Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
Post Info TOPIC: EU Referendum - how did you vote ?
EU Referendum - how did you vote ? [30 vote(s)]

Voted Remain
60.0%
Voted Leave
26.7%
Spoiled Ballot
3.3%
Didn't Vote
10.0%


Tennis legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 26080
Date:
RE: EU Referendum - how did you vote ?


Sim wrote:
AliBlahBlah wrote:

Blob, I fear you're right. I hope you're wrong.

As a silver lining, I know a lot of folks here are partial to the odd flutter, a cheeky £10 today on a Trump third term (yes, I do mean third, not second) might be a worthwhile punt.


 Not quite sure why you would bet on a third term for Trump? Even if the US changed their laws to allow this he is already the oldest president to take office. In 8 years time he will be 78. 


And why should that put off such a truly great man put on this earth so we can surely all benefit from his true greatness, modesty and humility. Age is no barrier to greatness  

Incompetence might be, it's going to be a bit of a ride ... 



__________________


Grand Slam Champion

Status: Offline
Posts: 4853
Date:

indiana wrote:
Sim wrote:
AliBlahBlah wrote:

Blob, I fear you're right. I hope you're wrong.

As a silver lining, I know a lot of folks here are partial to the odd flutter, a cheeky £10 today on a Drumpf third term (yes, I do mean third, not second) might be a worthwhile punt.


 Not quite sure why you would bet on a third term for Drumpf? Even if the US changed their laws to allow this he is already the oldest president to take office. In 8 years time he will be 78. 


And why should that put off such a truly great man put on this earth so we can surely all benefit from his true greatness, modesty and humility. Age is no barrier to greatness  

Incompetence might be, it's going to be a bit of a ride ... 


And, Trump's father lived to 94 and he had worse rage issues than even Donny, driving up that stress and blood pressure.
Either way, you can get very strong odds because of the combination of these factors.



__________________


Tennis legend

Status: Online
Posts: 25931
Date:

So, the Labour party have finally (finally!) taken the bull by the horns and laid down a clear policy on Brexit.

Singles market. Customs union. Free movement. On a transitional and maybe permanent basis.

Shame they couldn't convey a clear message at the time of the referendum. But we are where we are.

With the Tory party just going from shameful bad to shameful worse....

Now if only Mr Corbyn would vanish in a puff of smoke, the party would be quite electable.

__________________


Tennis legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 26080
Date:

So what are they actually suggesting we leave? And I was reading somewhere that even the government imagines much ( I think indeed most ) of the general European legislation to basically remain in place if redrafted into British legislation. Labour would naturally be moreso inclined, particularly regarding employment legislation.

Don't get me wrong, I voted to remain and I would like pretty much what Labour are talking about. But the rather annoying fact is that the majority did vote to leave albeit on the back of shocking campaigns from both sides in different ways. And to be fair many were voting against some of these specifics.

Indeed a shame that Labour as a party couldn't have added much more coherent thoughts at the time of the referendum to help explain what was good about the EU instead of us just being so told / lectured by the Tory remainers about what would be so bad if we left.



-- Edited by indiana on Sunday 27th of August 2017 12:52:24 PM

__________________


Tennis legend

Status: Online
Posts: 25931
Date:

Absolutely. We'll be still part of it all but without a voice. Brilliant.
And, from a legal point of view, the laws simply cannot be redrafted in time (or even within the next ten or so years) - it's a logistical impossibility - so they will have to be replicated. Brilliant again.

And not to mention that the papers STILL seem to think that that the ECJ is the same as the European Court of Human Rights - many of their complaints/anti-EU arguments are actually against ECHR decisions. Which we will still be 100% bound by, as the ECHR has nothing to do with the EU, being founded on a completely different treaty and thinking, well before the EU was even thought of.

But still well done to the Labour Party

__________________


Tennis legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 26080
Date:

I kept adding waffle as I got on a roll even after you posted, CD. But I think that's my final edited version for now.

__________________


All-time great

Status: Offline
Posts: 5175
Date:

Coup Droit wrote:


Now if only Mr Corbyn would vanish in a puff of smoke, the party would be quite electable.


 You're not joking are you.  I just don't get it.........  many people still do not like Jeremy Corbyn.  Fortunately enough do though.

 

 



__________________


Tennis legend

Status: Online
Posts: 25931
Date:

Julia Carrot wrote:
Coup Droit wrote:


Now if only Mr Corbyn would vanish in a puff of smoke, the party would be quite electable.


 You're not joking are you.  I just don't get it.........  many people still do not like Jeremy Corbyn.  Fortunately enough do though


 No, I'm not joking. But it's only my opinion, a teeny drop in the ocean. It's not a question of liking him or not. I think he really lacks intelligence (and I'm not talking about the two Es at A level) and is dangerous. But I think May is a narrow-minded, dangerous piece of work too. So it's party-neutral smile



__________________


Tennis legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 12744
Date:

I see that over the last couple of days, there has been a big push from the Remain side for a second vote. I am not really sure what they are trying to achieve by this.  They are not calling it a second referendum but saying it is a vote on the final deal. I am a self confessed Remainer, but this post is not about remain or leave, but more about the practicalities of structuring a second vote.

So the idea is, we are going to have a vote on the final deal. What is put on the ballot paper ? Is it, "Do we accept the deal - Yes or No". Here-in lies the problem. If we vote no, what then ? Does that mean we leave without a deal ? For many people who want to vote No, that could be considered an even worse option. Does it mean we go back to try and get a better deal ? Well the EU won't let us drag this on for ever. Does it mean we stay in ? That would make this a second referendum in all but name and we can't have that, can we.

Another option might be to put 3 options on the ballot.

Accept the deal
Reject the deal and leave
Stay

This would never be accepted by those wanting to leave as it would split their vote and give the Remainers an unfair advantage and would again be considered a second referendum. So this isn't going to happen.

Maybe we split the vote into two stages.  Firstly a straight "Yes or No" on accepting the deal.  If the vote is No, then we have a second (or is it now a third) vote, which is a straight fight between Stay or Leave without a deal.  However, this is unlikely to work either.  When we have the initial straight Yes or No on accepting the deal, the No vote would be supported by the strange bedfellows of hard line Brexiteers who just want to walk away and Remainers.  Each would be voting for the same thing but for polar opposite reasons.

So my question to those fellow Remainers is - How would you structure this second vote without making it a second referendum ?  After all, that is what you say you are trying to do.

I am sure many would argue that the democratic decision to leave has been taken.  That leaves it with a vote on "Accept the Deal" or "Leave without a Deal". As I remainer, that would leave me trying to pick the lesser of two evils - or not as the case may be.  Because given that I am an expat that has lived abroad for over 15 years, I can't vote anyway.  So why worry at all.



__________________


Club Coach

Status: Offline
Posts: 660
Date:

I think the Remainers pushing a vote on the final deal aren't calling it a second referendum because obviously the response would be "why do we need a second one"? It looks more democratic to say that you are putting the terms of departure to the people. But as you note, there is no way that the EU would accept the UK coming back and trying to negotiate new terms, so it would have to be a two stage vote (which could be done on one day, and one ballot paper) as you set out. I don't think that the problem you set out would be that much of a difficulty, we have people voting the same way for very different reasons already.

I don't think the second referendum will work for a more fundamental reason, if it did result in the UK remaining, then it would leave about half the country incandescently angry and would poison the well of political discourse for decades. I think that we have to suck up the (deeply misguided) decision to leave, witness the disaster that it results in, and hopefully rejoin in 15-20 years time with a political culture less blighted by lying propaganda sheets owned by billionaires in tax havens.

__________________
«First  <  16 7 8 | Page of 8  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.

Tweet this page Post to Digg Post to Del.icio.us


Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse
Powered by ActiveBoard