Brexit

[CL]

I find this rabid hatred hard to understand.
I would ...

Oh what's the point.

I agree with you Graham should tone down his malice.

[Wheeze]

Look, this has been one of the few places where it has been possible to have a non-rabid, non-inflammatory exchange of views. I, for one, have appreciated that. Lets keep it that way. Snide digs or anything else would undermine this, so leave it out....please.

End game is a time for clear heads and open eyes. The speed with which the EU deal was ratified was fascinating. Was there a party line or something? And if so, who was the prime mover? Real agreement on the deal obviously occurred some time before and the Summit at the weekend was just window dressing.

[Stagger]

Why not let Donald negotiate the deal for us?

We could then become the 51st state.

Is that politically correct?

PS no confidence in and of Westminster lot to negotiate a good deal☹

[Wheeze]

Great Idea Stagger!

[Stagger]

May OUT

[shaunaneto]

May OUT? How many times have we heard “she can’t go on” so far? Ive honestly lost count. I’d guess the right people want her to stay on.

Anyway, are we all ready to dismiss/jump on today’s report as best fits our pre existing opinions 🤔🙃

Certainly nothing at all convenient about the timing, like the other report claiming no deal will cost £140bn a year and Mays £100bn a year I’m sure there’s no attempt at all to nudge public opinion to suit someone’s agenda.

[Mike T]

"You may not know what you were voting for ..... we cannot keep having referenda until you get the answer you want."
Who should decide? Certainly no individual, surely.
Therefore we ask "The People" two questions - do you want a second referendum, and if you do, would you vote in or out of the EU.
These can be asked at the same time - if more than 50% want a second referendum, then the answer to the second question counts, otherwise it doesn't.

[Llani Boy]

"You may not know what you were voting for ..... we cannot keep having referenda until you get the answer you want."
Who should decide? Certainly no individual, surely.
Therefore we ask "The People" two questions - do you want a second referendum, and if you do, would you vote in or out of the EU.
These can be asked at the same time - if more than 50% want a second referendum, then the answer to the second question counts, otherwise it doesn't.

"The People" have already been asked. And they voted OUT. Get over it!

[shaunaneto]

Nah, everyone is allowed to agitate for what they want. That’s something you need to get over.

Unless you want to live in a nation where differing opinions are not allowed?

Democracy shouldn’t stop because you want it to. Although I can find a number of examples where it has if you like. They tend to get the coolest uniforms if that makes any difference.

Although personally I think we should at least test Brexit first.

Decide
Implement
Test
Repeat the decision

[Muddy Retriever]

Therefore we ask "The People" two questions - do you want a second referendum, and if you do, would you vote in or out of the EU.
These can be asked at the same time - if more than 50% want a second referendum, then the answer to the second question counts, otherwise it doesn't.

Think I can spot a flaw in your idea.

I am going to assume that the electorate is still 52% Leave and 48% Remain.

Now suppose 80% of Remainers and 30% of Leavers want a second referendum, therefore 54% overall want a second referendum so the result of the second question of whether to leave the EU or not counts.

If you only vote on the second question if you have voted yes on the first then 70% of Leavers won't vote, which means Remain wins by a landslide.

Or maybe you think that's not a flaw.................