Brexit Benefits Log

[Bentley Bullet]

BST, we are discussing the point that people demanded that we overruled a Democratic vote. You are pointing out reasons why you think we should have overruled a democratic vote.

WE CAN'T ALLOW TRUMP-LIKE BEHAVIOUR TO OVERRULE OUR DEMOCRACY.

[Glyn_Wigley]

The 2016 referendum overuled the democratic vote of 1975.

WE CAN'T ALLOW TRUMP-LIKE BEHAVIOUR TO OVERRULE OUR DEMOCRACY.

[Bentley Bullet]

With something of equal validity.

If that's the case why invalidate the first vote?

[BillyStubbsTears]

"Clarify" is the word. Surely, no-one seriously thinks it was sensible to make such a momentous decision without properly understanding what the alternative outcomes were?

[Glyn_Wigley]

With something of equal validity.

If that's the case why invalidate the first vote?

Because that's how democracy works when the electorate change their mind based on newer information.

Assuming they change their mind, of course.

[Bentley Bullet]

The 2016 referendum overuled the democratic vote of 1975.

WE CAN'T ALLOW TRUMP-LIKE BEHAVIOUR TO OVERRULE OUR DEMOCRACY.

The 2016 referendum didn't stop the 1975 vote being consumated democratically.

[Glyn_Wigley]

A decision can be superseded before it's put into effect. Surely even you know that?

[Bentley Bullet]

Do you mean in political instances like the recent US election events?

[belton rover]

Billy. Out of interest, would you have asked for a vote of clarification had remain won the democratic vote?

[BillyStubbsTears]

Belton.

No, of course not. Because "Remain" was a defined thing.

"Leave" was an amorphous, undefined concept which covered everything from No Deal Brexit to a soft Norway-style deal.

That was the reason why the whole concept of a binary choice was flawed.

[Glyn_Wigley]

Do you mean in political instances like the recent US election events?

Any decision can be superseded before any action is taken. It's the making of the decision that is superseded, not its effects. Otherwise there'd be no Court Of Appeal. Especially in the days of capital punishment!

[belton rover]

Belton.

No, of course not. Because "Remain" was a defined thing.

"Leave" was an amorphous, undefined concept which covered everything from No Deal Brexit to a soft Norway-style deal.

That was the reason why the whole concept of a binary choice was flawed.

But surely leave should have been defined then, regardless of the outcome?

[BillyStubbsTears]

Belton.

If you are saying that the precise form of Leave should have been known at the time we voted to Remain or Leave, then I have no argument with you.

It was utterly ridiculous to vote on something so important to the future of the nation for generations to come when one of the options was totally undefined. That lack of definition was critical to the success of the Leave campaign. The people who headed the campaign (like Hannan above and he is only one of very many) reassured Leave supporters that they could have all the freedoms of Leave with none of the economic costs. Johnson repeatedly banged the table and shouted "Take Back Control" and when it was shown that taking back control would have negative economic consequences, or cause major problems for Northern Ireland, that was waved away as Project Fear. They knew that was total b*llocks, but while ever "Leave" wasn't a defined thing, they could play that game. And they did. They repeatedly conflated all the freedom benefits of a hard Brexit with all the economic advantages of a Norway-type deal, despite them knowing that we couldn't have both. While ever Brexit wasn't defined, they could tell the electorate that they could have both.

Which is why a TRULY democratic process would have had a confirmatory vote once Brexit was defined: Do you want A) The Brexit that has been agreed or B) to Remain.

Of course, Brexit supporters could never support such a vote. Because they know they would have lost it hands down. Poll after poll after poll has shown that the only form of Brexit which could have won a majority support (and which  I personally would have certainly accepted in 2016, after the vote) was a soft, Norway-style Brexit. But, despite regularly advocating that sort of outcome DURING the campaign (if I had a penny for every time Farage said "Norway" in Spring 2016...) the Leave leaders about-turned AFTER the vote and said a Norway deal would be a Betrayal of the Will of the People.

[selby]

  Leave was defined, it was even advertised on the side of a bus.

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

Should we not be moving on from that topic of conversation?  We had a referendum, leave won, we had an election (twice since that point) which the conservatives came out the largest party.  They are points that are done, history.  It's about the future now surely?

[Bentley Bullet]

Do you mean in political instances like the recent US election events?

Any decision can be superseded before any action is taken. It's the making of the decision that is superseded, not its effects. Otherwise there'd be no Court Of Appeal. Especially in the days of capital punishment!

So you don't mean in political instances such as the recent US election then?

[BillyStubbsTears]

BFYP.

You don't believe in understanding and learning from your history?

[belton rover]

Billy. What I mean is, it was the British public who were misinformed by leave campaigners, not just Brexit supporters. You were misinformed just as much as anyone else.
We (the British public) were misinformed and lied to by both remain and leave campaigns. We were treated with contempt by both sides. I know people who moved from leave to remain and remain to leave because of misinformation and ‘fear’ talk  from both sides.
The vote should never have taken place to begin with - it was in my opinion one of the worst decisions any government has ever made. It should never have happened, especially the way that it did.
But it did, and many, many politicians (and their advisers), leave or remain, should be thoroughly  ashamed of what they have put us all through, and continue to do. Starting with David Cameron.
It’s not just remainers who should feel hard done to, it’s all of us. And not because of the outcome of the vote, but because of the appalling manner in which we were all treated.

But it’s happened. I know you don’t like the ‘let’s move on’ attitude, but there is no other choice.
This country f**ked this right up. Again, not because we voted to leave, but because of the decision to allow the vote and the disgraceful way the campaigns were allowed to behave.

The reason I asked you the question was that I believe  if anyone thinks that any kind of vote is needed after the first vote, then it should be needed regardless of the outcome of the original vote to remain or leave. Otherwise it seems a second vote, even one of clarification, would only be for the sole purpose of overturning the original outcome. Which is completely undemocratic.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Belton.

In what way did the Remain side lie disgracefully in a way that matched the Leave side illegally profiling vulnerable people and bombarding them with "If we don't leave, 80m Turks are going to get the right to be your neighbour" approach?

[belton rover]

I never mentioned ‘matching lies’.

It’s simple. We could play the ‘you were worserer than me’ game all day long. Or we can accept that both sides are to blame, and it is a part of our history that, regrettably, we cannot change, and deal with it.

I fear that there are too many of the former, though. As shown by this microcosmic thread.

[Glyn_Wigley]

Do you mean in political instances like the recent US election events?

Any decision can be superseded before any action is taken. It's the making of the decision that is superseded, not its effects. Otherwise there'd be no Court Of Appeal. Especially in the days of capital punishment!

So you don't mean in political instances such as the recent US election then?

As usual, your deflection question is so vague as to be totally unanswerable. What instances?

[Glyn_Wigley]

As a general point, now that Brexit has happened would a new referendum held tomorrow be deemed to be undemocratic?

[BillyStubbsTears]

Belton.

But this matters. I DON'T accept that there was any form of equality in the behaviour of the two sides. My take is that there is a lesson to be learned from this whole sorry process, and it is how easily we as a country can be deceived by those with enough balls to stand up and tell flat out lies. I don't think that has ever happened before in our politics, and I think the "oh they ALL do it attitude" is deeply dangerous. Because it means there is no filter when it is taken to the level that we saw by the Leave campaign, or by Trump. So you really should not say both campaigns behaved disgracefully unless you have clear evidence to support that.

[Bentley Bullet]

Do you mean in political instances like the recent US election events?

Any decision can be superseded before any action is taken. It's the making of the decision that is superseded, not its effects. Otherwise there'd be no Court Of Appeal. Especially in the days of capital punishment!

So you don't mean in political instances such as the recent US election then?

As usual, your deflection question is so vague as to be totally unanswerable. What instances?

I've deflected! A discussion about democratic votes being deflected into courts of appeal on capital punishment and I'VE deflected!

Oh dear!

[Glyn_Wigley]

Do you mean in political instances like the recent US election events?

Any decision can be superseded before any action is taken. It's the making of the decision that is superseded, not its effects. Otherwise there'd be no Court Of Appeal. Especially in the days of capital punishment!

So you don't mean in political instances such as the recent US election then?

As usual, your deflection question is so vague as to be totally unanswerable. What instances?

I've deflected! A discussion about democratic votes being deflected into courts of appeal on capital punishment and I'VE deflected!

Oh dear!

I was using the Appeal Court as an example, not a question.

What instances?

[Bentley Bullet]

As a general point, now that Brexit has happened would a new referendum held tomorrow be deemed to be undemocratic?

I'm not aware of any ruling saying we can't have another referendum in future. Hopefully, there won't be any success in overturning that result either.

[Glyn_Wigley]

As a general point, now that Brexit has happened would a new referendum held tomorrow be deemed to be undemocratic?

I'm not aware of any ruling saying we can't have another referendum in future. Hopefully, there won't be any success in overturning that result either.

Good. Let's campaign for a new referendum!

[Bentley Bullet]

Luckily for you, you can, thanks to the likes of me who strive to keep our country a democratic one.

[selby]

  Glyn the Maastricht and Lisbon treaty's being imposed on us without a vote made sure the 2016 vote was not over ruling the same thing as in 1975, but something the ECM had morphed deliberately into without the citizens  of the UK having any vote on, and alienated those generations against an undemocratic system.
  The politicians reaped what they sowed for totally ignoring the UK's electorate in the past. 

[belton rover]

Billy. But in this case they ALL (the remain and leave campaign) DID. Dangerous or not
That doesn’t mean I think that all members of both camps were liars, and it certainly doesn’t mean that all politicians are liars.
The remain campaign was built on the foundation of fear, scaremongering and ill founded dystopian predictions.
Or lies, if you will.
If thy had focussed on the benefits of staying in the EU, instead of trying to frighten us, I think remain would have had a comfortable win.
I’ve said before, I was just on the side of remain to begin with. By the time of the vote, I was just on the side of leave.
I wasn’t pulled into leave by the Brexiteers, though - I was pushed there by the remain camp.

https://www.dailyglobe.co.uk/comment/the-many-lies-of-the-remain-campaign/

I have little knowledge of the Daily Globe, but you suggested I offer some evidence. This was top of the search.