Quantcast
Brexit
EricHiggin said:

forest-spirit said:

That's a pretty bad comparison so I don't know why you'd want us to imagine it. The reason for why it has taken this many years isn't because the Stay-side has refused to accept defeat but because the Brexiters has failed spectacularly in going through with Brexit. Perhaps if the Leave-side had had an actual plan and its leaders hadn't fled the field like cowards once the results was in, things had gone differently. Truth is though that they have had three years to come up with a solution but have not gotten anywhere.

Not allowing people to vote for Brexit again is like cancelling a general election because the ruling parties has yet to fulfill all of the promised reforms.

It was only about the anti-democratic point. It wasn't really based directly on what is happening with Brexit. Either way, if the winner in my scenario didn't really have much of a plan and platform and wouldn't have gotten much accomplished anyway, then it wouldn't be much different. It's not like the stay side and the EU is going out of their way to make things super easy for the Brexiters to move ahead with their agenda.

The issue with your point is that no one is keeping the Leave-side from taking power, they are in power. The problem is that the Leave-side can't agree upon a single solution and that is why, three years later, Brexit still hasn't happened. Sure, the EU is not helping them but why should they bend over for the Brexiters? That's not their job, they should look after the interests of the union. And the opposition in the UK is doing what an opposition usually does in a democracy. They oppose that which they don't agree on. That's their job.



Around the Network
forest-spirit said:

That's a pretty bad comparison so I don't know why you'd want us to imagine it. The reason for why it has taken this many years isn't because the Stay-side has refused to accept defeat but because the Brexiters has failed spectacularly in going through with Brexit. Perhaps if the Leave-side had had an actual plan and its leaders hadn't fled the field like cowards once the results was in, things had gone differently. Truth is though that they have had three years to come up with a solution but have not gotten anywhere.

Not allowing people to vote for Brexit again is like cancelling a general election because the ruling parties has yet to fulfill all of the promised reforms.

He actually has valid point in comparison to the others trying to make false equivalencies between a real democratic (elections/referendums) mandate and a non-democratic (parliament) mandate ... 

It's very clearly the stay-side's fault that their holding the public hostage by not implementing the result. There's ~400 MPs who are actively trying to sabotage a direct democratic mandate and aside from the SNPs, many of them are of the toxic and bitter legacy of the blairites/thatcherites who refuse to own up to the results ...

Most brexiteers and especially the leaders are not the ones being indecisive and desire no deal most of all but it sucks that the parliament can't contemplate the only realistic option and instead keeps deciding to tyrannically delay implementing the result ... 

It's very clearly the stay-side that needs to stop being on the fence and decide what sort of way they want to leave ...



fatslob-:O said:
forest-spirit said:

That's a pretty bad comparison so I don't know why you'd want us to imagine it. The reason for why it has taken this many years isn't because the Stay-side has refused to accept defeat but because the Brexiters has failed spectacularly in going through with Brexit. Perhaps if the Leave-side had had an actual plan and its leaders hadn't fled the field like cowards once the results was in, things had gone differently. Truth is though that they have had three years to come up with a solution but have not gotten anywhere.

Not allowing people to vote for Brexit again is like cancelling a general election because the ruling parties has yet to fulfill all of the promised reforms.

He actually has valid point in comparison to the others trying to make false equivalencies between a real democratic (elections/referendums) mandate and a non-democratic (parliament) mandate ... 

It's very clearly the stay-side's fault that their holding the public hostage by not implementing the result. There's ~400 MPs who are actively trying to sabotage a direct democratic mandate and aside from the SNPs, many of them are of the toxic and bitter legacy of the blairites/thatcherites who refuse to own up to the results ...

Most brexiteers and especially the leaders are not the ones being indecisive and desire no deal most of all but it sucks that the parliament can't contemplate the only realistic option and instead keeps deciding to tyrannically delay implementing the result ... 

It's very clearly the stay-side that needs to stop being on the fence and decide what sort of way they want to leave ...

So the Leave-side side never had a valid leave plan to begin with yet its the Stay-sides fault they haven't left yet?

Didn't the Leave-side leadership promise things they couldn't actually do to get the vote passed? 



Massimus - "Trump already has democrat support."

SpokenTruth said:

So the Leave-side side never had a valid leave plan to begin with yet its the Stay-sides fault they haven't left yet?

Didn't the Leave-side leadership promise things they couldn't actually do to get the vote passed? 

What is "valid" is a matter of opinion but that doesn't mean no deal is not a real plan and yes it is indeed the stay-side at fault because majority of the MPs who campaigned for remaining are still shamelessly taking their parliamentary seats not properly representing their own constituencies instead of resigning or abstaining in disgrace ... 

Leavers can't do shit because there's ~400 fucking remainers in parliament willing to keep hostage of a democratic mandate that their supposed to implement like any real functioning democracy ...  

You tell me, what in the hell is a vote supposed to mean in democracy that DOESN'T implement the result ? It's become more of a disturbing authoritarian pattern among my generation to just straight up want to ignore the outcome whenever it suits them but if that's the direction we're going in then it'd be best for them and the others to declare in their own ultimatum that they're NOT democratic and in fact want to be dictators ...

Finding principled people are hard these days but I guess they're the dying breed when being an authoritarian technocratic elite like the communists at the other side of the world is becoming more popular among the young ...



fatslob-:O said:
SpokenTruth said:

So the Leave-side side never had a valid leave plan to begin with yet its the Stay-sides fault they haven't left yet?

Didn't the Leave-side leadership promise things they couldn't actually do to get the vote passed? 

What is "valid" is a matter of opinion but that doesn't mean no deal is not a real plan and yes it is indeed the stay-side at fault because majority of the MPs who campaigned for remaining are still shamelessly taking their parliamentary seats not properly representing their own constituencies instead of resigning or abstaining in disgrace ... 

Leavers can't do shit because there's ~400 fucking remainers in parliament willing to keep hostage of a democratic mandate that their supposed to implement like any real functioning democracy ...  

You tell me, what in the hell is a vote supposed to mean in democracy that DOESN'T implement the result ? It's become more of a disturbing authoritarian pattern among my generation to just straight up want to ignore the outcome whenever it suits them but if that's the direction we're going in then it'd be best for them and the others to declare in their own ultimatum that they're NOT democratic and in fact want to be dictators ...

Finding principled people are hard these days but I guess they're the dying breed when being an authoritarian technocratic elite like the communists at the other side of the world is becoming more popular among the young ...

It's more like a quarter (and growing) are remainers, half of the PM are okay to leave, but not without a deal, and the final quarter just want to leave. But they can't find a viable deal, which grinds everything to a halt.

May's deal is about the best they could get, but it got shot down by everyone

Oh, and it's the ERG that holds everyone hostage, not the remainers. After all, at this rate No-Deal is getting more and more likely simply because they refuse pretty much any kind of agreement, and the clock is ticking. But only a small part of the population is okay with No-deal, it's just bigger than the part who agree to May's deal: https://www.ft.com/content/83d2880a-4bef-11e9-bbc9-6917dce3dc62

As you can see, half of the people consider No-Deal a bad outcome, and only a fifth think it would be good. And like the Parliament, the Brits in general seem to know what they don't want, but can't make up their mind on what they want in the end. And the end result of this will be No deal of there's no solution to be found.



Around the Network
forest-spirit said:
EricHiggin said:

It was only about the anti-democratic point. It wasn't really based directly on what is happening with Brexit. Either way, if the winner in my scenario didn't really have much of a plan and platform and wouldn't have gotten much accomplished anyway, then it wouldn't be much different. It's not like the stay side and the EU is going out of their way to make things super easy for the Brexiters to move ahead with their agenda.

The issue with your point is that no one is keeping the Leave-side from taking power, they are in power. The problem is that the Leave-side can't agree upon a single solution and that is why, three years later, Brexit still hasn't happened. Sure, the EU is not helping them but why should they bend over for the Brexiters? That's not their job, they should look after the interests of the union. And the opposition in the UK is doing what an opposition usually does in a democracy. They oppose that which they don't agree on. That's their job.

As I initially stated, it wasn't originally based on the Brexit situation, and I also did say it wouldn't be much different after the addition, meaning there still was a difference, because it clearly wouldn't be a direct comparison since it wasn't planned to be.

If the EU truly believes in freedom, rights, equality, etc, then why make the transition so tough? Is domination more important to them? Are they scared other countries will leave as well even though the EU is so great? How does making it easy for the UK to leave go against their jobs? It won't be hurting the EU because if the UK wants out, then what the UK brings to the union no longer matters because they don't want to be part of it. It's like the UK was never part to begin with. They are treating the UK like it belongs in the EU, as if it always has, which isn't the case. It's sort of like when a business says they lost money but what they really mean is they didn't make as much as they planned. That 'lost' money was never their's to begin with and isn't a loss, even though they may have been counting on it.

Opposition or not, politicians are there to serve the people. If the vote was held for all the people, and the majority chose leave, then it's their job to make sure it happens, regardless of your party. If your side lost, and you hold back the democratic majority from achieving what it wants, your not doing your job.



The Canadian National Anthem According To Justin Trudeau

 

Oh planet Earth! The home of native lands, 
True social law, in all of us demand.
With cattle farts, we view sea rise,
Our North sinking slowly.
From far and snide, oh planet Earth, 
Our healthcare is yours free!
Science save our land, harnessing the breeze,
Oh planet Earth, smoke weed and ferment yeast.
Oh planet Earth, ell gee bee queue and tee.

EricHiggin said:
RolStoppable said:

My favorite part about the Brexit is the stance that it would be anti-democratic to let the people of the UK vote again three years later.

Meanwhile, it's the norm in democracies that the people get to vote for new governments every 4-6 years depending on the country. But for the Brexit it's apparently a betrayal of democratic principles to ask the people if their opinions have changed since three years ago.

Imagine if a candidate barely won an election but the opponent wouldn't accept it and was able to keep them from taking power, and somehow dragged it out for 4 years until the next election. That would be cool because, democracy, right? I tend to think if the winner was liberal and the opponent was conservative that it wouldn't be seen as ok, at least the msm and their viewers would see it that way.

A point well-made, Eric.



Legend11 correctly predicted that GTA IV (360+PS3) would outsell SSBB. I was wrong.

A Biased Review Reloaded / Open Your Eyes / Switch Gamers Club

Bofferbrauer2 said:

It's more like a quarter (and growing) are remainers, half of the PM are okay to leave, but not without a deal, and the final quarter just want to leave. But they can't find a viable deal, which grinds everything to a halt. 

What on fucking earth makes you think that only a quarter of the MPs are remainers ? At least 40% of them are bitter as shit remainers still trying to weasel their out of the real democratic mandate but now we have Theresa May (beg) trying to force EP elections down her very own voters throats most of which are no dealers ... 

Bofferbrauer2 said:

May's deal is about the best they could get, but it got shot down by everyone

No, what's clearly best is that the conservative party needs to be buried along with Thatcher's rotten ass legacy because their god damned purpose has been out served already. It should be the ERG's duty punish leadership who promised to end freedom of movement and leave the customs union as well by splitting the whole party apart and taking the entire grassroots with them as well. In fact the ERG should do to the Conservatives what the Conservatives did to the Lib Dems and that is by making them irrelevant forever in mainstream politics because as of late recently for their leaders duplicity (Cameron/May) ...

There's clearly more important domestic matters to achieve than brexit and it means a long overdue political alignment ... (the salty tory remainer MPs have FAR more in common with the Lib Dems than they do with the rest of the party)

Bofferbrauer2 said:

Oh, and it's the ERG that holds everyone hostage, not the remainers. After all, at this rate No-Deal is getting more and more likely simply because they refuse pretty much any kind of agreement, and the clock is ticking. But only a small part of the population is okay with No-deal, it's just bigger than the part who agree to May's deal: https://www.ft.com/content/83d2880a-4bef-11e9-bbc9-6917dce3dc62

For once, the vast majority of the ERG along with the likes of Jacob Rees-Mogg and Boris Johnson (Jo, who's his brother went the other way) voted for the deal so let's stop pinning the blame on them when most of them are eager enough to put the backstop behind them so they ain't taking anything hostage for shit and in fact are very much the hostages themselves in this case ... 

And no, no-deal is not getting more likely because parliament is full of remainers everywhere holding the leave voters ransom and Macron caved in like a little bitch to the rest of the EU despite all of his constant huffing and puffing LEL ...

Bofferbrauer2 said:

*snip*

As you can see, half of the people consider No-Deal a bad outcome, and only a fifth think it would be good. And like the Parliament, the Brits in general seem to know what they don't want, but can't make up their mind on what they want in the end. And the end result of this will be No deal of there's no solution to be found.

Did the sample include remain voters ? If so then it's mostly bunk as anyone can see since they were on the losing side and exactly how much value do you think this poll has when everything including a second referendum ending with a "remain" result is still somehow regarded as a bad outcome ? 

If I see the UK participating in the EU elections, I think it's probably for the best that the ERG along with other brexiteers dissociate themselves with the Conservatives and start painting their own former party as an afront to democracy because that path is arguably a better ... 

Don't worry about no deal happening because it's clearly NOT going to happen since May/MPs/EU will not ever countenance the idea of a no deal and are only interested in kicking the can as long as they all want. There's no political will from any side to deliver brexit but there's clearly tons (over 400 MPs, PM, and majority of EU council) of political will to have these extensions instead. Unless the UK becomes a hot potato and insists on being obstructionist as said by Jacob Rees-Mogg or the ERG/UKIP/brexit group take matters into their own hands to dominate parliament then the threats of a no deal aren't going to be taken very seriously (take this from a fairly hardcore centre nationalist)



A flexible extension. Not surprised.



fatslob-:O said:
SpokenTruth said:

So the Leave-side side never had a valid leave plan to begin with yet its the Stay-sides fault they haven't left yet?

Didn't the Leave-side leadership promise things they couldn't actually do to get the vote passed? 

What is "valid" is a matter of opinion but that doesn't mean no deal is not a real plan and yes it is indeed the stay-side at fault because majority of the MPs who campaigned for remaining are still shamelessly taking their parliamentary seats not properly representing their own constituencies instead of resigning or abstaining in disgrace ... 

Leavers can't do shit because there's ~400 fucking remainers in parliament willing to keep hostage of a democratic mandate that their supposed to implement like any real functioning democracy ...  

You tell me, what in the hell is a vote supposed to mean in democracy that DOESN'T implement the result ? It's become more of a disturbing authoritarian pattern among my generation to just straight up want to ignore the outcome whenever it suits them but if that's the direction we're going in then it'd be best for them and the others to declare in their own ultimatum that they're NOT democratic and in fact want to be dictators ...

Finding principled people are hard these days but I guess they're the dying breed when being an authoritarian technocratic elite like the communists at the other side of the world is becoming more popular among the young ...

The thing you're talking about is the exact reason why a direct Democracy is an inherently bad thing. I mean Democracy to begin with is just a flimsy compromise but a direct democracy is just a pure clusterfuck. That's why we have a representative democracy so that elected officials have a bit of wiggle room against moronic voters. And apparently the voters are moronic because all current polls show that the majority now wants to stay. That's why you don't let the masses decide policy directly. The vote should've never been anything binding to begin with, let alone using simple majority.

The fighting we have currently going on between the elected officials is exactly working as designed. It's not a great system but it's better than a direct democracy.



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.