Brexit

I suggest if they'd have said "we'll try to get a deal, but if we can't we'll leave without a deal" the result would have been different.

As Stagger says, the options were leave or remain. Obviously your choice of where to tick would have been informed by many things depending on who you are etc. I like to think of myself as reasonably middle ground in most things and the quote from Noel above is EXACTLY what I expected from the situation. I had no expectation of a deal. If we could get one, great, but I certainly did not expect one. So, my vote would not have changed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by noel

I think most of the remainers on here have either been hounded out (not wanting to mention any names here ;)), or have left you to it.

I wonder if this is good gauge of the way the public debate has gone.

I do accept the result. People voted for Brexit. This was based on the clearly stated pledges by lots of leading brexiteer politicians that this would mean leaving with a deal. If the UK can achieve this, I will accept democracy (despite thinking we're better off in the EU).

---

Given the fact that we start from a position of regulatory equivalence and that it is in the EU's economic interests to agree a deal with the UK, it should have been straight forward. But it takes two to tango, we can't force the other side to act reasonably. The EU was motivated by a desire to punish the UK and deter other potential leavers. If the referendum can be invalidated simply by the other side refusing to play ball, why would they ever have any incentive to do so?

Let's not forget that agreeing an acceptable deal has been severely hampered by Remain politicians in this country who have acted to undermine the UK's negotiating position e.g. removing the threat of no deal. Some like Tony Blair have even gone to meet with Brussels officials to encourage them to adopt a hardline.

Remain MP's justify their refusal to honour the referendum result and in many cases general election promises by saying it is only no-deal that they are opposed to. Well in that case why did they vote against May's deal? And in the unlikely event that Boris agrees a deal with the EU, why will most vote against that too?

As others have said the referendum was not dependent on whether we achieved a deal or not. The prevailing issue was one of sovereignty. "Take back control" was the Vote Leave motto. Remainers claim that leavers didn't vote for no-deal so why do they refuse to put that to the test? The Labour party's policy is to negotiate a severely watered down Brexit in name only, which they will put to a referendum where the only other choice would be Remain. As for the Liberal Democrats, their official policy is now to not even have one at but revoke article 50 completely if they get an overall majority, something they could achieve with only 35% of the vote. That's if we ever get a general election any time soon, the opposition parties are currently blocking this for fear they will lose. Plus both Jo Swinson and Caroline Lucas have said even if Leave won again in a referendum they would vote against it in parliament

I'm afraid the acceptance of democracy argument doesn't wash when you put it like this. I don't doubt your sincerity Noel but I do Remain politicians. They simply want to stay in the EU and they're not overly fussed how they achieve it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Muddy Retriever

I'm afraid the acceptance of democracy argument doesn't wash when you put it like this. I don't doubt your sincerity Noel but I do Remain politicians. They simply want to stay in the EU and they're not overly fussed how they achieve it.

---

This is such a skewed view on the actual things that happened. Have you already forgotten the DUP and the f**king ERG (including dear old Boris) “democratically” voting against Theresa May’s deal? A huge swathe of Labour and opposition MPs would have voted through Brexit yonks ago had TM done the right thing, straight after the referendum, and made the negotiation of Brexit terms with the EU an all parliament issue. Instead, because the whole damn point of this ludicrous exercise in the first place was all about, and nothing else about, the unity of the Tory party, and to reel back in their far right nutcase wing that was deserting to the UKIP, TM made the tories the party of hard bastard Brexit.

A softer more representative Brexit would have happened ages ago.

Now though with TM and now BJ turning turning and turning the screw and increasing the pressure to the max, the country is totally and utterly divided and never the twain shall meet

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stolly

This is such a skewed view on the actual things that happened. Have you already forgotten the DUP and the f**king ERG (including deal old Boris) “democratically” voting against Theresa May’s deal? A huge swathe of Labour and opposition MPs would have voted through Brexit yonks ago had TM done the right thing, straight after the referendum, and made the negotiation of Brexit terms with the EU an all parliament issue. Instead, because the whole damn point of this ludicrous exercise in the first place was all about, and nothing else about, the unity of the Tory party, and to reel back in their far right nutcase wing that was deserting to the UKIP, TM made the tories the party of hard bastard Brexit.

A softer more representative Brexit would have happened ages ago.

Now though with TM and now BJ turning turning and turning the screw and increasing the pressure to the max, the country is totally and utterly divided and never the twain shall meet

---

I thought you'd gone Stolly, you can't resist coming back. I see your commentating style remains unchanged though.

The ERG was opposed to May's deal because they didn't see it as a proper Brexit and they weren't wrong. It would have kept us in the EU's regulatory orbit and would have allowed the EU to keep us in the Customs Union. To all in intents and purposes we would still be in large parts of the EU but without any say. The Conservatives had stood on a platform of no-deal being better than a bad deal and this was a very bad deal. Yanis Varoufakis called it an agreement that only a country defeated in war would sign.

The DUP were opposed because it kept Northern Ireland not only in the Customs Union but fully in the Single Market. They would be governed by Brussels with no representation. It breached the Good Friday agreement.

Coming to Labour, the deal May negotiated was very close to what they said they wanted. It kept the UK close to the EU. Of all people they should have been pleased to vote for it if as they say they wanted to honour the result of the referendum. Except what most of them really want is to overturn the result of the referendum. The last thing they want is a deal.

Some interesting points there MR.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Muddy Retriever

...The EU was motivated by a desire to punish the UK and deter other potential leavers.

---

This is a narrative that plays into hands of those who would prefer a no-deal as it paints the EU at the bad guy. I agree partly - they need to deter other leavers, but I genuinely don't think they were motivated by a desire to punish the UK (any more than we were punishing ourselves). Teresa negotiated on the basis of her red lines, all of which the EU accommodated. It was Teresa's failure to get this deal approved by parliament that brought it down.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Muddy Retriever

Let's not forget that agreeing an acceptable deal has been severely hampered by Remain politicians in this country

---

The key word is "acceptable". Remember it was the ERG et al who cost Teresa the deal. The deal that met all the UK government's red lines.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Muddy Retriever

Remain MP's justify their refusal to honour the referendum result and in many cases general election promises by saying it is only no-deal that they are opposed to. Well in that case why did they vote against May's deal?

---

So the way I see it is: the Labour leadership were playing politics - they wanted to see the deal fail. Some rebelled and voted with Teresa May. But as I said before, the deal would have passed if it wasn't for many Tories who felt it wasn't brexit enough.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Muddy Retriever

Remainers claim that leavers didn't vote for no-deal so why do they refuse to put that to the test?

---

I genuinely don't know what you mean here. By "put that to the test", do you mean have a second referendum asking people if they support a no-deal? I can't think that's what you mean, as I suspect you'd be worried the first referendum would be overturned.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Muddy Retriever

That's if we ever get a general election any time soon, the opposition parties are currently blocking this for fear they will lose.

---

You know that's not the reason they blocked it though don't you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Muddy Retriever

I'm afraid the acceptance of democracy argument doesn't wash when you put it like this. I don't doubt your sincerity Noel but I do Remain politicians. They simply want to stay in the EU and they're not overly fussed how they achieve it.

---

I agree to a certain extent. However, I think the way things have played out has pushed many reasonable MPs to adopt a polarised position. Look at most of the conservative MPs - mainly pro-remain, but mainly voted with the government on Teresa's deal. It's only as things have shifted more towards a no-deal that some (and it's probably a minority of conservative remainers - I'd be interested to see the numbers) have split off to actively try to prevent a no-deal. Of course that only addresses the Tories. Labour have been playing politics, and the SNP and Lib Dems were openly opposed to it from the start so I definitely agree with you with regards to these.

So, we've had three or four people on here say, in response to my assertion that some people who voted to leave didn't want a no-deal, that they would still have voted the same way. And I think the implication is that "because I didn't, I know others didn't too". However, brexit is a broad church. I know people who have said they wouldn't support a no-deal even though they voted to leave. Indeed, I also know people who said, if they had their time again, they'd vote to remain. There's also a YouGov opinion poll: https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.ne...Trackers_w.pdf
that includes slightly more leavers than remainers (based on the referendum) and 49% say the UK was wrong to vote to leave, vs 40% saying the UK was right to vote to leave. What do you brexiteers make of this?

Quote:

---

What do you brexiteers make of this?

---

they'll blame it on the EU :p

Noel, the sample size was 1,628. Not 17 million. Slight difference:D

46,501,241

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wheeze

Noel, the sample size was 1,628. Not 17 million. Slight difference:D

---

Thanks Wheeze. I understand that that's how polls work.

My question was what do you make of the subgroup of people in this poll who said they voted to leave before but now think the UK was wrong to vote to leave. What do you suspect are their reasons?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by noel

The key word is "acceptable". Remember it was the ERG et al who cost Teresa the deal. The deal that met all the UK government's red lines.

---

But that was the problem, it didn't meet the red lines. They kept being breached e.g. Customs Union. The backstop meant we would need the EU's permission to leave it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by noel

I genuinely don't know what you mean here. By "put that to the test", do you mean have a second referendum asking people if they support a no-deal? I can't think that's what you mean, as I suspect you'd be worried the first referendum would be overturned.

---

I was demonstrating the hypocrisy of some Remain politicians. The reason they say that we can't leave without a deal was because it wasn't on the ballot paper. So they argue for a second referendum but then won't allow "no-deal" to be an option. So how would people chose it? Clearly it's not the lack of a democratic mandate that concerns them about "no-deal".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by noel

You know that's not the reason they blocked it though don't you?

---

Re the general election, I presume you mean they wanted to prevent a no-deal exit and ensure an extension was requested instead. But the election date was going to be on 14th October. So if they're so confident than have a general election and Labour or possibly a Labour plus others coalition would win. Then they could ask for an extension from the EU themselves. They're obviously scared that they'll lose. To be honest I'm not even sure the opposition parties will agree to an election after November 1st if the polls are still as they are at the moment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by noel

So, we've had three or four people on here say, in response to my assertion that some people who voted to leave didn't want a no-deal, that they would still have voted the same way. And I think the implication is that "because I didn't, I know others didn't too". However, brexit is a broad church. I know people who have said they wouldn't support a no-deal even though they voted to leave. Indeed, I also know people who said, if they had their time again, they'd vote to remain. There's also a YouGov opinion poll: https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.ne...Trackers_w.pdf
that includes slightly more leavers than remainers (based on the referendum) and 49% say the UK was wrong to vote to leave, vs 40% saying the UK was right to vote to leave. What do you brexiteers make of this?

---

That's just one poll but it doesn't surprise me given the last three years that people wish the whole thing hadn't happened. But if you're asking whether we should actually leave given that this was the verdict of the referendum I suspect many remainers would say yes we should because they recognise that this is how a democracy works.