Once again , I didn't say that. Whether you think my points are valid or not is a total irrelevance to me . The few readers who read this will already have a very good snapshot of your mindset .
Isnt that the purpose of a forum. To debate peoples points of view.
Advocating uninformed voting ..genius again . You are also in favour of a 2nd referendum , presumably that would be on the basis that people voted without really knowing the consequences or likely deal ...You can't have it both ways , you cant suggest we should make everyone vote ( uninformed or not ) , but if we don't like the result , we will make them vote again .
I can.
In the two years since the referendum, it has become obvious that at the time the public was extremely ill informed about the consequences of leaving.
This evidence was not available, or discussed prior to the referendum.
This additional information did not affect me as I voted to remain. It only really affected leave voters.
How do you think that the 34 million people that voted differed from you?
How many of these 34 million voters would you consider informed?
What percentage of voters do you think are well informed?
Do you think it is a voters responsibility to inform themselves?
Can you vote in General Elections, or do you find yourself unable to assess politicians claims?
If you were Scottish, would you vote in an Independence Referendum, or would you just say "no one knows"?
Don't you think that many people have lots more knowledge regarding staying or leaving now than they could have had prior to the referendum?
What do you think about compulsory voting?
Do you think it has affected Australia in an adverse way?
If you lived in Australia, would you be happy to be paying the fines for being ill informed or just vote?
Or would you take responsibility, become informed and save the money?
Do you think that many difficulties surrounding leaving the EU have come to light since the referendum?
Full of questions , but don't want to answer any !
I just don't think you understand it. YOU posted an article in support of you being unable to vote in the referendum. The writer of this article argued on your side, by using the example I quoted earlier. However it is not possible to use the example when referring to a referendum. His justification relied on the way votes are counted in a General Election. The same method of vote counting is not used in the case of a referendum. Therefore the article did not support your case. Did you actually read it? Did you not understand it?
Lots of rumours yesterday. Labour, supported by The DUP, are threatening The Government with Contempt Proceedings, unless they immediately publish the legal advice on Brexit in full. It is rumoured that this legal advice will show that we could get stuck in The Customs Union forever, which is why they have gone back on their agreement to publish in full The Shadow Cabinet have been discussing a second referendum. The PM is contemplating a General Election in an attempt to get an overall majority in Parliament, get rid of any reliance on The DUP, and go direct to the people to get her deal through.
As far as the last bolded part , the self proclaimed Brexit expert , now proclaims to know what EVERYONE knew or thought . Your hole's getting bigger , stop digging ! Liam fox said the easiest trade deal ever. Your mate David Davis said we would have exactly the same Single Market benefits after we left. The majority of the complications have come to light since leaving. All negotiations were meant to be over by now, but they haven't even started.
Not the case at all , you didn't have to be a rocket scientist pre brexit vote , to realise that if you voted leave , then you couldn't be sure what the exact deal was going to be , as if you voted remain , what the potential benefits to the country might be long term .
With all due respect I think remain voters were those that saw the benefits that EU membership gave us, liked the status quo, and didn't want change.
Where many leave voters did so on the basis of taking back control of our money, borders, and laws, reducing immigration, sovereignty, fishing rights etc etc
I cant remember much talk of what would happen after we left, although there were claims that have turned out to be untrue. Although at the time they were made it was difficult to tell.
And it could also be levelled at Remain voters that they were/are unwilling to explore any advantages down the line of leaving .
And therein lies one of the main issues , why it was difficult to cast an informed vote .
What I have said is true. At the time of the referendum people were asked to make a binary choice. There was little talk of what the subsequent relationship might be. For instance I cant remember any mention of the Irish border, which has proved to be such a problem. Nobody was asking what would happen to the Irish border if we left The Single Market, and TH Customs Union.
So if you said I didn't vote because I wasn't sure what would happen with the Irish border, I don't think this would be a valid claim.
Similarly I don't think it is valid to cite the problems that have come to light since the referendum either.
Around 34 million people managed it, many of whom knew nothing about The Single Market, The Customs Union, the Irish border, and didn't have a clue about what our trading relationship with the EU might be like.
Once again , I didn't say that. Whether you think my points are valid or not is a total irrelevance to me . The few readers who read this will already have a very good snapshot of your mindset .
Advocating uninformed voting ..genius again . You are also in favour of a 2nd referendum , presumably that would be on the basis that people voted without really knowing the consequences or likely deal ...You can't have it both ways , you cant suggest we should make everyone vote ( uninformed or not ) , but if we don't like the result , we will make them vote again .
How could anyone have had a really informed view of the deal we were likely to get, when 30 months later we still haven't got a clue?
Brexit: Support for Theresa May's deal seems to be shrinking
But her efforts on all of those important discussions may prove entirely irrelevant if, in the next nine days, she can't persuade enough of her colleagues at home to come on board. Because support for the prime minister's Brexit compromise seems to be shrinking, rather than growing.
Brexit: What will happen if MPs reject Theresa May's deal?
It feels like Westminster is tumbling towards a political crisis without modern precedent. On Tuesday 11 December, the House of Commons will conclude five days of debate with a vote on a government motion to approve the EU withdrawal agreement and accompanying political declaration. The terms of the UK's departure from the EU.
Nine in 10 companies say Brexit has made it harder to find staff
Nine in 10 businesses say Brexit has affected their ability to recruit and train the staff they needed this year, a survey by the Confederation of British Industry (CBI) found
£711bn of assets tipped to leave London for Frankfurt due to Brexit
London is expected to lose a mammoth 800 billion euro (£711 billion) of assets as lenders shift operations to Frankfurt in preparation for Brexit. Frankfurt Main Finance, the German city’s lobby group, said 30 out of 37 financial institutions which have applied to the European Central Bank for new licences, or to extend existing ones, have chosen Frankfurt for their European headquarters
I think I speak for the Forum (all 10 of us ) when I say that this thread needs fresh ideas. It was bad enough when the 2 of you were attacking 1 another, but now the prospect of the 2 of you getting a room and debating in versus out is too terrible to contemplate!
My thoughts are:-
1. It is rarely a good idea to let the people vote in referenda; 2. The campaign was appalling on both sides, not only with barefaced lies but a total failure to address any of the issues; 3. If economics were the only yardstick, then better to remain, not least because our trade policies have been allied there for the last 45 years; 4. Trade is not the only issue here-we are talking about European Union, not a Common Market; 5. Rightly or wrongly, the people have spoken-we have to leave, regardless of my own views. We have always been geographically and economically on the edge of Europe, with a level of mutual distrust. We can debate Norway vs Canada all day, but we have to leave, or democracy just died in our country; 6. There is no time for a second (or more accurately third) vote, just like there is no time for an election or for Lord Snooty to start negotiations all over again; 7. It really is time this country moved on, did a deal whereby May agreed to step down in return for people supporting this agreement, and provide business with legal certainty
Rant over-can always spot a man who just lost DYMs at 1.10/2.20/3.30 when got decent streaks going...
First agreement of the day .
How could you debate it, when you cant answer a single question.
Second agreement of the day , problem is Haysie would have everyone vote , regardless of this.
Only if we lived in Australia
We have all read leave politicians and supporters stress it's not just about economics .
What is it about for you then?
Theresa May has pretty much ruled out a " norway style " option .
The Norway option includes Freedom of Movement, and doesn't solve the Irish border problem. but I am certain you would be aware of this.
That still won't stop Haysie from banging his drum , even up to and probably after receiving his telegram .
Moving on becomes more difficult as the hole gets deeper.
Once again , I didn't say that. Whether you think my points are valid or not is a total irrelevance to me . The few readers who read this will already have a very good snapshot of your mindset .
Isnt that the purpose of a forum. To debate peoples points of view.
Advocating uninformed voting ..genius again . You are also in favour of a 2nd referendum , presumably that would be on the basis that people voted without really knowing the consequences or likely deal ...You can't have it both ways , you cant suggest we should make everyone vote ( uninformed or not ) , but if we don't like the result , we will make them vote again .
I can.
In the two years since the referendum, it has become obvious that at the time the public was extremely ill informed about the consequences of leaving.
This evidence was not available, or discussed prior to the referendum.
This additional information did not affect me as I voted to remain. It only really affected leave voters.
How do you think that the 34 million people that voted differed from you?
How many of these 34 million voters would you consider informed?
What percentage of voters do you think are well informed?
Do you think it is a voters responsibility to inform themselves?
Can you vote in General Elections, or do you find yourself unable to assess politicians claims?
If you were Scottish, would you vote in an Independence Referendum, or would you just say "no one knows"?
Don't you think that many people have lots more knowledge regarding staying or leaving now than they could have had prior to the referendum?
What do you think about compulsory voting?
Do you think it has affected Australia in an adverse way?
If you lived in Australia, would you be happy to be paying the fines for being ill informed or just vote?
Or would you take responsibility, become informed and save the money?
Do you think that many difficulties surrounding leaving the EU have come to light since the referendum?
Full of questions , but don't want to answer any !
May warned of ‘historic’ battle as opposition parties unite to demand release of Brexit legal advice
Theresa May has been warned she is on course for a "historic constitutional row" unless the government releases its full legal advice on the Brexit deal. Labour said it is ready to combine with other opposition parties to start proceedings for contempt of Parliament unless the legal opinion of Attorney General Geoffrey Cox is published in full. The DUP - which props up the Conservative government in the commons - was said to be ready to sign a joint letter with other parties to Speaker John Bercow on Monday unless ministers back down. It potentially represents another hurdle for Ms May to overcome as she struggles to win backing for her deal in the crucial commons vote on 11 December. The latest row erupted row erupted as it was reported Mr Cox - who is due to make a statement to the commons on Monday - had warned the UK could be tied to the EU customs union "indefinitely" through the Northern Ireland "backstop". The Sunday Times said in a letter sent last month to cabinet ministers, he advised the only way out of the backstop - designed to prevent the return of a hard border with the Republic - once it was invoked was to sign a new trade deal, a process which could take years. "The protocol would endure indefinitely," he is reported to have written The letter was said to be so sensitive that ministers were given numbered copies to read which they were not allowed to take from the room afterwards. Former Brexit secretary Dominic Raab - who quit last month over the withdrawal agreement - said the legal position was clear. "The backstop will last indefinitely until it is superseded by the treaty setting out our future relationship, unless the EU allows us to exit," he told The Sunday Times.
Andrew Marr just said that the Treasury analysis of the PMs deal showed that every viewer of his programme would be £1100 per year worse off. You might be ok though, if you missed the programme.
Unless of course he meant every person in the country, and not even the average person.
Comments
I used to enjoy spam sandwiches, but I find it too expensive these days.
I didn’t think these links were allowed here, may be wrong, best to ask the people who are busy in Manchester at present.
You never have been able to.
dobiesdraw said:
I just don't think you understand it.
YOU posted an article in support of you being unable to vote in the referendum.
The writer of this article argued on your side, by using the example I quoted earlier.
However it is not possible to use the example when referring to a referendum.
His justification relied on the way votes are counted in a General Election.
The same method of vote counting is not used in the case of a referendum.
Therefore the article did not support your case.
Did you actually read it?
Did you not understand it?
Labour, supported by The DUP, are threatening The Government with Contempt Proceedings, unless they immediately publish the legal advice on Brexit in full.
It is rumoured that this legal advice will show that we could get stuck in The Customs Union forever, which is why they have gone back on their agreement to publish in full
The Shadow Cabinet have been discussing a second referendum.
The PM is contemplating a General Election in an attempt to get an overall majority in Parliament, get rid of any reliance on The DUP, and go direct to the people to get her deal through.
As far as the last bolded part , the self proclaimed Brexit expert , now proclaims to know what EVERYONE knew or thought . Your hole's getting bigger , stop digging !
Liam fox said the easiest trade deal ever.
Your mate David Davis said we would have exactly the same Single Market benefits after we left.
The majority of the complications have come to light since leaving.
All negotiations were meant to be over by now, but they haven't even started.
Advocating uninformed voting ..genius again . You are also in favour of a 2nd referendum , presumably that would be on the basis that people voted without really knowing the consequences or likely deal ...You can't have it both ways , you cant suggest we should make everyone vote ( uninformed or not ) , but if we don't like the result , we will make them vote again .
How could anyone have had a really informed view of the deal we were likely to get, when 30 months later we still haven't got a clue?
But her efforts on all of those important discussions may prove entirely irrelevant if, in the next nine days, she can't persuade enough of her colleagues at home to come on board.
Because support for the prime minister's Brexit compromise seems to be shrinking, rather than growing.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46415574
It feels like Westminster is tumbling towards a political crisis without modern precedent.
On Tuesday 11 December, the House of Commons will conclude five days of debate with a vote on a government motion to approve the EU withdrawal agreement and accompanying political declaration. The terms of the UK's departure from the EU.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46320368
The minister who resigned over Theresa May's Brexit strategy says another referendum may be the only option if MPs reject the deal.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46413370
Nine in 10 businesses say Brexit has affected their ability to recruit and train the staff they needed this year, a survey by the Confederation of British Industry (CBI) found
https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/nine-10-companies-brexit-made-123500705.html
London is expected to lose a mammoth 800 billion euro (£711 billion) of assets as lenders shift operations to Frankfurt in preparation for Brexit.
Frankfurt Main Finance, the German city’s lobby group, said 30 out of 37 financial institutions which have applied to the European Central Bank for new licences, or to extend existing ones, have chosen Frankfurt for their European headquarters
https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/711bn-assets-tipped-leave-london-104611087.html
Moving on becomes more difficult as the hole gets deeper.
What do you think will happen next?
Theresa May has been warned she is on course for a "historic constitutional row" unless the government releases its full legal advice on the Brexit deal.
Labour said it is ready to combine with other opposition parties to start proceedings for contempt of Parliament unless the legal opinion of Attorney General Geoffrey Cox is published in full.
The DUP - which props up the Conservative government in the commons - was said to be ready to sign a joint letter with other parties to Speaker John Bercow on Monday unless ministers back down.
It potentially represents another hurdle for Ms May to overcome as she struggles to win backing for her deal in the crucial commons vote on 11 December.
The latest row erupted row erupted as it was reported Mr Cox - who is due to make a statement to the commons on Monday - had warned the UK could be tied to the EU customs union "indefinitely" through the Northern Ireland "backstop".
The Sunday Times said in a letter sent last month to cabinet ministers, he advised the only way out of the backstop - designed to prevent the return of a hard border with the Republic - once it was invoked was to sign a new trade deal, a process which could take years.
"The protocol would endure indefinitely," he is reported to have written
The letter was said to be so sensitive that ministers were given numbered copies to read which they were not allowed to take from the room afterwards.
Former Brexit secretary Dominic Raab - who quit last month over the withdrawal agreement - said the legal position was clear.
"The backstop will last indefinitely until it is superseded by the treaty setting out our future relationship, unless the EU allows us to exit," he told The Sunday Times.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/brexit/may-warned-of-‘historic’-battle-as-opposition-parties-unite-to-demand-release-of-brexit-legal-advice/ar-BBQm2w8?ocid=spartandhp
You might be ok though, if you missed the programme.
Unless of course he meant every person in the country, and not even the average person.