Cont: Brexit: Now What? Part 5

Status
Not open for further replies.
Archie Gemmill Goal said:
thats pretty damning. the question is horrible but you still get half the respondents who cant confidently say they understood the complexities of what they were voting for.
Click to expand...

I reckon that about 40% of the respondents, if asked, would say they were a bit confused about the question ;)
 
Captain_Swoop said:
Boris has a new plan for a 'Super Canada' deal

May has humiliated Britain with her Chequers deal and only his new plan is the way forward. He proposed a looser free trade agreement, "at least as deep as the one the EU has recently concluded with Canada".
His 'Super Canada' deal would bring an open border with Ireland, zero tariffs and zero quotas on all imports and exports, Mutual recognition agreements covering UK and EU regulations to ensure conformity of goods with each other's standards, Technological solutions to keep supply chains operating smoothly, A deal covering goods as well as services, membership of the Aviation area and should be "relatively straightforward" to negotiate.

So, looks like it will be fun at the Party Conference next week.
Click to expand...

Is Boris a complete idiot or just lying, because there is 0 chance of this ever happening.
 
The Moog said:
Is Boris a complete idiot or just lying, because there is 0 chance of this ever happening.
Click to expand...
You are probably mistaken about what Johnson is trying to achieve. Which is as it has ever been is to become PM. By all natural justice it should have been his turn after Cameron....

For Johnson Brexit was only ever a way to become PM and that is still all it is for him.
 
We get to override democracy if we can prove the majority doesn't know what the heck they are talking about?

BRB gonna go override pretty much every decision made ever in a democracy.
 
JoeMorgue said:
We get to override democracy if we can prove the majority doesn't know what the heck they are talking about?

BRB gonna go override pretty much every decision made ever in a democracy.
Click to expand...

You don't understand, Joe. The decision was bad. Bad! It's different when the decision is bad. Objectively bad, even.
 
JoeMorgue said:
We get to override democracy if we can prove the majority doesn't know what the heck they are talking about?
Click to expand...


I believe there's at least a working solution for this. I don't know if anyone's mentioned it before in this thread, but I feel it would be worth the world knowing about a thing called 'representative democracy'. It's a fantastic idea, one benefit of which is that the above is less of an issue than it would be in a direct democracy...
 
Dave Rogers said:
No, the only thing that can override a referendum is another referendum. I'm not sure why that makes it undemocratic to hold another referendum, but apparently it does.
Click to expand...

It's fine to hold another referendum, in theory.

It's dirty to pool to keep asking the question over and over until the masses give you the answer you think is right.
 
JoeMorgue said:
We get to override democracy if we can prove the majority doesn't know what the heck they are talking about?

BRB gonna go override pretty much every decision made ever in a democracy.
Click to expand...
Usually voters only need to know the values and priorities of the people who are offering to represent them so they can decide which matches their own views best, they don't need to know the ins and outs of all the individual issues. Obviously they can be fooled even about that if they don't do their due diligence (cf Donald Trump), but as a rule, in a country with a reasonable level of education, majority vote shouldn't lead to disaster.

When it comes to referenda, however, especially on a question as complex as membership of the EU, the percentage of the population with both the time and the intellectual capacity to fully assess the pros and cons and reach a properly informed conclusion is very small. Which is why the person I blame for this whole mess is David Cameron, who agreed to a referendum purely to buy the silence of his crackpot right wing during the 2015 election campaign. Though to be fair to him I'm sure that if he'd known how the vote would go he would not have agreed to it, even if it had cost him the election (which it probably would have).
 
Last edited:
JoeMorgue said:
It's fine to hold another referendum, in theory.

It's dirty to pool to keep asking the question over and over until the masses give you the answer you think is right.
Click to expand...

Agreed. But it's also valid to hold a referendum to check we've made the right choice, now that we have at least a vague idea of what choice we've made. And really, what's the problem either way? If the vote is "Yes, we still want to leave," then the leavers will be happy and the remainers won't have any grounds for complaint; and if the vote is "No, having seen what leaving entails we now don't want to," then that's what the majority of the people want.

Dave
 
Let's just say if I'm pretty sure if we have another referendum (either another basically glorified opinion poll like the first or one with some actual to be taken action attached to it) and it comes back "Yes" again... most people in this thread will still be coming up with reasons we should have another one.

Everyone's all "Democracy is great, will of the people, sucks to be you losers" when the masses vote on their side, all "OMG Tyranny of the Majority! This is why we have Representational and not pure democracy!" when it's not.
 
JoeMorgue said:
It's fine to hold another referendum, in theory.

It's dirty to pool to keep asking the question over and over until the masses give you the answer you think is right.
Click to expand...
I think we have learned that there is no point having a decisive vote where you don't know what you are voting for.

In future the deal needs to be done before the vote.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom