advertisement


Brexit: a re-vote

C

Chilliboy13

pfm Member
What do you think would be the outcome of a re-vote today?.... now we know the true (as far as possible given no-one seems really to know jack) and non hyperbolied utter shit ahead as opposed to the web of half truths, deciet & outright lies pumped pre vote... personally, I think it would be an overwhelming `stay`.

Maybe it`s time for politicians to grow a pair and say we F`d up. Sorry. We`ll do a re-vote and the toss pots at the vanguard feck off.... where we`re going doesn`t look anything as `good` as where we were pre the `Camble` that back fired.

What say yea?
 
1. I think the outcome of a second vote would be narrowly in favour of ‘remain’ - probably another 52/48.

2. Yes, politicians should grow a pair but there should be no second vote. The referendum result should be annulled and they should make the decision for us. This is a representative democracy and that is their job.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PsB
We haven't got there yet IMO. Things need to get worse still before they will be past tipping point for a huge number of people who voted leave.

If the negotiations don't get the go ahead to move on to the trade agreement stage within the next week, maybe we'll be there.
 
The numpties in the sticks still won`t have worked out why brexit is a really bad idea so the result would be much the same. (yes, I know I upset people by saying this in a previous thread but the point remains).
 
There are a number of problems with this. One big one is: can invocation of Article 50 be reversed unilaterally by the UK?

Opinion is divided on this. The guy that wrote it thinks so, but having read A50 I can't see why he thinks that, and the EU view seems to be the same as mine.

There is no problem if the EU agrees with us to reverse it, of course. Many in the EU would undoubtedly breathe a sigh of relief, but have we caused sufficient annoyance that there would be a desire, amongst some at least, to extract a price for our indecision? For example, would we have to give up the rebate, or certain vetoes?

If we have learned anything from the original referendum, we ought to have learned that we need to be clear about what each answer actually means before we vote.
 
Like above, it's too early.

People who are less interested in politics need to see real consequences from their decision such a major car manufacturer decamping to the EU or a family member losing their job before it will dawn on them that things are not going too well.

We're a long way off from that, IMO.
 
Marchbanks said:
1. I think the outcome of a second vote would be narrowly in favour of ‘remain’ - probably another 52/48.

2. Yes, politicians should grow a pair but there should be no second vote. The referendum result should be annulled and they should make the decision for us. This is a representative democracy and that is their job.
Click to expand...

Yes, I don't understand why they don't. All perfectly legal and in the national interest. And by a different government and PM from the ones that held the referendum.
 
glancaster said:
There are a number of problems with this. One big one is: can invocation of Article 50 be reversed unilaterally by the UK?

Opinion is divided on this. The guy that wrote it thinks so, but having read A50 I can't see why he thinks that, and the EU view seems to be the same as mine.
Click to expand...

If article 50 cannot be revoked we are stuffed. The EU wouldn’t let us back in without committing to the Euro and, although my own economics education stopped at ‘O’-level, I’ve read Varoufakis’ book and his argument against the Euro unless there is political union makes sense to me.
 
Another problem is: we won't be able to assess the true effects of Brexit until some time after we have left. By which time it will be too late to reverse Article 50, we'll be talking about re-entry under Article 49. Might still be relatively painless, but again it depends on the feeling within the EU towards us, and on how far we have diverged from the EU rules (the 'acquis') in the meantime. It could be very painful indeed, or even impossible - the modern equivalent of De Gaulle's 'non'.

Until the moment we leave we are seeing not the effects of Brexit, but the effects of economic uncertainty, and of people's ideas of what Brexit would be like. They might be right, of course, they might even be underestimating the downsides, or be powerful enough to create a self-fulfilling prophecy, but we should bear in mind that the people with economic power are mostly Remainers.
 
Yesterday I placed a bet on the 3.15 race at Kempton Park. My horse was winning the race right up until the last furlong when I was pipped at the post by the eventual winner. This just isn't fair or democratic and I demand the race be re-run until my horse wins !
 
It's too late either way. We have given up all the benefits we had. To rejoin we would have to negotiate but that will inevitably mean a worse position than before we left and humiliation.
Personally I just want to get on with it, take the short term pain and start looking to the future.
Regards another vote I think today would be a bigger win for brexit. Most people haven't felt much pain in reality, for those where immigration was the issue we have seen a drop and in their minds it is working, the further expansion by the EU into a single nation announced post brexit will have compounded such views and the overall perception of how the EU has negotiated will play into the mindset of those voting brexit.
 
HydeLea said:
Yesterday I placed a bet on the 3.15 race at Kempton Park. My horse was winning the race right up until the last furlong when I was pipped at the post by the eventual winner. This just isn't fair or democratic and I demand the race be re-run until my horse wins !
Click to expand...

Bad luck, but you should have laid it off in-play! Bit of a schoolboy error. Do you have a Betfair account? I can give you a basic grounding, but this probably isn’t the right thread.
 
glancaster said:
There are a number of problems with this. One big one is: can invocation of Article 50 be reversed unilaterally by the UK?

Opinion is divided on this. The guy that wrote it thinks so, but having read A50 I can't see why he thinks that, and the EU view seems to be the same as mine.

There is no problem if the EU agrees with us to reverse it, of course.
Click to expand...

Various EU bigwigs have said that Article 50 can be reversed very easily. The UK just needs to stop to the process. Even David Davis, the OP and others, should be able to understand that, unless racism makes them deaf.

Jack
 
What has racism got to do with it?

Do you think the EU would let us reverse article 50 and everything go back to normal? Thanks madame may, welcome back! No hard feeling
 
HydeLea said:
Yesterday I placed a bet on the 3.15 race at Kempton Park. My horse was winning the race right up until the last furlong when I was pipped at the post by the eventual winner. This just isn't fair or democratic and I demand the race be re-run until my horse wins !
Click to expand...

You won. Get over it.
 
jackbarron said:
Various EU bigwigs have said that Article 50 can be reversed very easily. The UK just needs to stop to the process. Even David Davis and the OP should be able to understand that, unless racism makes them deaf.

Jack
Click to expand...

There are lots of big wigs in the EU, Jack. It isn't clear they have a consistent view on this right now. The comments I have seen were broadly welcoming of the idea, but some time back, and non-specific as to the price of a reversal. As a second referendum or other attempt to reverse A50 by the UK seems unlikely at this point, and it could be seen as an interference in UK politics, I can understand why they are not talking about it much.

I don't see any evidence that either David Davis or the OP are racist, by the way. That seems a rather lazy characterisation, to put it mildly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top