Brexit the economy and house prices part 6

mrginge

I hear what Phil is saying, let’s just break it down so it’s easier for others to understand -

Xenophobic xenophobic xenophobic xenophobic xenophobic racist xenophobic xenophobic xenophobic thick racist xenophobic xenophobic Xenophobia xenophobic xenophobic xenophobic thick moron racist idiot democracy

ukcarper

Daniel54 wrote: »

You appear to misunderstand how our democracy works.

Once an MP is elected,they represent all their constituents,not just those who voted for them

It is incumbent upon Parliament to recognise the 16m plus votes in the referendum

That they have chosen not to do so is the reason I am out streets in protest,My vote has been disenfranchised as a result of Government interpretation of the result.

I think it's you and phill that don't understand
1. this was not a general election it was a binary choice
2. It is the responsibility of Parliament to represent everybody but you don't do that by ignoring the wishes of the majority.

ukcarper

phillw wrote: »

I think you have a blinkered view. People don't want to be labelled xenophobic, so they pretend they aren't while saying they don't want to be ruled by foreigners.

We aren't "ruled" by them, there is a democratic process that all countries are involved with.

If you hate being part of that democratic process because they are foreigners, then you are xenophobic. Fact, end of, etc. All you're doing is normalising xenophobia.

That might be the new normal, but I'm not going along with it. You can choose to, I respect myself too much.



Hasn't it been pre-rejected by our British overlords too? And the DUP are looking likely to collapse the government.

You just can't see can you so decide to label brexit voters as xenophobic and racist. Not wanting to be subject to laws that you have virtually no influence in changing is not hating foreign people the fact that you can't see that tells us quite a bit about your prejudice.

Enterprise_1701C

Daniel54 wrote: »

You appear to misunderstand how our democracy works.

Once an MP is elected,they represent all their constituents,not just those who voted for them

It is incumbent upon Parliament to recognise the 16m plus votes in the referendum

That they have chosen not to do so is the reason I am out streets in protest,My vote has been disenfranchised as a result of Government interpretation of the result.

They have recognised those votes, they have also recognised that there was a majority for leave.

Herzlos

cogito wrote: »

What evidence? A few opinion polls? Like the ones that predicted a vote for remain in 2016?

As I said, opinion polls aren't great but they are the best source we have here and they've all been showing the same trend - support has been moving from leave to remain despite whatever bias and sample size has been used. Do you have any evidence to counter it?

You've heard about the shy tories who when approached for their voting intentions claim to be don't knows or something else. What about shy leavers who deny their intentions because they are sick of being labelled ignorant racist bigots but in the secrecy of the polling booth put their cross in the leave box.

Or the shy Remainers who don't want to be labelled as traitors? We all know polls are only as good as the people polling, but again with a large enough sample size that should cancel out, and it's the best we've got.

If you want another referendum, bring it on.

That's all I'm asking for. We need one so that we can hopefully settle this and move on with something constructive.

buglawton wrote: »

I'm baffled. May is on TV still promulgating the Chequers plan.
Yet it's been outright pre-rejected by our EU overlords!

You're assuming that Mays plan is to make a deal with the EU, and not just virtue signal to the Eurosceptics. If you look at her behaviour as that of someone trying to short Sterling for gain, then it becomes a lot clearer.

ukcarper wrote: »

I think it's you and phill that don't understand
1. this was not a general election it was a binary choice
2. It is the responsibility of Parliament to represent everybody but you don't do that by ignoring the wishes of the majority.

But it wasn't a majority. They can't do something vague and damaging to everyone because a third of them voted for it. They need to consider the best interests of everyone including the Brexiteers, and if that means something other than you want then that's just democracy.

ukcarper wrote: »

the majority wanted an end to FOM and or to stop us being under jurisdiction of EU court so being subject to both of those will not satisfy any.

Where's your evidence for this? If you can prove it, then that'd settle things pretty well.


Or are you going to say that because they voted Yes to "Should Britain leave the EU?" that means FoM, CU, SM and ECJ? Leave was sold on a platform of cake and eat it. We can have all the benefits of being in the EU, but without having to send any money to the EU, respect their courts or let any foreigners in.

ukcarper

Herzlos wrote: »

As I said, opinion polls aren't great but they are the best source we have here and they've all been showing the same trend - support has been moving from leave to remain despite whatever bias and sample size has been used. Do you have any evidence to counter it?



Or the shy Remainers who don't want to be labelled as traitors? We all know polls are only as good as the people polling, but again with a large enough sample size that should cancel out, and it's the best we've got.


That's all I'm asking for. We need one so that we can hopefully settle this and move on with something constructive.








You're assuming that Mays plan is to make a deal with the EU, and not just virtue signal to the Eurosceptics. If you look at her behaviour as that of someone trying to short Sterling for gain, then it becomes a lot clearer.





But it wasn't a majority. They can't do something vague and damaging to everyone because a third of them voted for it. They need to consider the best interests of everyone including the Brexiteers, and if that means something other than you want then that's just democracy.




Where's your evidence for this? If you can prove it, then that'd settle things pretty well.


Or are you going to say that because they voted Yes to "Should Britain leave the EU?" that means FoM, CU, SM and ECJ? Leave was sold on a platform of cake and eat it. We can have all the benefits of being in the EU, but without having to send any money to the EU, respect their courts or let any foreigners in.

https://whatukthinks.org/eu/questions/if-there-was-a-referendum-on-britains-membership-of-the-eu-how-would-you-vote-2/

A majority voted for leave the people who didn't vote are irrelevant we don't know what they though and if they did have strong thoughts they should have voted.

cogito

There isn't going to be a referendum if only because there isn't time to organise one before the leaving date. There is no constitutional provision for referenda in the UK so an Act of Parliament would be required in the first place.

At the point when one got before MPs, what do you think would happen? Leave supporting MPs would take a leaf out of the remainers book and use delaying tactics and subject every line to scrutiny and probably mount a few legal challenges. I can imagine the howls of outrage from the remain camp if it ever happened.

StevieJ

ukcarper wrote: »

I think it's you and phill that don't understand
1. this was not a general election it was a binary choice
2. It is the responsibility of Parliament to represent everybody but you don't do that by ignoring the wishes of the majority.

We could have followed the Norway model, this would satisfy the binary choice in the referendum and also appease the 48% who voted to remain. The fact that the referendum was so close may suggest that this was what the majority actually voted for, as there was no description of what 'post brexit' would look like.


So what did BoJo have to say about it after the Brexit vote?

“It is said that those who voted Leave were mainly driven by anxieties about immigration,” Mr. Johnson wrote. “I do not believe that is so.”
Suggesting that he wants to keep some kind of open flow of people across the border with Europe, Mr. Johnson wrote, “British people will still be able to go and work in the E.U.; to live; to travel; to study; to buy homes and to settle down.”
Not only that, he asserted, “There will continue to be free trade, and access to the single market.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/29/world/europe/boris-johnson-brexit-leaders-eu.html

ukcarper

StevieJ wrote: »

We could have followed the Norway model, this would satisfy the binary choice in the referendum and also appease the 48% who voted to remain. The fact that the referendum was so close may suggest that this was what the majority actually voted for, as there was no description of what 'post brexit' would look like.


So what did BoJo have to say about it after the Brexit vote?

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/29/world/europe/boris-johnson-brexit-leaders-eu.html

Doesn't the Norway plan mean accepting FOM and EU courts which would not appease the 52% who vote leave.

I

Herzlos

ukcarper wrote: »

https://whatukthinks.org/eu/questions/if-there-was-a-referendum-on-britains-membership-of-the-eu-how-would-you-vote-2/

A majority voted for leave the people who didn't vote are irrelevant we don't know what they though and if they did have strong thoughts they should have voted.

That shows that since last July, more people have wanted to Remain than Leave. Was that the point you wanted to make? Are you actually agreeing with me?