FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > 100000 london march against brexit
100000 london march against brexit
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Good. Hope it brings people to their senses . If there was another vote it would go the other way for sure I reckon." I also think that and this could unite the country too  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Continue here, it was interesting seeing the replyes, there will be a march in london calling for a peoples vote today, it is said to be the largest anti brexit demonstration ever seen, whats your view? I agree there should be one as you woulnt buy a house without a second opinion, also there wasnt a contingency plan." Like agreeing to a meet and being catfished but you can't back out of it. Vote till they make the right decision and remain. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If (unlikely) a second referendum was called so joe public can base their vote on facts this time and not lies... it would be nice if they included the ‘ex pats’ living abroad this time. Many I know myself that weren’t given the opportunity to vote last time around, multiply that by other as well and you’ve got a fair few thousand." And lower the voting age to sixteen. They’re more than capable of making decisions and they are the generation to be most affected by the outcome longterm. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So, basically calling for a referendum on the result of a referendum.. Total anti-democracy. No Deal will make the rest of the EU countries very quickly come crying back to us, begging forgiveness. " Yep, I can see the largest single market in the world really suffering because of one small Island deciding to leave. Their probably on their starting blocks already, sweattabout how they’l Manage to survive without us  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If (unlikely) a second referendum was called so joe public can base their vote on facts this time and not lies... it would be nice if they included the ‘ex pats’ living abroad this time. Many I know myself that weren’t given the opportunity to vote last time around, multiply that by other as well and you’ve got a fair few thousand. And lower the voting age to sixteen. They’re more than capable of making decisions and they are the generation to be most affected by the outcome longterm. " And they can use all that experience they’ve gained from texting in for X-factor winners and Big Bother evictions. Great idea, give the vote to people who may not have left education, have never worked, and are considered too young to drive, get married or buy a pint. Maybe it’s desperation talking.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So, basically calling for a referendum on the result of a referendum.. Total anti-democracy. No Deal will make the rest of the EU countries very quickly come crying back to us, begging forgiveness. Yep, I can see the largest single market in the world really suffering because of one small Island deciding to leave. Their probably on their starting blocks already, sweattabout how they’l Manage to survive without us "Alternatively, they lose their second biggest contributor, and their nearest rival is free to trade with America and China. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If (unlikely) a second referendum was called so joe public can base their vote on facts this time and not lies... it would be nice if they included the ‘ex pats’ living abroad this time. Many I know myself that weren’t given the opportunity to vote last time around, multiply that by other as well and you’ve got a fair few thousand. And lower the voting age to sixteen. They’re more than capable of making decisions and they are the generation to be most affected by the outcome longterm. And they can use all that experience they’ve gained from texting in for X-factor winners and Big Bother evictions. Great idea, give the vote to people who may not have left education, have never worked, and are considered too young to drive, get married or buy a pint. Maybe it’s desperation talking.." How little you think of the youth of today. I have every confidence in the vast majority of young people. I’m not sure why you are so critical of them. My daughter is now 17 and has two jobs which she has had for two years, along with many of her under 18 year old friends. There are some adults that don’t have that much work experience. They can drive at 17 if they pass their test. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Great idea, give the vote to people who may not have left education, have never worked, and are considered too young to drive, get married or buy a pint " They are also among the ones that will be running this country in the future, so yes, they should have a say. As should the thousands of ex pats that (conveniently) weren’t giventhe chance to vote first time. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If (unlikely) a second referendum was called so joe public can base their vote on facts this time and not lies... it would be nice if they included the ‘ex pats’ living abroad this time. Many I know myself that weren’t given the opportunity to vote last time around, multiply that by other as well and you’ve got a fair few thousand. And lower the voting age to sixteen. They’re more than capable of making decisions and they are the generation to be most affected by the outcome longterm. And they can use all that experience they’ve gained from texting in for X-factor winners and Big Bother evictions. Great idea, give the vote to people who may not have left education, have never worked, and are considered too young to drive, get married or buy a pint. Maybe it’s desperation talking.. How little you think of the youth of today. I have every confidence in the vast majority of young people. I’m not sure why you are so critical of them. My daughter is now 17 and has two jobs which she has had for two years, along with many of her under 18 year old friends. There are some adults that don’t have that much work experience. They can drive at 17 if they pass their test. " In response to a quote which desperately suggested lowering the voting age to get the result they wanted.. Fine, lower the voting age to 6, Spider-Man can be the PM | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"And lower the voting age to sixteen. They’re more than capable of making decisions and they are the generation to be most affected by the outcome longterm. " Why 16? Surely the effects won't be know better or worse for 10 to 15 years after we leave, which is probably 2 to 3 years away yet. Lower the voting age to 3 and stop anyone over 65 voting cos they will probably be dead before it settles out  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If we vote again. And it goes the other way then what do we have another best out of 3? " Don't need to then because we have made the right decision. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If (unlikely) a second referendum was called so joe public can base their vote on facts this time and not lies... it would be nice if they included the ‘ex pats’ living abroad this time. Many I know myself that weren’t given the opportunity to vote last time around, multiply that by other as well and you’ve got a fair few thousand. And lower the voting age to sixteen. They’re more than capable of making decisions and they are the generation to be most affected by the outcome longterm. And they can use all that experience they’ve gained from texting in for X-factor winners and Big Bother evictions. Great idea, give the vote to people who may not have left education, have never worked, and are considered too young to drive, get married or buy a pint. Maybe it’s desperation talking.. How little you think of the youth of today. I have every confidence in the vast majority of young people. I’m not sure why you are so critical of them. My daughter is now 17 and has two jobs which she has had for two years, along with many of her under 18 year old friends. There are some adults that don’t have that much work experience. They can drive at 17 if they pass their test. In response to a quote which desperately suggested lowering the voting age to get the result they wanted.. Fine, lower the voting age to 6, Spider-Man can be the PM" There’s nothing desperate about my opinion. It’s my opinion. You on the other hand are quite rude in the way you respond and there’s no need to do that. I believe that 16 year old should have been able to vote. You can’t include them as adults when it suits and not at other times. Unless they’re people like you of course because you are clearly the fountain of all knowledge and wisdom whilst they’re just kids. Politics affects them as much as you. You are assuming that they are too immature and silly and you name xboxes and xfactor. Don’t half the adults play and vote on those things? You underestimate them. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If we vote again. And it goes the other way then what do we have another best out of 3? Don't need to then because we have made the right decision." 52% think we have already made the right decision.  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If we vote again. And it goes the other way then what do we have another best out of 3? Don't need to then because we have made the right decision. 52% think we have already made the right decision. "Naively  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So we vote again and the remainers win. What then! The leavers demand another vote and they win. Do we do this forever? Rightly or wrongly the democratic vote said leave. " Democracy isn't a one time thing - think of it like criminal cases, where new evidence alters investigations and prosecutions etc. If it's important enough to gain special insight into public opinion on principles - eg, in or out, it's important enough to gauge the absolute right decision on a negotiated offer that will permanently affect lives to an enormous extent. And as one of the sides in the referendum campaign broke the law - not to mention that Russia may have interfere in the referendum result - having this safeguard in place supports the integrity of ensuring that the absolute pounds and pence, nuts and bolts of any changes are clearly understood and opinion fairly assessed. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So we vote again and the remainers win. What then! The leavers demand another vote and they win. Do we do this forever? Rightly or wrongly the democratic vote said leave. " The whole thing is a farce. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"And lower the voting age to sixteen. They’re more than capable of making decisions and they are the generation to be most affected by the outcome longterm. Why 16? Surely the effects won't be know better or worse for 10 to 15 years after we leave, which is probably 2 to 3 years away yet. Lower the voting age to 3 and stop anyone over 65 voting cos they will probably be dead before it settles out "Because they are adult enough to vote and should have their say. The work to rules and conditions governed by Europe so why not? Why do people keep saying lower the age to 3? Is that the only way to get a point across ... resort to extremes? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Fine, lower the voting age to 6, Spider-Man can be the PM" Spiderman is American, so can't be PM, tsk... And you are allowed to vote 
It's Fireman Sam for PM  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" In response to a quote which desperately suggested lowering the voting age to get the result they wanted.. Fine, lower the voting age to 6, Spider-Man can be the PM" If your so certain that the outcome was the one the country wants (albeit voted for in blindness of what it would really mean), why are you so scared of a second referendum on wether the deal on offer is better than remaining? Surely if the decision was ‘the right one’ it will stay the same in a second vote, irrespective of the fact people will know hard facts this time around? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The reason people perceive that lowing the voting age will change the result is that in the UK most people get their news (and opinions) from a Londoncentric, non-neutral media outlet which is ridiculously out of touch with real people and consistently makes wrong predictions based on the perceived illusions of its demographic rather than the population as a whole. The BBC has become an embarrassment. Auntie continues to flog some ridiculous left wing rhetoric and broadcast opinions rather than balanced argument. Facebook (where opinion pieces take the place of news) are where young people get their ideas. Seeing as nobody under 16 has any real responsibility, and Facebook has little accountability for what it promotes the only side on offer to people is the default hippy opinion. Not really grounds for sensible debate or decision making " Ive got news for you ... 16 year olds don’t use Facebook because their parents do it’s not ‘fashionable’ anymore. They do however use Twitter and not Fab to gain their knowledge and voice opinions. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If (unlikely) a second referendum was called so joe public can base their vote on facts this time and not lies... it would be nice if they included the ‘ex pats’ living abroad this time. Many I know myself that weren’t given the opportunity to vote last time around, multiply that by other as well and you’ve got a fair few thousand. And lower the voting age to sixteen. They’re more than capable of making decisions and they are the generation to be most affected by the outcome longterm. And they can use all that experience they’ve gained from texting in for X-factor winners and Big Bother evictions. Great idea, give the vote to people who may not have left education, have never worked, and are considered too young to drive, get married or buy a pint. Maybe it’s desperation talking.. How little you think of the youth of today. I have every confidence in the vast majority of young people. I’m not sure why you are so critical of them. My daughter is now 17 and has two jobs which she has had for two years, along with many of her under 18 year old friends. There are some adults that don’t have that much work experience. They can drive at 17 if they pass their test. In response to a quote which desperately suggested lowering the voting age to get the result they wanted.. Fine, lower the voting age to 6, Spider-Man can be the PM There’s nothing desperate about my opinion. It’s my opinion. You on the other hand are quite rude in the way you respond and there’s no need to do that. I believe that 16 year old should have been able to vote. You can’t include them as adults when it suits and not at other times. Unless they’re people like you of course because you are clearly the fountain of all knowledge and wisdom whilst they’re just kids. Politics affects them as much as you. You are assuming that they are too immature and silly and you name xboxes and xfactor. Don’t half the adults play and vote on those things? You underestimate them. " The reason I said it was desperate, is because it seeks to change the outcome of a democratic process by fair means or foul. It’s not rude to have an opinion that doesn’t suit you. A referendum has however taken place, and the remainers must realise that they are, by definition is the minority. Seeking to change the outcome by changing the rules does smack of desperation to me. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We both voted remain, but as more of those who were eligible to vote chose to leave voted the other way then we need to get the best possible deal with the EU and move on. We can't keep having elections until we get the result we want. The saying "you've made your bed now lie in it" springs to mind. " In principal yes, but if a group of you took a vote in favour of walking off a cliff, would it be right to do it because the majority decided to? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We both voted remain, but as more of those who were eligible to vote chose to leave voted the other way then we need to get the best possible deal with the EU and move on. We can't keep having elections until we get the result we want. The saying "you've made your bed now lie in it" springs to mind. In principal yes, but if a group of you took a vote in favour of walking off a cliff, would it be right to do it because the majority decided to?" | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We both voted remain, but as more of those who were eligible to vote chose to leave voted the other way then we need to get the best possible deal with the EU and move on. We can't keep having elections until we get the result we want. The saying "you've made your bed now lie in it" springs to mind. In principal yes, but if a group of you took a vote in favour of walking off a cliff, would it be right to do it because the majority decided to?" like lemmings | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"And lower the voting age to sixteen. They’re more than capable of making decisions and they are the generation to be most affected by the outcome longterm. Why 16? Surely the effects won't be know better or worse for 10 to 15 years after we leave, which is probably 2 to 3 years away yet. Lower the voting age to 3 and stop anyone over 65 voting cos they will probably be dead before it settles out
Because they are adult enough to vote and should have their say. The work to rules and conditions governed by Europe so why not?
Why do people keep saying lower the age to 3? Is that the only way to get a point across ... resort to extremes? "No, but to lower the age limit to vote is just moving an established line, if you move it why 16, and not 15? Should we have a referendum on voting age? Before we do any more elections? Point is it's set at 18, has been since it was reduced from 21. There is no right and wrong age that depends on the individual. But changing parameters needs to be separately considered not rushed in for one event. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The reason people perceive that lowing the voting age will change the result is that in the UK most people get their news (and opinions) from a Londoncentric, non-neutral media outlet which is ridiculously out of touch with real people and consistently makes wrong predictions based on the perceived illusions of its demographic rather than the population as a whole. The BBC has become an embarrassment. Auntie continues to flog some ridiculous left wing rhetoric and broadcast opinions rather than balanced argument. Facebook (where opinion pieces take the place of news) are where young people get their ideas. Seeing as nobody under 16 has any real responsibility, and Facebook has little accountability for what it promotes the only side on offer to people is the default hippy opinion. Not really grounds for sensible debate or decision making Ive got news for you ... 16 year olds don’t use Facebook because their parents do it’s not ‘fashionable’ anymore. They do however use Twitter and not Fab to gain their knowledge and voice opinions. "Congratulations on continuing to use Facebook then. I don’t. And I never have. I certainly don’t use Fab (or twitter) as a source of ‘knowledge’ either. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If (unlikely) a second referendum was called so joe public can base their vote on facts this time and not lies... it would be nice if they included the ‘ex pats’ living abroad this time. Many I know myself that weren’t given the opportunity to vote last time around, multiply that by other as well and you’ve got a fair few thousand. And lower the voting age to sixteen. They’re more than capable of making decisions and they are the generation to be most affected by the outcome longterm. And they can use all that experience they’ve gained from texting in for X-factor winners and Big Bother evictions. Great idea, give the vote to people who may not have left education, have never worked, and are considered too young to drive, get married or buy a pint. Maybe it’s desperation talking.. How little you think of the youth of today. I have every confidence in the vast majority of young people. I’m not sure why you are so critical of them. My daughter is now 17 and has two jobs which she has had for two years, along with many of her under 18 year old friends. There are some adults that don’t have that much work experience. They can drive at 17 if they pass their test. In response to a quote which desperately suggested lowering the voting age to get the result they wanted.. Fine, lower the voting age to 6, Spider-Man can be the PM There’s nothing desperate about my opinion. It’s my opinion. You on the other hand are quite rude in the way you respond and there’s no need to do that. I believe that 16 year old should have been able to vote. You can’t include them as adults when it suits and not at other times. Unless they’re people like you of course because you are clearly the fountain of all knowledge and wisdom whilst they’re just kids. Politics affects them as much as you. You are assuming that they are too immature and silly and you name xboxes and xfactor. Don’t half the adults play and vote on those things? You underestimate them. The reason I said it was desperate, is because it seeks to change the outcome of a democratic process by fair means or foul. It’s not rude to have an opinion that doesn’t suit you. A referendum has however taken place, and the remainers must realise that they are, by definition is the minority. Seeking to change the outcome by changing the rules does smack of desperation to me. " Yet the leavers who lost in 1970 whatever didn't shut up for the last 40 years. Democracy works both ways. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If (unlikely) a second referendum was called so joe public can base their vote on facts this time and not lies... it would be nice if they included the ‘ex pats’ living abroad this time. Many I know myself that weren’t given the opportunity to vote last time around, multiply that by other as well and you’ve got a fair few thousand. And lower the voting age to sixteen. They’re more than capable of making decisions and they are the generation to be most affected by the outcome longterm. And they can use all that experience they’ve gained from texting in for X-factor winners and Big Bother evictions. Great idea, give the vote to people who may not have left education, have never worked, and are considered too young to drive, get married or buy a pint. Maybe it’s desperation talking.. How little you think of the youth of today. I have every confidence in the vast majority of young people. I’m not sure why you are so critical of them. My daughter is now 17 and has two jobs which she has had for two years, along with many of her under 18 year old friends. There are some adults that don’t have that much work experience. They can drive at 17 if they pass their test. In response to a quote which desperately suggested lowering the voting age to get the result they wanted.. Fine, lower the voting age to 6, Spider-Man can be the PM There’s nothing desperate about my opinion. It’s my opinion. You on the other hand are quite rude in the way you respond and there’s no need to do that. I believe that 16 year old should have been able to vote. You can’t include them as adults when it suits and not at other times. Unless they’re people like you of course because you are clearly the fountain of all knowledge and wisdom whilst they’re just kids. Politics affects them as much as you. You are assuming that they are too immature and silly and you name xboxes and xfactor. Don’t half the adults play and vote on those things? You underestimate them. The reason I said it was desperate, is because it seeks to change the outcome of a democratic process by fair means or foul. It’s not rude to have an opinion that doesn’t suit you. A referendum has however taken place, and the remainers must realise that they are, by definition is the minority. Seeking to change the outcome by changing the rules does smack of desperation to me. " For your information I haven’t said I think there should be another vote ... I do think that leaves us on dodgy ground as far as a democratic system goes but you have presumed otherwise. However, if there was another vote I do think it should include 16 year old. You opinion wasn’t rude but your attitude is and the way you respond is .., that is also my personal opinion. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"And lower the voting age to sixteen. They’re more than capable of making decisions and they are the generation to be most affected by the outcome longterm. Why 16? Surely the effects won't be know better or worse for 10 to 15 years after we leave, which is probably 2 to 3 years away yet. Lower the voting age to 3 and stop anyone over 65 voting cos they will probably be dead before it settles out
Because they are adult enough to vote and should have their say. The work to rules and conditions governed by Europe so why not?
Why do people keep saying lower the age to 3? Is that the only way to get a point across ... resort to extremes?
No, but to lower the age limit to vote is just moving an established line, if you move it why 16, and not 15? Should we have a referendum on voting age? Before we do any more elections?
Point is it's set at 18, has been since it was reduced from 21. There is no right and wrong age that depends on the individual. But changing parameters needs to be separately considered not rushed in for one event."The precedent was set with the Scottish referendum when 16 year olds were allowed to vote. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The reason people perceive that lowing the voting age will change the result is that in the UK most people get their news (and opinions) from a Londoncentric, non-neutral media outlet which is ridiculously out of touch with real people and consistently makes wrong predictions based on the perceived illusions of its demographic rather than the population as a whole. The BBC has become an embarrassment. Auntie continues to flog some ridiculous left wing rhetoric and broadcast opinions rather than balanced argument. Facebook (where opinion pieces take the place of news) are where young people get their ideas. Seeing as nobody under 16 has any real responsibility, and Facebook has little accountability for what it promotes the only side on offer to people is the default hippy opinion. Not really grounds for sensible debate or decision making Ive got news for you ... 16 year olds don’t use Facebook because their parents do it’s not ‘fashionable’ anymore. They do however use Twitter and not Fab to gain their knowledge and voice opinions.
Congratulations on continuing to use Facebook then. I don’t. And I never have. I certainly don’t use Fab (or twitter) as a source of ‘knowledge’ either. "I don’t use Facebook. Where does it say that I do? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"And lower the voting age to sixteen. They’re more than capable of making decisions and they are the generation to be most affected by the outcome longterm. Why 16? Surely the effects won't be know better or worse for 10 to 15 years after we leave, which is probably 2 to 3 years away yet. Lower the voting age to 3 and stop anyone over 65 voting cos they will probably be dead before it settles out
Because they are adult enough to vote and should have their say. The work to rules and conditions governed by Europe so why not?
Why do people keep saying lower the age to 3? Is that the only way to get a point across ... resort to extremes?
No, but to lower the age limit to vote is just moving an established line, if you move it why 16, and not 15? Should we have a referendum on voting age? Before we do any more elections?
Point is it's set at 18, has been since it was reduced from 21. There is no right and wrong age that depends on the individual. But changing parameters needs to be separately considered not rushed in for one event."Absolutely agree which is why it was discussed before the general election, however they did nothing about it. It was discussed again before the referendum but they decided there wasn’t time. That is not a sound judgement call. They have time now. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Seeking to change the outcome by changing the rules does smack of desperation to me " And a vote as to whether the final deal is better than what we get if we remain? I repeat, no one knew that was on offer or what leaving would mean when the referendum was initially taken. Once this is known wouldn’t you prefer to decide with facts and make a choice, or just blindly continue with I voted what I did irrespective of what it will do? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If (unlikely) a second referendum was called so joe public can base their vote on facts this time and not lies... it would be nice if they included the ‘ex pats’ living abroad this time. Many I know myself that weren’t given the opportunity to vote last time around, multiply that by other as well and you’ve got a fair few thousand. And lower the voting age to sixteen. They’re more than capable of making decisions and they are the generation to be most affected by the outcome longterm. And they can use all that experience they’ve gained from texting in for X-factor winners and Big Bother evictions. Great idea, give the vote to people who may not have left education, have never worked, and are considered too young to drive, get married or buy a pint. Maybe it’s desperation talking.. How little you think of the youth of today. I have every confidence in the vast majority of young people. I’m not sure why you are so critical of them. My daughter is now 17 and has two jobs which she has had for two years, along with many of her under 18 year old friends. There are some adults that don’t have that much work experience. They can drive at 17 if they pass their test. In response to a quote which desperately suggested lowering the voting age to get the result they wanted.. Fine, lower the voting age to 6, Spider-Man can be the PM There’s nothing desperate about my opinion. It’s my opinion. You on the other hand are quite rude in the way you respond and there’s no need to do that. I believe that 16 year old should have been able to vote. You can’t include them as adults when it suits and not at other times. Unless they’re people like you of course because you are clearly the fountain of all knowledge and wisdom whilst they’re just kids. Politics affects them as much as you. You are assuming that they are too immature and silly and you name xboxes and xfactor. Don’t half the adults play and vote on those things? You underestimate them. The reason I said it was desperate, is because it seeks to change the outcome of a democratic process by fair means or foul. It’s not rude to have an opinion that doesn’t suit you. A referendum has however taken place, and the remainers must realise that they are, by definition is the minority. Seeking to change the outcome by changing the rules does smack of desperation to me. For your information I haven’t said I think there should be another vote ... I do think that leaves us on dodgy ground as far as a democratic system goes but you have presumed otherwise. However, if there was another vote I do think it should include 16 year old. You opinion wasn’t rude but your attitude is and the way you respond is .., that is also my personal opinion. " I think my posts have been responses to the post that I quote. The posts I have made are referencable to others and when I have a difference of opinion it is clearly stated. I’m surprise that anyone has found that rude. It’s an opinion that I’m countering, not the person. For example I don’t regularly use the word ‘you’ or made a personal assertions about the posters I’m replying to. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"And lower the voting age to sixteen. They’re more than capable of making decisions and they are the generation to be most affected by the outcome longterm. Why 16? Surely the effects won't be know better or worse for 10 to 15 years after we leave, which is probably 2 to 3 years away yet. Lower the voting age to 3 and stop anyone over 65 voting cos they will probably be dead before it settles out
Because they are adult enough to vote and should have their say. The work to rules and conditions governed by Europe so why not?
Why do people keep saying lower the age to 3? Is that the only way to get a point across ... resort to extremes?
No, but to lower the age limit to vote is just moving an established line, if you move it why 16, and not 15? Should we have a referendum on voting age? Before we do any more elections?
Point is it's set at 18, has been since it was reduced from 21. There is no right and wrong age that depends on the individual. But changing parameters needs to be separately considered not rushed in for one event."You can leave school at 16 if you are in work or some type of full time education which means you are contributing to the economy and society, just as you and I would do. Why should they be disadvantaged based on their age if they live and work in society? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We both voted remain, but as more of those who were eligible to vote chose to leave voted the other way then we need to get the best possible deal with the EU and move on. We can't keep having elections until we get the result we want. The saying "you've made your bed now lie in it" springs to mind. In principal yes, but if a group of you took a vote in favour of walking off a cliff, would it be right to do it because the majority decided to?" In all honesty none of know the outcome of leaving, whereas the outcome of walking off a cliff is in most cases a foregone conclusion so there isn't really a comparison. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If (unlikely) a second referendum was called so joe public can base their vote on facts this time and not lies... it would be nice if they included the ‘ex pats’ living abroad this time. Many I know myself that weren’t given the opportunity to vote last time around, multiply that by other as well and you’ve got a fair few thousand. And lower the voting age to sixteen. They’re more than capable of making decisions and they are the generation to be most affected by the outcome longterm. And they can use all that experience they’ve gained from texting in for X-factor winners and Big Bother evictions. Great idea, give the vote to people who may not have left education, have never worked, and are considered too young to drive, get married or buy a pint. Maybe it’s desperation talking.. How little you think of the youth of today. I have every confidence in the vast majority of young people. I’m not sure why you are so critical of them. My daughter is now 17 and has two jobs which she has had for two years, along with many of her under 18 year old friends. There are some adults that don’t have that much work experience. They can drive at 17 if they pass their test. In response to a quote which desperately suggested lowering the voting age to get the result they wanted.. Fine, lower the voting age to 6, Spider-Man can be the PM There’s nothing desperate about my opinion. It’s my opinion. You on the other hand are quite rude in the way you respond and there’s no need to do that. I believe that 16 year old should have been able to vote. You can’t include them as adults when it suits and not at other times. Unless they’re people like you of course because you are clearly the fountain of all knowledge and wisdom whilst they’re just kids. Politics affects them as much as you. You are assuming that they are too immature and silly and you name xboxes and xfactor. Don’t half the adults play and vote on those things? You underestimate them. The reason I said it was desperate, is because it seeks to change the outcome of a democratic process by fair means or foul. It’s not rude to have an opinion that doesn’t suit you. A referendum has however taken place, and the remainers must realise that they are, by definition is the minority. Seeking to change the outcome by changing the rules does smack of desperation to me. For your information I haven’t said I think there should be another vote ... I do think that leaves us on dodgy ground as far as a democratic system goes but you have presumed otherwise. However, if there was another vote I do think it should include 16 year old. You opinion wasn’t rude but your attitude is and the way you respond is .., that is also my personal opinion. I think my posts have been responses to the post that I quote. The posts I have made are referencable to others and when I have a difference of opinion it is clearly stated. I’m surprise that anyone has found that rude. It’s an opinion that I’m countering, not the person. For example I don’t regularly use the word ‘you’ or made a personal assertions about the posters I’m replying to. " You are entitled to your opinion as I am to mine. We are clearly not going to agree though. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Seeking to change the outcome by changing the rules does smack of desperation to me And a vote as to whether the final deal is better than what we get if we remain? I repeat, no one knew that was on offer or what leaving would mean when the referendum was initially taken. Once this is known wouldn’t you prefer to decide with facts and make a choice, or just blindly continue with I voted what I did irrespective of what it will do?" I don’t think it matters. That wasn’t the question that was asked in the referendum. If the question had been something along the lines of ‘right so, we’ll like say we’re going to leave, and then like yeah, see what we can negotiate, but if it isn’t exactly what you wanted right, do you still like, still want to do it?’ Then yes, we should have a vote on whether we want to accept the final ‘deal’. But the referendum was on ‘do we stay’? And the majority of the population that voted said no. To me that’s democratic and clear cut. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The precedent was set with the Scottish referendum when 16 year olds were allowed to vote." It was, and the powers that be, don't like that result either so want another vote! Had the 16 year olds been allowed to vote in the last council / general election then I would have no objection to continuing allowing them to vote. But though I don't want out of the EU personally, and don't want another referendum. If there is one I don't want the losers media to blame the 16 year olds. We have made a choice, I think we have a very bad PM at the moment and no real democracy as all of Westminster is too busy squabbling to get on with their jobs. But it's over all not a bad system been Ok'ish for a while now, if we change stuff we should do it for the future best for the people who live here. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If (unlikely) a second referendum was called so joe public can base their vote on facts this time and not lies... it would be nice if they included the ‘ex pats’ living abroad this time. Many I know myself that weren’t given the opportunity to vote last time around, multiply that by other as well and you’ve got a fair few thousand. And lower the voting age to sixteen. They’re more than capable of making decisions and they are the generation to be most affected by the outcome longterm. And they can use all that experience they’ve gained from texting in for X-factor winners and Big Bother evictions. Great idea, give the vote to people who may not have left education, have never worked, and are considered too young to drive, get married or buy a pint. Maybe it’s desperation talking.. How little you think of the youth of today. I have every confidence in the vast majority of young people. I’m not sure why you are so critical of them. My daughter is now 17 and has two jobs which she has had for two years, along with many of her under 18 year old friends. There are some adults that don’t have that much work experience. They can drive at 17 if they pass their test. In response to a quote which desperately suggested lowering the voting age to get the result they wanted.. Fine, lower the voting age to 6, Spider-Man can be the PM There’s nothing desperate about my opinion. It’s my opinion. You on the other hand are quite rude in the way you respond and there’s no need to do that. I believe that 16 year old should have been able to vote. You can’t include them as adults when it suits and not at other times. Unless they’re people like you of course because you are clearly the fountain of all knowledge and wisdom whilst they’re just kids. Politics affects them as much as you. You are assuming that they are too immature and silly and you name xboxes and xfactor. Don’t half the adults play and vote on those things? You underestimate them. The reason I said it was desperate, is because it seeks to change the outcome of a democratic process by fair means or foul. It’s not rude to have an opinion that doesn’t suit you. A referendum has however taken place, and the remainers must realise that they are, by definition is the minority. Seeking to change the outcome by changing the rules does smack of desperation to me. For your information I haven’t said I think there should be another vote ... I do think that leaves us on dodgy ground as far as a democratic system goes but you have presumed otherwise. However, if there was another vote I do think it should include 16 year old. You opinion wasn’t rude but your attitude is and the way you respond is .., that is also my personal opinion. I think my posts have been responses to the post that I quote. The posts I have made are referencable to others and when I have a difference of opinion it is clearly stated. I’m surprise that anyone has found that rude. It’s an opinion that I’m countering, not the person. For example I don’t regularly use the word ‘you’ or made a personal assertions about the posters I’m replying to. You are entitled to your opinion as I am to mine. We are clearly not going to agree though. " Yes, but my posts have not made any personal attacks or criticisms. And I’m not the one making accusations of rudeness. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" In all honesty none of know the outcome of leaving, whereas the outcome of walking off a cliff is in most cases a foregone conclusion so there isn't really a comparison." But once we know what the final deal being offered is, or even ‘no deal’, isn’t refusing a peoples vote on it akin to walking off the cliff? You all made your chice in the referendum, you can’t change it now you know what’s really going to happen. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We both voted remain, but as more of those who were eligible to vote chose to leave voted the other way then we need to get the best possible deal with the EU and move on. We can't keep having elections until we get the result we want. The saying "you've made your bed now lie in it" springs to mind. In principal yes, but if a group of you took a vote in favour of walking off a cliff, would it be right to do it because the majority decided to? like lemmings "Refer back to our last post. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"And lower the voting age to sixteen. They’re more than capable of making decisions and they are the generation to be most affected by the outcome longterm. Why 16? Surely the effects won't be know better or worse for 10 to 15 years after we leave, which is probably 2 to 3 years away yet. Lower the voting age to 3 and stop anyone over 65 voting cos they will probably be dead before it settles out
Because they are adult enough to vote and should have their say. The work to rules and conditions governed by Europe so why not?
Why do people keep saying lower the age to 3? Is that the only way to get a point across ... resort to extremes?
No, but to lower the age limit to vote is just moving an established line, if you move it why 16, and not 15? Should we have a referendum on voting age? Before we do any more elections?
Point is it's set at 18, has been since it was reduced from 21. There is no right and wrong age that depends on the individual. But changing parameters needs to be separately considered not rushed in for one event.
The precedent was set with the Scottish referendum when 16 year olds were allowed to vote."And they still didn’t get what they wanted!! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We both voted remain, but as more of those who were eligible to vote chose to leave voted the other way then we need to get the best possible deal with the EU and move on. We can't keep having elections until we get the result we want. The saying "you've made your bed now lie in it" springs to mind. In principal yes, but if a group of you took a vote in favour of walking off a cliff, would it be right to do it because the majority decided to? like lemmings
Refer back to our last post."But we know Brexit isn't a good idea now after the lies have been exposed, it isn't too late. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If (unlikely) a second referendum was called so joe public can base their vote on facts this time and not lies... it would be nice if they included the ‘ex pats’ living abroad this time. Many I know myself that weren’t given the opportunity to vote last time around, multiply that by other as well and you’ve got a fair few thousand. And lower the voting age to sixteen. They’re more than capable of making decisions and they are the generation to be most affected by the outcome longterm. And they can use all that experience they’ve gained from texting in for X-factor winners and Big Bother evictions. Great idea, give the vote to people who may not have left education, have never worked, and are considered too young to drive, get married or buy a pint. Maybe it’s desperation talking.. How little you think of the youth of today. I have every confidence in the vast majority of young people. I’m not sure why you are so critical of them. My daughter is now 17 and has two jobs which she has had for two years, along with many of her under 18 year old friends. There are some adults that don’t have that much work experience. They can drive at 17 if they pass their test. In response to a quote which desperately suggested lowering the voting age to get the result they wanted.. Fine, lower the voting age to 6, Spider-Man can be the PM There’s nothing desperate about my opinion. It’s my opinion. You on the other hand are quite rude in the way you respond and there’s no need to do that. I believe that 16 year old should have been able to vote. You can’t include them as adults when it suits and not at other times. Unless they’re people like you of course because you are clearly the fountain of all knowledge and wisdom whilst they’re just kids. Politics affects them as much as you. You are assuming that they are too immature and silly and you name xboxes and xfactor. Don’t half the adults play and vote on those things? You underestimate them. The reason I said it was desperate, is because it seeks to change the outcome of a democratic process by fair means or foul. It’s not rude to have an opinion that doesn’t suit you. A referendum has however taken place, and the remainers must realise that they are, by definition is the minority. Seeking to change the outcome by changing the rules does smack of desperation to me. For your information I haven’t said I think there should be another vote ... I do think that leaves us on dodgy ground as far as a democratic system goes but you have presumed otherwise. However, if there was another vote I do think it should include 16 year old. You opinion wasn’t rude but your attitude is and the way you respond is .., that is also my personal opinion. I think my posts have been responses to the post that I quote. The posts I have made are referencable to others and when I have a difference of opinion it is clearly stated. I’m surprise that anyone has found that rude. It’s an opinion that I’m countering, not the person. For example I don’t regularly use the word ‘you’ or made a personal assertions about the posters I’m replying to. You are entitled to your opinion as I am to mine. We are clearly not going to agree though. Yes, but my posts have not made any personal attacks or criticisms. And I’m not the one making accusations of rudeness. " ‘Desperation talking? Fine, lower the age to six etc. Texting in xfactor etc?’ It’s unnecessary to refer to my comment as ‘desperation’ and the dismissive nature of your comments isn’t something I care for. It’s your style, not mine. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
democracy rules !!!
no new referendum
no matter how close it was
its the democratic way the fair way
the bad losers are marching on London nothing else X
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"But we know Brexit isn't a good idea now after the lies have been exposed, it isn't too late." Do we? We won't actually ever know if it's good or bad, because it's change and unless all of the EU get very rich while we starve to death there will never be an answer. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"And lower the voting age to sixteen. They’re more than capable of making decisions and they are the generation to be most affected by the outcome longterm. Why 16? Surely the effects won't be know better or worse for 10 to 15 years after we leave, which is probably 2 to 3 years away yet. Lower the voting age to 3 and stop anyone over 65 voting cos they will probably be dead before it settles out
Because they are adult enough to vote and should have their say. The work to rules and conditions governed by Europe so why not?
Why do people keep saying lower the age to 3? Is that the only way to get a point across ... resort to extremes?
No, but to lower the age limit to vote is just moving an established line, if you move it why 16, and not 15? Should we have a referendum on voting age? Before we do any more elections?
Point is it's set at 18, has been since it was reduced from 21. There is no right and wrong age that depends on the individual. But changing parameters needs to be separately considered not rushed in for one event.
The precedent was set with the Scottish referendum when 16 year olds were allowed to vote.
And they still didn’t get what they wanted!!"My point being, people can't argue that 16 year olds shouldn't be allowed to vote because they don't in General Elections. This is an exceptional situation (like the Scottish referendum). It is their futures. They should have a say. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If (unlikely) a second referendum was called so joe public can base their vote on facts this time and not lies... it would be nice if they included the ‘ex pats’ living abroad this time. Many I know myself that weren’t given the opportunity to vote last time around, multiply that by other as well and you’ve got a fair few thousand. And lower the voting age to sixteen. They’re more than capable of making decisions and they are the generation to be most affected by the outcome longterm. And they can use all that experience they’ve gained from texting in for X-factor winners and Big Bother evictions. Great idea, give the vote to people who may not have left education, have never worked, and are considered too young to drive, get married or buy a pint. Maybe it’s desperation talking.. How little you think of the youth of today. I have every confidence in the vast majority of young people. I’m not sure why you are so critical of them. My daughter is now 17 and has two jobs which she has had for two years, along with many of her under 18 year old friends. There are some adults that don’t have that much work experience. They can drive at 17 if they pass their test. In response to a quote which desperately suggested lowering the voting age to get the result they wanted.. Fine, lower the voting age to 6, Spider-Man can be the PM There’s nothing desperate about my opinion. It’s my opinion. You on the other hand are quite rude in the way you respond and there’s no need to do that. I believe that 16 year old should have been able to vote. You can’t include them as adults when it suits and not at other times. Unless they’re people like you of course because you are clearly the fountain of all knowledge and wisdom whilst they’re just kids. Politics affects them as much as you. You are assuming that they are too immature and silly and you name xboxes and xfactor. Don’t half the adults play and vote on those things? You underestimate them. The reason I said it was desperate, is because it seeks to change the outcome of a democratic process by fair means or foul. It’s not rude to have an opinion that doesn’t suit you. A referendum has however taken place, and the remainers must realise that they are, by definition is the minority. Seeking to change the outcome by changing the rules does smack of desperation to me. For your information I haven’t said I think there should be another vote ... I do think that leaves us on dodgy ground as far as a democratic system goes but you have presumed otherwise. However, if there was another vote I do think it should include 16 year old. You opinion wasn’t rude but your attitude is and the way you respond is .., that is also my personal opinion. I think my posts have been responses to the post that I quote. The posts I have made are referencable to others and when I have a difference of opinion it is clearly stated. I’m surprise that anyone has found that rude. It’s an opinion that I’m countering, not the person. For example I don’t regularly use the word ‘you’ or made a personal assertions about the posters I’m replying to. You are entitled to your opinion as I am to mine. We are clearly not going to agree though. Yes, but my posts have not made any personal attacks or criticisms. And I’m not the one making accusations of rudeness. ‘Desperation talking? Fine, lower the age to six etc. Texting in xfactor etc?’ It’s unnecessary to refer to my comment as ‘desperation’ and the dismissive nature of your comments isn’t something I care for. It’s your style, not mine. " None of my posts refer to a person in particular. Just an opinion. It’s not something to be taken personally. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If (unlikely) a second referendum was called so joe public can base their vote on facts this time and not lies... it would be nice if they included the ‘ex pats’ living abroad this time. Many I know myself that weren’t given the opportunity to vote last time around, multiply that by other as well and you’ve got a fair few thousand. And lower the voting age to sixteen. They’re more than capable of making decisions and they are the generation to be most affected by the outcome longterm. And they can use all that experience they’ve gained from texting in for X-factor winners and Big Bother evictions. Great idea, give the vote to people who may not have left education, have never worked, and are considered too young to drive, get married or buy a pint. Maybe it’s desperation talking.. How little you think of the youth of today. I have every confidence in the vast majority of young people. I’m not sure why you are so critical of them. My daughter is now 17 and has two jobs which she has had for two years, along with many of her under 18 year old friends. There are some adults that don’t have that much work experience. They can drive at 17 if they pass their test. In response to a quote which desperately suggested lowering the voting age to get the result they wanted.. Fine, lower the voting age to 6, Spider-Man can be the PM There’s nothing desperate about my opinion. It’s my opinion. You on the other hand are quite rude in the way you respond and there’s no need to do that. I believe that 16 year old should have been able to vote. You can’t include them as adults when it suits and not at other times. Unless they’re people like you of course because you are clearly the fountain of all knowledge and wisdom whilst they’re just kids. Politics affects them as much as you. You are assuming that they are too immature and silly and you name xboxes and xfactor. Don’t half the adults play and vote on those things? You underestimate them. The reason I said it was desperate, is because it seeks to change the outcome of a democratic process by fair means or foul. It’s not rude to have an opinion that doesn’t suit you. A referendum has however taken place, and the remainers must realise that they are, by definition is the minority. Seeking to change the outcome by changing the rules does smack of desperation to me. For your information I haven’t said I think there should be another vote ... I do think that leaves us on dodgy ground as far as a democratic system goes but you have presumed otherwise. However, if there was another vote I do think it should include 16 year old. You opinion wasn’t rude but your attitude is and the way you respond is .., that is also my personal opinion. I think my posts have been responses to the post that I quote. The posts I have made are referencable to others and when I have a difference of opinion it is clearly stated. I’m surprise that anyone has found that rude. It’s an opinion that I’m countering, not the person. For example I don’t regularly use the word ‘you’ or made a personal assertions about the posters I’m replying to. You are entitled to your opinion as I am to mine. We are clearly not going to agree though. Yes, but my posts have not made any personal attacks or criticisms. And I’m not the one making accusations of rudeness. ‘Desperation talking? Fine, lower the age to six etc. Texting in xfactor etc?’ It’s unnecessary to refer to my comment as ‘desperation’ and the dismissive nature of your comments isn’t something I care for. It’s your style, not mine. None of my posts refer to a person in particular. Just an opinion. It’s not something to be taken personally. " Of course that’s your opinion and style. I don’t care for it and your comment was in relation to my post therefore it makes it personal to me which is why I made a response. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"But we know Brexit isn't a good idea now after the lies have been exposed, it isn't too late. Do we? We won't actually ever know if it's good or bad, because it's change and unless all of the EU get very rich while we starve to death there will never be an answer. " looks like a foregone conclusion that the implications are bad! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If (unlikely) a second referendum was called so joe public can base their vote on facts this time and not lies... it would be nice if they included the ‘ex pats’ living abroad this time. Many I know myself that weren’t given the opportunity to vote last time around, multiply that by other as well and you’ve got a fair few thousand. And lower the voting age to sixteen. They’re more than capable of making decisions and they are the generation to be most affected by the outcome longterm. And they can use all that experience they’ve gained from texting in for X-factor winners and Big Bother evictions. Great idea, give the vote to people who may not have left education, have never worked, and are considered too young to drive, get married or buy a pint. Maybe it’s desperation talking.. How little you think of the youth of today. I have every confidence in the vast majority of young people. I’m not sure why you are so critical of them. My daughter is now 17 and has two jobs which she has had for two years, along with many of her under 18 year old friends. There are some adults that don’t have that much work experience. They can drive at 17 if they pass their test. In response to a quote which desperately suggested lowering the voting age to get the result they wanted.. Fine, lower the voting age to 6, Spider-Man can be the PM There’s nothing desperate about my opinion. It’s my opinion. You on the other hand are quite rude in the way you respond and there’s no need to do that. I believe that 16 year old should have been able to vote. You can’t include them as adults when it suits and not at other times. Unless they’re people like you of course because you are clearly the fountain of all knowledge and wisdom whilst they’re just kids. Politics affects them as much as you. You are assuming that they are too immature and silly and you name xboxes and xfactor. Don’t half the adults play and vote on those things? You underestimate them. The reason I said it was desperate, is because it seeks to change the outcome of a democratic process by fair means or foul. It’s not rude to have an opinion that doesn’t suit you. A referendum has however taken place, and the remainers must realise that they are, by definition is the minority. Seeking to change the outcome by changing the rules does smack of desperation to me. For your information I haven’t said I think there should be another vote ... I do think that leaves us on dodgy ground as far as a democratic system goes but you have presumed otherwise. However, if there was another vote I do think it should include 16 year old. You opinion wasn’t rude but your attitude is and the way you respond is .., that is also my personal opinion. I think my posts have been responses to the post that I quote. The posts I have made are referencable to others and when I have a difference of opinion it is clearly stated. I’m surprise that anyone has found that rude. It’s an opinion that I’m countering, not the person. For example I don’t regularly use the word ‘you’ or made a personal assertions about the posters I’m replying to. You are entitled to your opinion as I am to mine. We are clearly not going to agree though. Yes, but my posts have not made any personal attacks or criticisms. And I’m not the one making accusations of rudeness. ‘Desperation talking? Fine, lower the age to six etc. Texting in xfactor etc?’ It’s unnecessary to refer to my comment as ‘desperation’ and the dismissive nature of your comments isn’t something I care for. It’s your style, not mine. None of my posts refer to a person in particular. Just an opinion. It’s not something to be taken personally. Of course that’s your opinion and style. I don’t care for it and your comment was in relation to my post therefore it makes it personal to me which is why I made a response. " Right, finally I’m going to sink to your level. Count up the number of times I’ve made a direct personal reference to you (including the one in the previous sentence), then have a look at the number of times you have. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No chance the remainers lost get over it X spend your day doing something else hehe X
democracy rules !!!
no new referendum
no matter how close it was
its the democratic way the fair way
the bad losers are marching on London nothing else X
".. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Instead of telling people how the result should stand, can a Leaver tell me a single benefit that at the current time we know leaving will bring? Or even an expected benefit? Other than blue passports that is. Because surely if leaving is such a good idea then 2 years on from the referendum and months away from when we are due to leave someone should be able to answer those questions? " A question I keep asking (and we could have had blue passports anyway!). Come on Brexiters tell us one DEFINITE advantage of Brexit. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No chance the remainers lost get over it X spend your day doing something else hehe X
democracy rules !!!
no new referendum
no matter how close it was
its the democratic way the fair way
the bad losers are marching on London nothing else X
"Doesn’t matter what side you’re on, It’s still there democratic right to march, you expect people who strongly disagree with something to roll over and take it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No chance the remainers lost get over it X spend your day doing something else hehe X
democracy rules !!!
no new referendum
no matter how close it was
its the democratic way the fair way
the bad losers are marching on London nothing else X
"The Referendum as was to Leave or Remain came out with the result as we know it. That was Democracy! Let's say if the Remainers managed to constitutionally get a 2nd Referendum and that too went to a Leave decision How many more "Vote" Campaigns would the Remainers want? 3, 10, 50, 100 even 1000 ? But what if the result went the same as the first time around?? If the Remainers cannot accept Democracy, then bugger off out of the UK and live elsewhere. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If (unlikely) a second referendum was called so joe public can base their vote on facts this time and not lies... it would be nice if they included the ‘ex pats’ living abroad this time. Many I know myself that weren’t given the opportunity to vote last time around, multiply that by other as well and you’ve got a fair few thousand. And lower the voting age to sixteen. They’re more than capable of making decisions and they are the generation to be most affected by the outcome longterm. And they can use all that experience they’ve gained from texting in for X-factor winners and Big Bother evictions. Great idea, give the vote to people who may not have left education, have never worked, and are considered too young to drive, get married or buy a pint. Maybe it’s desperation talking.. How little you think of the youth of today. I have every confidence in the vast majority of young people. I’m not sure why you are so critical of them. My daughter is now 17 and has two jobs which she has had for two years, along with many of her under 18 year old friends. There are some adults that don’t have that much work experience. They can drive at 17 if they pass their test. In response to a quote which desperately suggested lowering the voting age to get the result they wanted.. Fine, lower the voting age to 6, Spider-Man can be the PM There’s nothing desperate about my opinion. It’s my opinion. You on the other hand are quite rude in the way you respond and there’s no need to do that. I believe that 16 year old should have been able to vote. You can’t include them as adults when it suits and not at other times. Unless they’re people like you of course because you are clearly the fountain of all knowledge and wisdom whilst they’re just kids. Politics affects them as much as you. You are assuming that they are too immature and silly and you name xboxes and xfactor. Don’t half the adults play and vote on those things? You underestimate them. The reason I said it was desperate, is because it seeks to change the outcome of a democratic process by fair means or foul. It’s not rude to have an opinion that doesn’t suit you. A referendum has however taken place, and the remainers must realise that they are, by definition is the minority. Seeking to change the outcome by changing the rules does smack of desperation to me. For your information I haven’t said I think there should be another vote ... I do think that leaves us on dodgy ground as far as a democratic system goes but you have presumed otherwise. However, if there was another vote I do think it should include 16 year old. You opinion wasn’t rude but your attitude is and the way you respond is .., that is also my personal opinion. I think my posts have been responses to the post that I quote. The posts I have made are referencable to others and when I have a difference of opinion it is clearly stated. I’m surprise that anyone has found that rude. It’s an opinion that I’m countering, not the person. For example I don’t regularly use the word ‘you’ or made a personal assertions about the posters I’m replying to. You are entitled to your opinion as I am to mine. We are clearly not going to agree though. Yes, but my posts have not made any personal attacks or criticisms. And I’m not the one making accusations of rudeness. ‘Desperation talking? Fine, lower the age to six etc. Texting in xfactor etc?’ It’s unnecessary to refer to my comment as ‘desperation’ and the dismissive nature of your comments isn’t something I care for. It’s your style, not mine. None of my posts refer to a person in particular. Just an opinion. It’s not something to be taken personally. Of course that’s your opinion and style. I don’t care for it and your comment was in relation to my post therefore it makes it personal to me which is why I made a response. Right, finally I’m going to sink to your level. Count up the number of times I’ve made a direct personal reference to you (including the one in the previous sentence), then have a look at the number of times you have. " Sink to my level?  now that is rude.
I am responding directly to you. My comments are aimed at ‘you’ because they are in response to your comments to me. It’s not difficult to understand, therefore there is no need for me to hide behind anything.
I don’t hold with all this thread squabbling so I shall leave you to your debate. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Instead of telling people how the result should stand, can a Leaver tell me a single benefit that at the current time we know leaving will bring? Or even an expected benefit? Other than blue passports that is. Because surely if leaving is such a good idea then 2 years on from the referendum and months away from when we are due to leave someone should be able to answer those questions? A question I keep asking (and we could have had blue passports anyway!). Come on Brexiters tell us one DEFINITE advantage of Brexit." It speaks volumes that this question will inevitably be ignored by people who will repeatedly and increasingly angrily tell people that they have to accept the result | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Referendum as was to Leave or Remain came out with the result as we know it. That was Democracy!" | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Instead of telling people how the result should stand, can a Leaver tell me a single benefit that at the current time we know leaving will bring? Or even an expected benefit? Other than blue passports that is. Because surely if leaving is such a good idea then 2 years on from the referendum and months away from when we are due to leave someone should be able to answer those questions? A question I keep asking (and we could have had blue passports anyway!). Come on Brexiters tell us one DEFINITE advantage of Brexit. It speaks volumes that this question will inevitably be ignored by people who will repeatedly and increasingly angrily tell people that they have to accept the result" nothing substantial anyway | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We both voted remain, but as more of those who were eligible to vote chose to leave voted the other way then we need to get the best possible deal with the EU and move on. We can't keep having elections until we get the result we want. The saying "you've made your bed now lie in it" springs to mind. In principal yes, but if a group of you took a vote in favour of walking off a cliff, would it be right to do it because the majority decided to? like lemmings
Refer back to our last post. But we know Brexit isn't a good idea now after the lies have been exposed, it isn't too late."Out of curiosity, did you vote leave or have the "lies" that have been exposed changed the way you would have voted? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yeah ignore the first vote coz it didn’t go your way what do you think all the people who voted leave are going to do after another vote. " Which bit of "the recent referendum was not legally binding" is hard to understand? And the the last referendum was in facty the second referendum on the issue; the first being in 1975 so the pricipal is established. And what is anti-democratic about seeking a new referendum based on the facts as they are now and voting list as it is now? i.e. a lot of young people, whose futures will be affected, who were not able to vote last time are now on the electoral list. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yeah ignore the first vote coz it didn’t go your way what do you think all the people who voted leave are going to do after another vote. This could go on for ever. So if at next general election your party don’t win let’s march and have another try. Total bullshit " Technically, this is the second vote. The first one was in the 70's. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Instead of telling people how the result should stand, can a Leaver tell me a single benefit that at the current time we know leaving will bring? Or even an expected benefit? Other than blue passports that is. Because surely if leaving is such a good idea then 2 years on from the referendum and months away from when we are due to leave someone should be able to answer those questions? A question I keep asking (and we could have had blue passports anyway!). Come on Brexiters tell us one DEFINITE advantage of Brexit. It speaks volumes that this question will inevitably be ignored by people who will repeatedly and increasingly angrily tell people that they have to accept the result"i made my arguments months ago only for someone to try tell me the european court of human rights was the british one so i give up arguing with wannabe polititians on a sex site il stick to flirting and shagging thanks | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We both voted remain, but as more of those who were eligible to vote chose to leave voted the other way then we need to get the best possible deal with the EU and move on. We can't keep having elections until we get the result we want. The saying "you've made your bed now lie in it" springs to mind. In principal yes, but if a group of you took a vote in favour of walking off a cliff, would it be right to do it because the majority decided to? like lemmings
Refer back to our last post. But we know Brexit isn't a good idea now after the lies have been exposed, it isn't too late.
Out of curiosity, did you vote leave or have the "lies" that have been exposed changed the way you would have voted? "No obviously Remain | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Instead of telling people how the result should stand, can a Leaver tell me a single benefit that at the current time we know leaving will bring? Or even an expected benefit? Other than blue passports that is. Because surely if leaving is such a good idea then 2 years on from the referendum and months away from when we are due to leave someone should be able to answer those questions? " The answers to those questions can be found online, but you're expecting the average person on the forums to give you all the answers? And when nobody falls for your shabby little bullying trick, you'll claim victory and retire smug and satisfied that your bullying has some sort of effect? This is typical hard-line remainer thinking - insult and belittle the opposition until you actually believe you are in the right. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The way I see whether to vote on a final deal or not (having been given the facts this time) is this: If you decide to purchase a laptop, and between selecting it and paying for it, you discover the one next to it is far better. Faster CPU, more memory, bigger hard drive. Do you: A) Continue on to the checkout irrespective B) Take advantage of the information you’ve received and re-evaluate your decion be it changing or sticking with the laptop C) Accept the person at the checkout telling you that you can’t change your decision because you’ve already chosen and your stuck with it now. " Yes. But the referendum wasn’t about thinking about buying a laptop. It was about pressing ‘click to buy’ It’s done | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Instead of telling people how the result should stand, can a Leaver tell me a single benefit that at the current time we know leaving will bring? Or even an expected benefit? Other than blue passports that is. Because surely if leaving is such a good idea then 2 years on from the referendum and months away from when we are due to leave someone should be able to answer those questions? A question I keep asking (and we could have had blue passports anyway!). Come on Brexiters tell us one DEFINITE advantage of Brexit. It speaks volumes that this question will inevitably be ignored by people who will repeatedly and increasingly angrily tell people that they have to accept the resulti made my arguments months ago only for someone to try tell me the european court of human rights was the british one so i give up arguing with wannabe polititians on a sex site il stick to flirting and shagging thanks"You mean flirting and shagging actually goes on here? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The answers to those questions can be found online, but you're expecting the average person on the forums to give you all the answers? " I'm expecting anyone who voted Brexit to be able to give me one DEFINITIVE advantage of Brexit. So far no one has. Should be simple enough if the case is so strong. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Instead of telling people how the result should stand, can a Leaver tell me a single benefit that at the current time we know leaving will bring? Or even an expected benefit? Other than blue passports that is. Because surely if leaving is such a good idea then 2 years on from the referendum and months away from when we are due to leave someone should be able to answer those questions? The answers to those questions can be found online, but you're expecting the average person on the forums to give you all the answers? And when nobody falls for your shabby little bullying trick, you'll claim victory and retire smug and satisfied that your bullying has some sort of effect? This is typical hard-line remainer thinking - insult and belittle the opposition until you actually believe you are in the right." Read your post back./ Read my post back. Now who is insulting and belittling people? Because I'm pretty sure it wasn't me 
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"the second referendum on the issue; the first being in 1975 so the pricipal is established. And what is anti-democratic about seeking a new referendum based on the facts as they are now and voting list as it is now? " The 1975 referendum was to leave the European Communities (EC). This was an economic union. The latest referendum is to leave the EU. This is a political union. Quite a different thing. The facts as the are now are still that no one knows what Brexit will actually mean to anyone until it happens | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yeah ignore the first vote coz it didn’t go your way what do you think all the people who voted leave are going to do after another vote. Which bit of "the recent referendum was not legally binding" is hard to understand? And the the last referendum was in facty the second referendum on the issue; the first being in 1975 so the pricipal is established. And what is anti-democratic about seeking a new referendum based on the facts as they are now and voting list as it is now? i.e. a lot of young people, whose futures will be affected, who were not able to vote last time are now on the electoral list." I voted to leave. What "facts" do you have at your disposal now that might make me change my mind? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I'm expecting anyone who voted Brexit to be able to give me one DEFINITIVE advantage of Brexit." Our country will no longer be ruled over by a set of unelected non British people | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Instead of telling people how the result should stand, can a Leaver tell me a single benefit that at the current time we know leaving will bring? Or even an expected benefit? Other than blue passports that is. Because surely if leaving is such a good idea then 2 years on from the referendum and months away from when we are due to leave someone should be able to answer those questions? The answers to those questions can be found online, but you're expecting the average person on the forums to give you all the answers? And when nobody falls for your shabby little bullying trick, you'll claim victory and retire smug and satisfied that your bullying has some sort of effect? This is typical hard-line remainer thinking - insult and belittle the opposition until you actually believe you are in the right." Petal, chill out.. It's hardly bullying to ask a simple question.. In what way is the above posed in any way that is insulting or belittling ..? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yeah ignore the first vote coz it didn’t go your way what do you think all the people who voted leave are going to do after another vote. Which bit of "the recent referendum was not legally binding" is hard to understand? And the the last referendum was in facty the second referendum on the issue; the first being in 1975 so the pricipal is established. And what is anti-democratic about seeking a new referendum based on the facts as they are now and voting list as it is now? i.e. a lot of young people, whose futures will be affected, who were not able to vote last time are now on the electoral list." And... There is a General Election. One party wins an overall majority based on its stated policies. One year into their term as a government, they change/drop/fail to enact some of their policies. Do we now have another election to remove them? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Instead of telling people how the result should stand, can a Leaver tell me a single benefit that at the current time we know leaving will bring? Or even an expected benefit? Other than blue passports that is. Because surely if leaving is such a good idea then 2 years on from the referendum and months away from when we are due to leave someone should be able to answer those questions? The answers to those questions can be found online, but you're expecting the average person on the forums to give you all the answers? And when nobody falls for your shabby little bullying trick, you'll claim victory and retire smug and satisfied that your bullying has some sort of effect? This is typical hard-line remainer thinking - insult and belittle the opposition until you actually believe you are in the right. Read your post back./ Read my post back. Now who is insulting and belittling people? Because I'm pretty sure it wasn't me
"Twaddle. You're a bully and I'm sure you're quite aware of it. Deal with it | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"People had a vote. They voted to leave. That's Democracy. Live with it." That would make a good mug | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The answers to those questions can be found online, but you're expecting the average person on the forums to give you all the answers? I'm expecting anyone who voted Brexit to be able to give me one DEFINITIVE advantage of Brexit. So far no one has. Should be simple enough if the case is so strong." You;d have thought so wouldn't you? I can tell people why I believe in Remaining. I can tell people why I vote labour. I can tell people why I oppose austerity. Maybe not in the greatest detail, maybe not all that eloquently but I can explain why I believe and support something. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The answers to those questions can be found online, but you're expecting the average person on the forums to give you all the answers? I'm expecting anyone who voted Brexit to be able to give me one DEFINITIVE advantage of Brexit. So far no one has. Should be simple enough if the case is so strong." nobody knows any advantage or disadvantage until it actually happens but people fear the unknown | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The answers to those questions can be found online, but you're expecting the average person on the forums to give you all the answers? I'm expecting anyone who voted Brexit to be able to give me one DEFINITIVE advantage of Brexit. So far no one has. Should be simple enough if the case is so strong. You;d have thought so wouldn't you? " See above ^^^ | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"the second referendum on the issue; the first being in 1975 so the pricipal is established. And what is anti-democratic about seeking a new referendum based on the facts as they are now and voting list as it is now? The 1975 referendum was to leave the European Communities (EC). This was an economic union. The latest referendum is to leave the EU. This is a political union. Quite a different thing. The facts as the are now are still that no one knows what Brexit will actually mean to anyone until it happens "There was no referendum to join any political union. That was Un-Democratic. Indeed it was Anti-Democratic. To then use that Anti-Democratic Political Union which no-one ever voted for as an excuse to overturn a Democratic Referendum is Totalitarianism. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"There was no referendum to join any political union. That was Un-Democratic. Indeed it was Anti-Democratic. To then use that Anti-Democratic Political Union which no-one ever voted for as an excuse to overturn a Democratic Referendum is Totalitarianism. " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If (unlikely) a second referendum was called so joe public can base their vote on facts this time and not lies... it would be nice if they included the ‘ex pats’ living abroad this time. Many I know myself that weren’t given the opportunity to vote last time around, multiply that by other as well and you’ve got a fair few thousand. And lower the voting age to sixteen. They’re more than capable of making decisions and they are the generation to be most affected by the outcome longterm. And they can use all that experience they’ve gained from texting in for X-factor winners and Big Bother evictions. Great idea, give the vote to people who may not have left education, have never worked, and are considered too young to drive, get married or buy a pint. Maybe it’s desperation talking.. How little you think of the youth of today. I have every confidence in the vast majority of young people. I’m not sure why you are so critical of them. My daughter is now 17 and has two jobs which she has had for two years, along with many of her under 18 year old friends. There are some adults that don’t have that much work experience. They can drive at 17 if they pass their test. In response to a quote which desperately suggested lowering the voting age to get the result they wanted.. Fine, lower the voting age to 6, Spider-Man can be the PM There’s nothing desperate about my opinion. It’s my opinion. You on the other hand are quite rude in the way you respond and there’s no need to do that. I believe that 16 year old should have been able to vote. You can’t include them as adults when it suits and not at other times. Unless they’re people like you of course because you are clearly the fountain of all knowledge and wisdom whilst they’re just kids. Politics affects them as much as you. You are assuming that they are too immature and silly and you name xboxes and xfactor. Don’t half the adults play and vote on those things? You underestimate them. The reason I said it was desperate, is because it seeks to change the outcome of a democratic process by fair means or foul. It’s not rude to have an opinion that doesn’t suit you. A referendum has however taken place, and the remainers must realise that they are, by definition is the minority. Seeking to change the outcome by changing the rules does smack of desperation to me. For your information I haven’t said I think there should be another vote ... I do think that leaves us on dodgy ground as far as a democratic system goes but you have presumed otherwise. However, if there was another vote I do think it should include 16 year old. You opinion wasn’t rude but your attitude is and the way you respond is .., that is also my personal opinion. I think my posts have been responses to the post that I quote. The posts I have made are referencable to others and when I have a difference of opinion it is clearly stated. I’m surprise that anyone has found that rude. It’s an opinion that I’m countering, not the person. For example I don’t regularly use the word ‘you’ or made a personal assertions about the posters I’m replying to. You are entitled to your opinion as I am to mine. We are clearly not going to agree though. Yes, but my posts have not made any personal attacks or criticisms. And I’m not the one making accusations of rudeness. ‘Desperation talking? Fine, lower the age to six etc. Texting in xfactor etc?’ It’s unnecessary to refer to my comment as ‘desperation’ and the dismissive nature of your comments isn’t something I care for. It’s your style, not mine. None of my posts refer to a person in particular. Just an opinion. It’s not something to be taken personally. Of course that’s your opinion and style. I don’t care for it and your comment was in relation to my post therefore it makes it personal to me which is why I made a response. Right, finally I’m going to sink to your level. Count up the number of times I’ve made a direct personal reference to you (including the one in the previous sentence), then have a look at the number of times you have. Sink to my level? now that is rude.
I am responding directly to you. My comments are aimed at ‘you’ because they are in response to your comments to me. It’s not difficult to understand, therefore there is no need for me to hide behind anything.
I don’t hold with all this thread squabbling so I shall leave you to your debate. "Precisely. My comments are directed at your comments. Yours are directed at me. You called me rude after I suggested lowering the voting age after you suggested lowering the voting age. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Instead of telling people how the result should stand, can a Leaver tell me a single benefit that at the current time we know leaving will bring? Or even an expected benefit? Other than blue passports that is. Because surely if leaving is such a good idea then 2 years on from the referendum and months away from when we are due to leave someone should be able to answer those questions? The answers to those questions can be found online, but you're expecting the average person on the forums to give you all the answers? And when nobody falls for your shabby little bullying trick, you'll claim victory and retire smug and satisfied that your bullying has some sort of effect? This is typical hard-line remainer thinking - insult and belittle the opposition until you actually believe you are in the right. Read your post back./ Read my post back. Now who is insulting and belittling people? Because I'm pretty sure it wasn't me
Twaddle. You're a bully and I'm sure you're quite aware of it. Deal with it "Are you honestly suggesting that a post asking any leaver to explain to me a benefit of leaver is bullying? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The answers to those questions can be found online, but you're expecting the average person on the forums to give you all the answers? I'm expecting anyone who voted Brexit to be able to give me one DEFINITIVE advantage of Brexit. So far no one has. Should be simple enough if the case is so strong." Email a politician then, it's not difficult | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I'm expecting anyone who voted Brexit to be able to give me one DEFINITIVE advantage of Brexit. Our country will no longer be ruled over by a set of unelected non British people "By ruled over I assume you mean European Directives such as Worktime initiative (which limits the number of hours an employer can demand an employee has to work) Drivers hours (which limits the number of hours a person can be behind the wheel) A whole array of Health & Safety directives (to ensure workers basic safety) | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The answers to those questions can be found online, but you're expecting the average person on the forums to give you all the answers? I'm expecting anyone who voted Brexit to be able to give me one DEFINITIVE advantage of Brexit. So far no one has. Should be simple enough if the case is so strong.nobody knows any advantage or disadvantage until it actually happens but people fear the unknown" Of course but people don;t oppose change when they can see a benefit | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I'm expecting anyone who voted Brexit to be able to give me one DEFINITIVE advantage of Brexit. Our country will no longer be ruled over by a set of unelected non British people "... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Instead of telling people how the result should stand, can a Leaver tell me a single benefit that at the current time we know leaving will bring? Or even an expected benefit? Other than blue passports that is. Because surely if leaving is such a good idea then 2 years on from the referendum and months away from when we are due to leave someone should be able to answer those questions? The answers to those questions can be found online, but you're expecting the average person on the forums to give you all the answers? And when nobody falls for your shabby little bullying trick, you'll claim victory and retire smug and satisfied that your bullying has some sort of effect? This is typical hard-line remainer thinking - insult and belittle the opposition until you actually believe you are in the right. Read your post back./ Read my post back. Now who is insulting and belittling people? Because I'm pretty sure it wasn't me
Twaddle. You're a bully and I'm sure you're quite aware of it. Deal with it
Are you honestly suggesting that a post asking any leaver to explain to me a benefit of leaver is bullying? "I'm not suggesting, I'm stating it as a fact. If you have evidence to show the opposite is true, please present it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I'm expecting anyone who voted Brexit to be able to give me one DEFINITIVE advantage of Brexit. Our country will no longer be ruled over by a set of unelected non British people ... "We aren't now. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" By ruled over I assume you mean European Directives" If that's what I meant I would have said that. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I'm expecting anyone who voted Brexit to be able to give me one DEFINITIVE advantage of Brexit. Our country will no longer be ruled over by a set of unelected non British people ...
We aren't now. "If you say so | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I'm expecting anyone who voted Brexit to be able to give me one DEFINITIVE advantage of Brexit. Our country will no longer be ruled over by a set of unelected non British people
By ruled over I assume you mean European Directives such as
Worktime initiative (which limits the number of hours an employer can demand an employee has to work)
Drivers hours (which limits the number of hours a person can be behind the wheel)
A whole array of Health & Safety directives (to ensure workers basic safety)
"oooo ooo ooo and that one about not being able to deport a terrorist because of his european human rights that cherri blair was so fond of | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" By ruled over I assume you mean European Directives If that's what I meant I would have said that." Can you explain how else we are ruled over please? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I'm expecting anyone who voted Brexit to be able to give me one DEFINITIVE advantage of Brexit. Our country will no longer be ruled over by a set of unelected non British people "Well leaving aside that the Royal family is of German heritage and unelected; there are photos of Prince Phillip at a nazi funeral in 1937. How do you work out that we are being ruled over by anyone else in the EU? It's an organisational structure we joined and thus have agreed to the rules. At present we have a say in the rules; in future if we want to trade with Europe we'll still have to comply with their rules but have no say. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The answers to those questions can be found online, but you're expecting the average person on the forums to give you all the answers? I'm expecting anyone who voted Brexit to be able to give me one DEFINITIVE advantage of Brexit. So far no one has. Should be simple enough if the case is so strong. You;d have thought so wouldn't you? I can tell people why I believe in Remaining. I can tell people why I vote labour. I can tell people why I oppose austerity. Maybe not in the greatest detail, maybe not all that eloquently but I can explain why I believe and support something. " ooo ooo ooo heres another boris said so and hes a legend | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"to be fair guys right or wrong the vote was to leave called in a fair and democratic way whether we had the true facts or even all the facts you can never say or know even for the ones here that want a revote.it is simply a way of trying to justify getting what they want ie a stay vote...what makes that a a more valid result than the leave.it was akin to lemmings .exactly as the new vote public opinion is always manipulated by the propaganda..i didn't vote but I will this time for leave soely for the fact that you cant keep voting till get result you want or else why even ask " Loads of people like you didn't vote, might be a different outcome now. Might be equivalent to the non voters that voted for Obama. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"and our children will not be inundated with people who want sha rai law "  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"and our children will not be inundated with people who want sha rai law " How will leaving the EU prevent that? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"and our children will not be inundated with people who want sha rai law How will leaving the EU prevent that?" Because all the muslims come from the EU? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"actually this post has become less about Brexit more about im right and I want a second and a 3 and a 4 revote " you didn't even vote | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I'm expecting anyone who voted Brexit to be able to give me one DEFINITIVE advantage of Brexit. Our country will no longer be ruled over by a set of unelected non British people ...
We aren't now.
If you say so "We aren't. I understand how the EU works. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" By ruled over I assume you mean European Directives If that's what I meant I would have said that. Can you explain how else we are ruled over please?" I'm surprised you've not noticed how far the EU has become entrenched in our laws etc. I personally do not appreciate having our country ruled from afar, and with unelected officials playing hugely important roles in this. Democracy is a myth but the model we have at least involves those who chose to vote. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" We aren't. I understand how the EU works." So do I. If you think the Commission and President have no influence then that's your opinion. It's not mine. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"to be fair guys right or wrong the vote was to leave called in a fair and democratic way whether we had the true facts or even all the facts you can never say or know even for the ones here that want a revote.it is simply a way of trying to justify getting what they want ie a stay vote...what makes that a a more valid result than the leave.it was akin to lemmings .exactly as the new vote public opinion is always manipulated by the propaganda..i didn't vote but I will this time for leave soely for the fact that you cant keep voting till get result you want or else why even ask " I genuinely find it interesting that there seems to be a conclusion that anther vote will result in a reversal of the initial vote, by both leave and remain. This initself tells me it was the wrong decision taken in ignorance of any facts | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" We aren't. I understand how the EU works. So do I. If you think the Commission and President have no influence then that's your opinion. It's not mine." You are a sexy lady ...... Brexit will ne so bad for your country in every way | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" We aren't. I understand how the EU works. So do I. If you think the Commission and President have no influence then that's your opinion. It's not mine." The Commission works the same way as our Civil Service works. Politicians decide on a new law, the civil service implement it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"the crucial bit was the right to control our borders and not have their version of human rights imposed on our dying /raped kids." The crucial bit was actually to stay or leave. Absolutely no one knew or knows exactly what will happen afterwards. But it certainly was NOT a vote about immigration. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"the crucial bit was the right to control our borders and not have their version of human rights imposed on our dying /raped kids." I'm out of here. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If we had voted to stay. There would been none of this let's have a second vote. It would of been you lost so put up and shut up. The people have voted and the political parties need to carry out the will of the people. Us been out of the EU is not a problem. They need us more than we need them. As a net payer into the cash pot the said amount of money will do good for our country first and foremost. I can harp on for ages about this but I will not. Role on the 29th March 2019." | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" By ruled over I assume you mean European Directives If that's what I meant I would have said that. Can you explain how else we are ruled over please? I'm surprised you've not noticed how far the EU has become entrenched in our laws etc." That’s what EU Directives are ‘law’ and discussed, debated, agreed (or not) by all 27 Member Nations. There is of course the European Court of Justice.... which will still have impact on the UK even after Brexit | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Instead of telling people how the result should stand, can a Leaver tell me a single benefit that at the current time we know leaving will bring? Or even an expected benefit? Other than blue passports that is. Because surely if leaving is such a good idea then 2 years on from the referendum and months away from when we are due to leave someone should be able to answer those questions? The answers to those questions can be found online, but you're expecting the average person on the forums to give you all the answers? And when nobody falls for your shabby little bullying trick, you'll claim victory and retire smug and satisfied that your bullying has some sort of effect? This is typical hard-line remainer thinking - insult and belittle the opposition until you actually believe you are in the right. Read your post back./ Read my post back. Now who is insulting and belittling people? Because I'm pretty sure it wasn't me
Twaddle. You're a bully and I'm sure you're quite aware of it. Deal with it "Using the word bully in this context is ridiculous. There isn’t a single post on here that could be described as bullying. Infact, I’d say your comments are the most offensive and bullying like. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Commission works the same way as our Civil Service works. Politicians decide on a new law, the civil service implement it." The Commission "Promotes the general interest of the EU by proposing and enforcing legislation as well as by implementing policies and the EU budget" Our Civil service do not propose laws. The Commission does and its members are unelected. Which I find to be undemocratic. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"and our children will not be inundated with people who want sha rai law How will leaving the EU prevent that? Because all the muslims come from the EU?" | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"That’s what EU Directives are ‘law’ and discussed, debated, agreed (or not) by all 28 Member Nations. There is of course the European Court of Justice.... which will still have impact on the UK even after Brexit" FTFY | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"FAF anyone?" Of course  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"FAF anyone? Of course "I'm putting it to a vote | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Our Civil service do not propose laws. The Commission does and its members are unelected. Which I find to be undemocratic." Prior to the last General Election we were governed by a Prime Minister that the people hadn’t elected? Theresa May took over from David Cameron (who was elected) when he resigned. What’s the difference? She could of opted to run the country unellected for 3 years | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Just another antidemocratic march, that 100,000 people in a nation is a diminutive percent. " Do you understand democracy? The minority who lose a vote are still allowed to voice their opinions, they're still allowed to protest. To prevent them from doing so would be 'anti democratic' and would be the definition of a totalitarian state. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Our Civil service do not propose laws. The Commission does and its members are unelected. Which I find to be undemocratic. Prior to the last General Election we were governed by a Prime Minister that the people hadn’t elected? Theresa May took over from David Cameron (who was elected) when he resigned. What’s the difference? She could of opted to run the country unellected for 3 years" Teresa May was elected to Parliament by her constituents. And then elected as party leader by party members. She was never unelected and just put into post because someone thought it was a good idea. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The Commission "Promotes the general interest of the EU by proposing and enforcing legislation as well as by implementing policies and the EU budget" Our Civil service do not propose laws. The Commission does and its members are unelected. Which I find to be undemocratic." The Commission can only propose laws in those areas where the EU governments have UNANIMOUSLY AGREED to allow it to do under the EU treaty. Put another way, the Commission can only propose EU laws in areas where the UK government and the House of Commons has allowed it to do so. Also, ‘proposing’ is not the same as ‘deciding’. A Commission proposal only becomes law if it is approved by both a qualified-majority in the EU Council (unanimity in many sensitive areas) and a simple majority in the European Parliament. In practice this means that after the amendments adopted by the governments and the MEPs, the legislation usually looks very different to what the Commission originally proposed. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The Commission "Promotes the general interest of the EU by proposing and enforcing legislation as well as by implementing policies and the EU budget" Our Civil service do not propose laws. The Commission does and its members are unelected. Which I find to be undemocratic. The Commission can only propose laws in those areas where the EU governments have UNANIMOUSLY AGREED to allow it to do under the EU treaty. Put another way, the Commission can only propose EU laws in areas where the UK government and the House of Commons has allowed it to do so. Also, ‘proposing’ is not the same as ‘deciding’. A Commission proposal only becomes law if it is approved by both a qualified-majority in the EU Council (unanimity in many sensitive areas) and a simple majority in the European Parliament. In practice this means that after the amendments adopted by the governments and the MEPs, the legislation usually looks very different to what the Commission originally proposed. " I know, but they still have more power than unelected people should, in my opinion. Which is unlikely to change no matter what anyone says. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It also confuses me when certain individuals state you can't have a second vote, you can't change your mind. Of course you can, every four to five years we are given the opportunity to vote and change our minds about the government we have in Parliament. Whether I agree with Brexit is neither here nor there but there isn't half a lot of guff being talked about on here about what is and isn't democratic..." You are talking about Parliamentary elections. Not a referendum. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Instead of telling people how the result should stand, can a Leaver tell me a single benefit that at the current time we know leaving will bring? Or even an expected benefit? Other than blue passports that is. Because surely if leaving is such a good idea then 2 years on from the referendum and months away from when we are due to leave someone should be able to answer those questions? The answers to those questions can be found online, but you're expecting the average person on the forums to give you all the answers? And when nobody falls for your shabby little bullying trick, you'll claim victory and retire smug and satisfied that your bullying has some sort of effect? This is typical hard-line remainer thinking - insult and belittle the opposition until you actually believe you are in the right. Read your post back./ Read my post back. Now who is insulting and belittling people? Because I'm pretty sure it wasn't me
Twaddle. You're a bully and I'm sure you're quite aware of it. Deal with it
Using the word bully in this context is ridiculous.
There isn’t a single post on here that could be described as bullying. Infact, I’d say your comments are the most offensive and bullying like. "Calling out a bully is bullying?
What planet are you from? The post I was originally referring to is what's known as a "leading question", it's an old trick | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Instead of telling people how the result should stand, can a Leaver tell me a single benefit that at the current time we know leaving will bring? Or even an expected benefit? Other than blue passports that is. Because surely if leaving is such a good idea then 2 years on from the referendum and months away from when we are due to leave someone should be able to answer those questions? The answers to those questions can be found online, but you're expecting the average person on the forums to give you all the answers? And when nobody falls for your shabby little bullying trick, you'll claim victory and retire smug and satisfied that your bullying has some sort of effect? This is typical hard-line remainer thinking - insult and belittle the opposition until you actually believe you are in the right. Read your post back./ Read my post back. Now who is insulting and belittling people? Because I'm pretty sure it wasn't me
Twaddle. You're a bully and I'm sure you're quite aware of it. Deal with it
Using the word bully in this context is ridiculous.
There isn’t a single post on here that could be described as bullying. Infact, I’d say your comments are the most offensive and bullying like.
Calling out a bully is bullying?
What planet are you from? The post I was originally referring to is what's known as a "leading question", it's an old trick "I don’t see any bullying. But I’m sure if you call it bullying enough times, it will look like bullying to you. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Teresa May was elected to Parliament by her constituents. And then elected as party leader by party members. She was never unelected and just put into post because someone thought it was a good idea." Fair point, I stand corrected
And now I really need to go sort some stuff out for next week, otherwise I’ll never get my small place in France renovated | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It also confuses me when certain individuals state you can't have a second vote, you can't change your mind. Of course you can, every four to five years we are given the opportunity to vote and change our minds about the government we have in Parliament. Whether I agree with Brexit is neither here nor there but there isn't half a lot of guff being talked about on here about what is and isn't democratic..." | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Fair point, I stand corrected
And now I really need to go sort some stuff out for next week, otherwise I’ll never get my small place in France renovated "Je suis jaloux | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Instead of telling people how the result should stand, can a Leaver tell me a single benefit that at the current time we know leaving will bring? Or even an expected benefit? Other than blue passports that is. Because surely if leaving is such a good idea then 2 years on from the referendum and months away from when we are due to leave someone should be able to answer those questions? The answers to those questions can be found online, but you're expecting the average person on the forums to give you all the answers? And when nobody falls for your shabby little bullying trick, you'll claim victory and retire smug and satisfied that your bullying has some sort of effect? This is typical hard-line remainer thinking - insult and belittle the opposition until you actually believe you are in the right. Read your post back./ Read my post back. Now who is insulting and belittling people? Because I'm pretty sure it wasn't me
Twaddle. You're a bully and I'm sure you're quite aware of it. Deal with it
Using the word bully in this context is ridiculous.
There isn’t a single post on here that could be described as bullying. Infact, I’d say your comments are the most offensive and bullying like.
Calling out a bully is bullying?
What planet are you from? The post I was originally referring to is what's known as a "leading question", it's an old trick
I don’t see any bullying.
But I’m sure if you call it bullying enough times, it will look like bullying to you. "Hmm, yes - excellent response. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Fair point, I stand corrected
And now I really need to go sort some stuff out for next week, otherwise I’ll never get my small place in France renovated
Je suis jaloux "It’s only a small place in rural Normady, but it’s my haven | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
It really was a case that both sides honestly thought the brexit vote would be a landslide remain.
And now we are due to leave, where are all those that were so vocal we should leave, disappeared under the nearest rock for the next few years till the shit storm subsides..
In the cold light of day, the prospect of leaving has certainly lost its shine for many, I for one would welcome another vote. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Instead of telling people how the result should stand, can a Leaver tell me a single benefit that at the current time we know leaving will bring? Or even an expected benefit? Other than blue passports that is. Because surely if leaving is such a good idea then 2 years on from the referendum and months away from when we are due to leave someone should be able to answer those questions? The answers to those questions can be found online, but you're expecting the average person on the forums to give you all the answers? And when nobody falls for your shabby little bullying trick, you'll claim victory and retire smug and satisfied that your bullying has some sort of effect? This is typical hard-line remainer thinking - insult and belittle the opposition until you actually believe you are in the right. Read your post back./ Read my post back. Now who is insulting and belittling people? Because I'm pretty sure it wasn't me
Twaddle. You're a bully and I'm sure you're quite aware of it. Deal with it
Using the word bully in this context is ridiculous.
There isn’t a single post on here that could be described as bullying. Infact, I’d say your comments are the most offensive and bullying like.
Calling out a bully is bullying?
What planet are you from? The post I was originally referring to is what's known as a "leading question", it's an old trick
I don’t see any bullying.
But I’m sure if you call it bullying enough times, it will look like bullying to you.
Hmm, yes - excellent response."Thanks. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It also confuses me when certain individuals state you can't have a second vote, you can't change your mind. Of course you can, every four to five years we are given the opportunity to vote and change our minds about the government we have in Parliament. Whether I agree with Brexit is neither here nor there but there isn't half a lot of guff being talked about on here about what is and isn't democratic... You are talking about Parliamentary elections. Not a referendum." But where does it say in law that we cannot have a second referendum? This is a far fetched point, but what if the EU came to us cap in hand in 3 months, 'please we want Great Britain to be the European Overlords, at absolutely no cost to the British, retain your borders etc, etc we just realise that Europe needs you, in fact we ll pay you x billion per year for the privilege of being our new masters... ' Are you saying we could not hold another referendum to see if the British wanted to remain? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Je suis jaloux
It’s only a small place in rural Normady, but it’s my haven "It's not the size that counts | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Je suis jaloux
It’s only a small place in rural Normady, but it’s my haven
It's not the size that counts "I’ll hold you to that.... closely | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Instead of telling people how the result should stand, can a Leaver tell me a single benefit that at the current time we know leaving will bring? Or even an expected benefit? Other than blue passports that is. Because surely if leaving is such a good idea then 2 years on from the referendum and months away from when we are due to leave someone should be able to answer those questions? The answers to those questions can be found online, but you're expecting the average person on the forums to give you all the answers? And when nobody falls for your shabby little bullying trick, you'll claim victory and retire smug and satisfied that your bullying has some sort of effect? This is typical hard-line remainer thinking - insult and belittle the opposition until you actually believe you are in the right. Read your post back./ Read my post back. Now who is insulting and belittling people? Because I'm pretty sure it wasn't me
Twaddle. You're a bully and I'm sure you're quite aware of it. Deal with it
Using the word bully in this context is ridiculous.
There isn’t a single post on here that could be described as bullying. Infact, I’d say your comments are the most offensive and bullying like.
Calling out a bully is bullying?
What planet are you from? The post I was originally referring to is what's known as a "leading question", it's an old trick
I don’t see any bullying.
But I’m sure if you call it bullying enough times, it will look like bullying to you.
Hmm, yes - excellent response."How on earth is a leading question "bullying"? The fact that not one Leaver has attempted to answer it speaks volumes. The nearest I've got is you repeatedly calling me a bully, statingthat average people can't be expecting to answer it and suggesting I google to find out the benefits that you appear to passionate;y believe in despite not knowing what they are? I repeat my question. Tell me one benefit you know that leaving will bring? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No chance the remainers lost get over it X spend your day doing something else hehe X
democracy rules !!!
no new referendum
no matter how close it was
its the democratic way the fair way
the bad losers are marching on London nothing else X
The Referendum as was to Leave or Remain came out with the result as we know it.
That was Democracy!
Let's say if the Remainers managed to constitutionally get a 2nd Referendum and that too went to a Leave decision
How many more "Vote" Campaigns would the Remainers want? 3, 10, 50, 100 even 1000 ? But what if the result went the same as the first time around??
If the Remainers cannot accept Democracy, then bugger off out of the UK and live elsewhere."Do you think Is it really about not accepting democracy. We voted to remain because we felt we didnt have enough information to make an informed decision. The vote went against us and reluctantly we have no choice but to accept it. We can sit back in the comfort that the City is getting very nervous, Share prices are starting to fall, Companies have and are leaving our shores. Our PM is in an impossible position. The pro Brexiteers of course wont support her, Corbyn will try to destroy her to force an Election and the remainders have lost the fight and dont want to get involved. Who would want her job. Before we get told off and told to buggar off to live someone else, we have earned our right to live here and have the Medals to prove it. Of course if it all goes tits up in a few years, It wont be anything we've done. RT HE | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"But where does it say in law that we cannot have a second referendum" I have no idea but where does it say in law we can keep voting on something important till the original 'losers' become the 'winners'? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well the brexiteers promise that the sun would shine more in the UK if we left the EU seems to have come true, surely it cannot be down to global warming alone...
It really was a case that both sides honestly thought the brexit vote would be a landslide remain.
And now we are due to leave, where are all those that were so vocal we should leave, disappeared under the nearest rock for the next few years till the shit storm subsides..
In the cold light of day, the prospect of leaving has certainly lost its shine for many, I for one would welcome another vote."....Who are these many you talk of....I can't find them..It's just wishful thinking. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
