This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
Stuk Top half 06 Dec 16 2.26pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by nickgusset
Facts are ignored in this day and age stuk says I'm not allowed to usePost-Truth You can use what you want. It doesn't make it any less w***y.
Optimistic as ever |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
nickgusset Shizzlehurst 06 Dec 16 2.31pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Stuk
You can use what you want. It doesn't make it any less w***y. What do you think of the fact that the referendum was advisory only, yet many many people think it was binding?
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
The White Horse 06 Dec 16 3.07pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Hoof Hearted
Hold on a minute.... the original referendum in 1975 which resulted in us joining what was the common market was accepted in good grace by those who lost the vote! Since then the previously innocuous common market has become the EU federal state. If anything has been achieved by "preposterous lies" then surely that is what has happened to the UK with our enforced membership of the EU. No one in 1975 envisaged 300,000+ EU citizens arriving in the UK each and every year causing such hardship to communities with ghettos, lack of housing, schools, hospitals, etc. As you said the ballot paper was self explanatory.... you voted to remain or leave. Leave won this time, so just like in 1975, the losers should suck it up and accept that democracy has determined our departure from the EU. No legal challenge, no 2nd referendum to ratify terms, no Parliamentary debate. Brexit means Brexit now is just the same as our joining the common market in 1975 followed the people's voting decision. I was disappointed in 1975, but I accepted it. Please have the courtesy and respect to accept the country's decision now. But if your objection is that in 1975 the government (and successive governments) implemented the verdict in a way that didn't reflect the public mood, why would you object to a referendum to check they're actually "doing Brexit right" this time? Take the issue of immigration. It's clear from the level of immigration from outside the EU that has taken place after Cameron's tens of thousands promise that somewhere the government has realised it can't actually reduce immigration without damaging the economy. Now lets assume that whatever compromise that is reached between closing our borders and free movement from Europe, the projected net immigration figure remains around a quarter of a million a year after article 50 is triggered. Or worse, imagine if free movement is completely unaffected! In that situation, with Farage/Nuttall saying that UKIP don't agree with the deal, Lib Dems saying they don't agree, Labour saying they don't agree and millions of leave voters up in arms, could you not see some merit in the country being given a veto option for the proposed deal? Or would you rather May implements a deal hardly anyone actually wants?
"The fox has his den. The bee has his hive. The stoat, has, uh... his stoat-hole... but only man chooses to make his nest in an investment opportunity.” Stewart Lee |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
steeleye20 Croydon 06 Dec 16 3.40pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by The White Horse
But if your objection is that in 1975 the government (and successive governments) implemented the verdict in a way that didn't reflect the public mood, why would you object to a referendum to check they're actually "doing Brexit right" this time? Take the issue of immigration. It's clear from the level of immigration from outside the EU that has taken place after Cameron's tens of thousands promise that somewhere the government has realised it can't actually reduce immigration without damaging the economy. Now lets assume that whatever compromise that is reached between closing our borders and free movement from Europe, the projected net immigration figure remains around a quarter of a million a year after article 50 is triggered. Or worse, imagine if free movement is completely unaffected! In that situation, with Farage/Nuttall saying that UKIP don't agree with the deal, Lib Dems saying they don't agree, Labour saying they don't agree and millions of leave voters up in arms, could you not see some merit in the country being given a veto option for the proposed deal? Or would you rather May implements a deal hardly anyone actually wants? Interesting post thanks. It does worry me generally in regard to brexit that if the PM is unable to get a deal that is advantage to us in fact may be very disadvantageous and seen to be so - that Brexiter people just desire Brexit so much that they will just want it regardless - that is a disaster to me.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Painter Croydon 06 Dec 16 3.58pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by The White Horse
But if your objection is that in 1975 the government (and successive governments) implemented the verdict in a way that didn't reflect the public mood, why would you object to a referendum to check they're actually "doing Brexit right" this time? Take the issue of immigration. It's clear from the level of immigration from outside the EU that has taken place after Cameron's tens of thousands promise that somewhere the government has realised it can't actually reduce immigration without damaging the economy. Now lets assume that whatever compromise that is reached between closing our borders and free movement from Europe, the projected net immigration figure remains around a quarter of a million a year after article 50 is triggered. Or worse, imagine if free movement is completely unaffected! In that situation, with Farage/Nuttall saying that UKIP don't agree with the deal, Lib Dems saying they don't agree, Labour saying they don't agree and millions of leave voters up in arms, could you not see some merit in the country being given a veto option for the proposed deal? Or would you rather May implements a deal hardly anyone actually wants? Have you taken the trouble to research the requirements for Non EU Nationals to come here, it's a lot tougher than you may think. There are quite a few financial requirements, that many EU Nationals that are currently coming here, would not be able satisfy. Immigration isn't a bad thing, if controlled and the right people are allowed here.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Hrolf The Ganger 06 Dec 16 3.59pm | |
---|---|
The government should not have had a referendum if they weren't going to abide by the result. Those who support the use of "small print" and court rulings to over turn it need to think about what they are really supporting. Be careful what you wish for. Those scum bags in Westminster will stop at nothing to perpetuate their careers and influence and will be very happy to see the gullible cheer them on.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Kermit8 Hevon 06 Dec 16 4.13pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger
The government should not have had a referendum if they weren't going to abide by the result. Those who support the use of "small print" and court rulings to over turn it need to think about what they are really supporting. Be careful what you wish for. Those scum bags in Westminster will stop at nothing to perpetuate their careers and influence and will be very happy to see the gullible cheer them on. The vote was taken as of June 23rd 2016. A lot of things have come to light/happened since then which which would almost certainly undermine the Brexit camp and voter numbers for them were another vote taken today. We are very fortunate there has been a delay for reality and clarity purposes.
Big chest and massive boobs |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
steeleye20 Croydon 06 Dec 16 4.23pm | |
---|---|
Without the protections and definition afforded by a written constitution, referendums, she said, sacrificed parliamentary sovereignty to political expediency. Mrs.Thatchers quote and she further supported the disparaging view of referendums made by Attlee. No more referendums thanks - stick it in the bin or call an election.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
The White Horse 06 Dec 16 5.08pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger
The government should not have had a referendum if they weren't going to abide by the result. Those who support the use of "small print" and court rulings to over turn it need to think about what they are really supporting. Be careful what you wish for. Those scum bags in Westminster will stop at nothing to perpetuate their careers and influence and will be very happy to see the gullible cheer them on. The second referendum and judicial stuff is just a red herring being used to stoke up righteous anger and sell newspapers. Neither the courts nor the second referendum would reverse Brexit, they would just dictate whether we have a parliamentary vote which is bound to pass comfortably anyway and give the opportunity to the public to reject a deal they might not like formulated after they signed a bit of a blank cheque.
"The fox has his den. The bee has his hive. The stoat, has, uh... his stoat-hole... but only man chooses to make his nest in an investment opportunity.” Stewart Lee |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Hrolf The Ganger 06 Dec 16 6.29pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Kermit8
The vote was taken as of June 23rd 2016. A lot of things have come to light/happened since then which which would almost certainly undermine the Brexit camp and voter numbers for them were another vote taken today. We are very fortunate there has been a delay for reality and clarity purposes. Utter mealy mouthed twaddle. The electorate are as dumb now as ever, so maybe we should void all election results of the past just in case someone used some hyperbole.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Hrolf The Ganger 06 Dec 16 6.34pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by The White Horse
The second referendum and judicial stuff is just a red herring being used to stoke up righteous anger and sell newspapers. Neither the courts nor the second referendum would reverse Brexit, they would just dictate whether we have a parliamentary vote which is bound to pass comfortably anyway and give the opportunity to the public to reject a deal they might not like formulated after they signed a bit of a blank cheque.
We have to send them a strong message about what backtracking will mean for them.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Kermit8 Hevon 06 Dec 16 6.46pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger
Utter mealy mouthed twaddle. The electorate are as dumb now as ever, so maybe we should void all election results of the past just in case someone used some hyperbole. This was not an election merely an opinion poll via a tick. Elections in the UK have to be taken seriously and at face value. The country's very being depends on it. Besides there will be another one along in a minute. Opinion polls/Referendums don't have to be taken too seriously They should be analysed with a measure of caution and views tweaked when necessary for the good of the nation. Playing hardline Brexit will benefit no-one except the far right and far left who will take it as some kind of approval of their twisted ideology.
Big chest and massive boobs |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Registration is now on our new message board
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.