit, just dont see another way out of the deadlock now.
I appreciate it's a glib reply but I think in essence you've captured the issue in Parliament. because half of the house doesn't want to leave there is no incentive for them to work towards a solution.
The Voice of Reason In An Otherwise Mediocre World |
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
 |
| Willo South coast - west of Brighton. 29 Mar 19 4.10pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Maine Eagle
I agree it solves nothing at all. The 'how' is the problem. Frankly my view is the only way to solve this now is a second referendum on brexit, just dont see another way out of the deadlock now. The second referendum could result in a narrow victory for either side and the country will still be divided. At the end of the day, today was the day when Labour stopped Brexit for their own political purposes.They would have opposed any deal agreed by a Tory PM. Just like JRM and the ERG I am not sold on the May deal but as JRM said, half a loaf is better than no bread at all and many recognised that whilst the deal was not ideal, the alternatives were unpalatable and the deal would have delivered Brexit. Edited by Willo (29 Mar 2019 4.14pm)
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
 Hrolf The Ganger 29 Mar 19 4.14pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Maine Eagle
The second referendum would be on how to leave, along with an option to not leave at all, based on a lot more information being available now since the misinformation of 2016. That is the point, the "how to leave" cannot be agreed in parliament, so people outside of Westminster have to decide it apparently. There should also be the option to cancel the whole sh&t show on there too if you ask me. I wont pretend, I would like nothing more than to see brexit consigned to the scrap heap, I think its a huge f&cking mistake and doesnt achieve even 20% of what people originally thought in 2016. What a ridiculous piece of self serving logic. Leaving and how we leave are separate. Which part of that is difficult for you to grasp? The idea that Remainers can force a second referendum by deliberately halting the process in Parliament is equally outrageous. It's obvious that you would like to see Brexit reversed by any means. Why bother to say it? Sickening arrogance.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Maine Eagle USA 29 Mar 19 4.14pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
And what when you lose that one and parliament still reject it? If you have another referendum then there can be no objection to a best of three....best of five....best of seven. No, the original referendum result was sold to the public that the result would be respected. It isn't the public's fault that the parliament is full of hopeful gravy train remainers. Edited by Stirlingsays (29 Mar 2019 4.05pm) I have heard possibly 50 or 60 MPs in the last weeks state they will abide by whatever the outcome of a second or confirmatory vote would be. Personally I would also. If it went to leave again, with May's deal for example, then fair enough. Game over, get it done. My view is that there is too much riding on how we leave the EU to just leave any which way some group of MPs decides (not that they can even do that!) without a clear mandate on HOW to leave from the electorate. You know as well as I do that many leave voters had a very different notion from each other of what they were voting for in terms of the divorce agreement and future relationship. If there was a second referendum, it would have to be enshrined in law that the SPECIFIC option was implemented. MPs then would be legally obliged to do just that. There is not a legal obligation from the first vote as the entire topic of how to leave the EU, and how to structure the future relationship was totally omitted, as we all know. The reason the first vote is not leading to a deliverable brexit is that a simple choice of in or out is a fallacy. How you leave the EU is very important, and there are many different options. The original vote contained no specificity at all on how to leave the EU, hence the last 3 years being a total sh&t show.
Trump lost. Badly. Hahahahahahaha. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Hrolf The Ganger 29 Mar 19 4.17pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Maine Eagle
I have heard possibly 50 or 60 MPs in the last weeks state they will abide by whatever the outcome of a second or confirmatory vote would be. Personally I would also. If it went to leave again, with May's deal for example, then fair enough. Game over, get it done. My view is that there is too much riding on how we leave the EU to just leave any which way some group of MPs decides (not that they can even do that!) without a clear mandate on HOW to leave from the electorate. You know as well as I do that many leave voters had a very different notion from each other of what they were voting for in terms of the divorce agreement and future relationship. If there was a second referendum, it would have to be enshrined in law that the SPECIFIC option was implemented. MPs then would be legally obliged to do just that. There is not a legal obligation from the first vote as the entire topic of how to leave the EU, and how to structure the future relationship was totally omitted, as we all know. The reason the first vote is not leading to a deliverable brexit is that a simple choice of in or out is a fallacy. How you leave the EU is very important, and there are many different options. The original vote contained no specificity at all on how to leave the EU, hence the last 3 years being a total sh&t show. Ha ha ha. These people can't be trusted and you support the slippery scum.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Maine Eagle USA 29 Mar 19 4.18pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger
What a ridiculous piece of self serving logic. Leaving and how we leave are separate. Which part of that is difficult for you to grasp? The idea that Remainers can force a second referendum by deliberately halting the process in Parliament is equally outrageous. It's obvious that you would like to see Brexit reversed by any means. Why bother to say it? Sickening arrogance. Separate yet intrinsically linked. No deal is not a preferred option, therefore: Unless you agree how to leave, you wont leave at all. I dont see them as separated at all, but joined at the hip. I dont know if there is a concerted deliberate attempt in parliament to block brexit, but you could be right there for sure. However I think its just that they cannot agree on how to do it. That is not exactly the same thing. No need for the incendiary language, Hrolf, I am not looking for a slanging match.
Trump lost. Badly. Hahahahahahaha. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Hrolf The Ganger 29 Mar 19 4.29pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Maine Eagle
Separate yet intrinsically linked. No deal is not a preferred option, therefore: Unless you agree how to leave, you wont leave at all. I dont see them as separated at all, but joined at the hip. I dont know if there is a concerted deliberate attempt in parliament to block brexit, but you could be right there for sure. However I think its just that they cannot agree on how to do it. That is not exactly the same thing. No need for the incendiary language, Hrolf, I am not looking for a slanging match. Irrespective of whether it is deliberate or not. A section of MP's cannot be successful in overturning a democratic vote. Imagine the fall out from that. It cannot happen.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Frickin Saweet  South Cronx 29 Mar 19 4.35pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
Oh definitely.....just common sense really but they couldn't even vote for that. Computer says no. If Brexit were a football match we would have picked up the ball and sulked off at half time. no, we'd still be voting on which ball to play with and which team is playing at which end.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 29 Mar 19 4.39pm |
 |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Frickin Saweet
no, we'd still be voting on which ball to play with and which team is playing at which end.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 29 Mar 19 4.43pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Some people might say stop paying the buggers until they vote for something. At least the public can then vote them in or out on something they actually implemented.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Badger11 Beckenham 29 Mar 19 4.46pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
Some people might say stop paying the buggers until they vote for something. At least the public can then vote them in or out on something they actually implemented. Agreed, pay and performance in which case they owe the taxpayer.
One more point |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Midlands Eagle 29 Mar 19 5.12pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Maine Eagle
I have heard possibly 50 or 60 MPs in the last weeks state they will abide by whatever the outcome of a second or confirmatory vote would be. Are these 50 or 60 MPs the same ones that refuse to abide by the outcome of the original vote
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / RegisterNew users
Registration is now on our new message board
Existing users
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
Sponsors
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.