National News Brexit - the Deal or No Deal poll

Brexit - Deal or No Deal?

  • Deal

    Votes: 51 29.1%

  • No Deal

    Votes: 77 44.0%

  • Call in the Donald

    Votes: 2 1.1%

  • Call in Noel Edmonds

    Votes: 8 4.6%

  • I don't care anymore

    Votes: 37 21.1%
  • Total voters
    175
ZeroTheHero said:
That is the bit of my post you chose to reply to? May can say what she likes - she isn't in control of Parliament, her NI political allies or even a significant number of her own party. As to business and your 'vassal state' point, I have heard precisely no business man on any news outlet saying that they are desperate for a 'no deal' - they all want some sort of customs and regulatory deal that means they can keep trading without everything stopping dead in March next year until something is cobbled together. And the something that gets cobbled together will look very like a customs and regulatory deal - both we and the EU need that. I am amazed if you think otherwise.
Click to expand...

I`m not talking about the person, I`m talking about the fact that the people (you,me, everyone) were given the opportunity to answer a simple question. Stay or Leave.
The leaving part isn`t up for debate, democracy sorted that out.

The negotiation is about how we leave, in any business negotiation you need a firm starting point and things you will not concede.
If the negotiating teams of the EU accept this deal on the 25th its most likely Parliament will not support it. In my humble it contains far to much "Remain" but that is by the by.

So that leaves hard exit, things won`t "stop dead" because trade & business (and money!) won`t let it. There maybe difficulties but we won`t be stockpiling avocado`s "just in case".

When we voted to join the "sales pitch" was ease of trade & jobs with little or no future vision of what the EU was to become as both the UK & the EU flourished.

Trade & employment makes sense........... subsidising impoverished countries doesn`t when we have our own issues.
 
Hmm - well I'm not convinced that a second referendum is impossible, but I do agree that it is unlikely. Don't underestimate political expediency though, it might well be convenient for those in Westminster to throw the question back to 'us' rather than take the responsibility for the final decision themselves!

The problem with the negotiations has always been that we are doing so from a position of weakness. Yes, they would have preferred us to stay (for many reasons - financial, political, security etc) but we chose to leave. The idea put about by the odious Boris that we could somehow leave, have a huge amount to spend on the health service etc, reduce the amount of people coming into the country and yet retain the trade and financial benefits of membership was never realistic. The EU simply cannot accede to those kinds of demands - it would fall apart completely within a couple of years as other countries took advantage of the same conditions. So although they do want (and perhaps need) us, they were never going to bend over backwards to accommodate us - quite the reverse.

May was (and is) in an impossible position. The result is that we have a proposed deal that pleases absolutely nobody, neither those who want to leave nor those who think it was a huge mistake (and I am guessing that we are on opposite sides!). IF I thought a 'no deal' would - or could - work out OK, allowing us to flourish as a country without becoming a 'race-to-the-bottom' sweatshop economy and being able to retain our influence and standing with our neighbours, then I would be OK with it. But unfortunately I can see no way that can happen.
 
Pete Burrett said:
Here's what will probably be an unpopular view about a second referendum.

Based on the 'ordinary people (voters)' I've seen interviewed on TV, many would see a second referendum as a simple re-run of the first. Whatever the question, they would still vote on a 'leave' or 'remain' basis, rather than a vote on the terms of leaving. It will depend on the nuances of the referendum questions asked. If Joe Public perceives one option to smack of remaining or leaving that could influence their vote.

Many still think that calls for a second referendum are from a bunch of remoaning (sic) losers who hope that next time around they'll win.

This is nonsense, of course, but it's still the perception of many. So the question is, what would be the point of a second referendum when the reason for it is not understood and many of the votes cast are thus not addressing the issue at hand?

Easy to dismiss this as an undemocratic hypothesis or treating the public like idiots, but unfortunately a proportion of them are.
Click to expand...
Of course, you never know how people will vote (as opposed to how they say they'll vote!) - but here is a link to the Evening Standard poll after the 'deal'.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/pol...al-voters-want-a-new-referendum-a3990851.html

For those who can't be bothered to go and read through it:

"Voters have changed their minds about Brexit and would now vote to stay in the EU, with 54 per cent voting Remain, versus 46 per cent Leave.
Backing for a fresh referendum is the highest recorded so far, with 48 per cent in favour and only 34 per cent against. Excluding don’t knows, the margin is 59-42.
If May’s deal is voted down, that jumps higher to 64-36, excluding don’t knows."

I make no comment about this (polls, schmolls and it was 'was commissioned by the People’s Vote campaign for a second referendum' - make of that what you will! - but the right leaning ES has published it), except to say it was at least interesting.
 
If some folk thought "we" didn`t know what we were voting for in 2016 then they had better buckle up if they fancy another go!
Having a second vote because the answer first time wasn`t expected or created a bit of hard work for Parliament is about as pure a betrayal of democracy as you can wish for.
We voted leave, if thats "Hard/No Deal/Cliff Edge Leaving" then so be it. We reap what we sow.
 
A theoretical.

If a people's vote is agreed upon next week, how soon will it be able to legally take place, and particularly, if the 3 options are put out there, how can there be enough time to implement the results? If a result is less than 50.1% in that scenario, does it prove a majority point of view? Or further muddy the waters?

If it was a 52-48 two option vote the other way, how does that change where we are now? If it's not a big enough margin/undemocratic now, how would this then apply the other way? Would we then have another referendum? Time is ticking.

Similarly, what would a general election hope to solve between now and March? Would parliament but even more split and be unable to function?

Would either scenario seal a No Deal by the back door due to the time it takes to do it?

As we sit today, whatever side of the fence anyone sits on, a general public intervention just does not have enough time to resolve itself and enable a Govt the time to whatever it needs to. Cameron and Osborne managed to push it through in a year, but that was with a majority. How can that hope to happen in a hung parliament?
 
It looks like Theresa May is the only one who feels that it is a good deal.
The EU are probably expecting a new referendum with us staying in.
Looks an impossible task to exit. Parliament overwhelmingly wants in although the people said they wanted out
 
The thing that is absolutely obvious is that the country is split right down the middle about the whole thing. Yes there may some movement this way or that, but in general it's half and half. And for me, that's what is the most worrying.
If there's another referendum (and as I said above, I have my doubts) and 'remain' won this time, there would be trouble in the streets IMO.
If there isn't another referendum, then there will always be the feeling that at least some of the voters were hoodwinked last time by posters on the side of buses (I have just heard two such on the radio) and that we are accepting a deal that is the worst of all worlds, fashioned at least as much to try and heal the splits in the Conservative party (unsuccessfully!) as for the good of the country.
If the deal gets through Parliament, if there isn't a new Tory leader, if there isn't a general election, if if if :(
And even as someone who wanted, and still wants, to be in Europe - I cannot think of a way that this will come out OK. All the way from a no deal hard Brexit to changing our minds and staying in, every single option now seems like a bad one.
Thanks David Cameron - we owe you one. :mad:
 
Pete Burrett said:
Here's what will probably be an unpopular view about a second referendum.

Based on the 'ordinary people (voters)' I've seen interviewed on TV, many would see a second referendum as a simple re-run of the first. Whatever the question, they would still vote on a 'leave' or 'remain' basis, rather than a vote on the terms of leaving. It will depend on the nuances of the referendum questions asked. If Joe Public perceives one option to smack of remaining or leaving that could influence their vote.

Many still think that calls for a second referendum are from a bunch of remoaning (sic) losers who hope that next time around they'll win.

This is nonsense, of course, but it's still the perception of many. So the question is, what would be the point of a second referendum when the reason for it is not understood and many of the votes cast are thus not addressing the issue at hand?

Easy to dismiss this as an undemocratic hypothesis or treating the public like idiots, but unfortunately a proportion of them are.
Click to expand...


I agree with Pete, a proportion of the public are idiots especially those who disagree with me.;)
 
I wonder what Cameron thinks about his decision to call an EU referendum, as he writes his memoirs in a faux shepherd’s hut at the bottom of his garden?

Perhaps they will be published in time for Xmas and we’ll find out soon enough the thoughts of the great man.
 
ZeroTheHero said:
If the deal gets through Parliament, if there isn't a new Tory leader, if there isn't a general election, if if if :(
Click to expand...

Looking at it, it seems the only way that this deal can possibly get through parliament is if Labour backs it - or if Corbyn decides to give his MPs a free vote and enough of them back it.

SNP will be no. Lib Dems will be no (hoping to get another referendum). DUP will be no. And at least 50 Tory MPs will be no from the sounds of it.

If it doesn't get through parliament - then it seems to me that we have to have another general election. Which will serve as something of a proxy second referendum. And then there'll be a stark choice - extend the Brexit deadline for another year to have another go at negotiations, or failing that a second referendum. Or No Deal Brexit. And which way it goes would surely come down to who's in power.

But that's how I see it - either Corbyn steps up and does May a huge favour, or it's chaos. I expect chaos.
 
Pete Burrett said:
I might be missing something here ZTH in the general confusion, but isn't a second referendum likely to be around the terms of our leaving rather than 'leave' or 'remain'?

OK, if the referendum vote is in favour of the Chequers agreement many Brexit supporters might consider it too diluted for them, but it wouldn't be quite as stark a choice as in or out.
Click to expand...

Who knows? The question asked in any referendum would have to be framed very carefully.

If it was about the terms of us leaving, what would it be?

It couldn't be: Do you approve of the Chequers plan? Y/N ! Because what would an 'N' mean? In fact I think any referendum would have to give questions to which there was NO negative answer that didn't indicate a preference or we will be right back where we are now.

Not wanting to do the Governments job for them (mind you perhaps someone ought to!) but maybe something along the lines of:

Please indicate a preference for:
a) Accepting the Chequers deal (with a link that explains as simply as possible what it means)
b) Rejecting the Chequers deal, and leaving the EU without a deal (with a link that explains what the ramifications are of that)
c) Rejecting the Chequers deal and remaining in the EU (with a link that details on what terms they's have us back!)

That would NOT give the option to just vote NO, but would mean people actually had to make a positive decision. After all many people would vote against income tax given a Y/N decision, but that wouldn't make it a sensible outcome.
 
Last edited:
tonyw said:
Looking at it, it seems the only way that this deal can possibly get through parliament is if Labour backs it - or if Corbyn decides to give his MPs a free vote and enough of them back it.

SNP will be no. Lib Dems will be no (hoping to get another referendum). DUP will be no. And at least 50 Tory MPs will be no from the sounds of it.

If it doesn't get through parliament - then it seems to me that we have to have another general election. Which will serve as something of a proxy second referendum. And then there'll be a stark choice - extend the Brexit deadline for another year to have another go at negotiations, or failing that a second referendum. Or No Deal Brexit. And which way it goes would surely come down to who's in power.

But that's how I see it - either Corbyn steps up and does May a huge favour, or it's chaos. I expect chaos.
Click to expand...
The problem with that is that Labour is just as split on the EU as the Tories. And I don't think they are any more competent. So if they got into power, I'm not sure they could reconcile the two halves of their party/parliament/the country or negotiate a deal any better than this lot.
Chaos it is then.
 
tonyw said:
Looking at it, it seems the only way that this deal can possibly get through parliament is if Labour backs it - or if Corbyn decides to give his MPs a free vote and enough of them back it.

SNP will be no. Lib Dems will be no (hoping to get another referendum). DUP will be no. And at least 50 Tory MPs will be no from the sounds of it.

If it doesn't get through parliament - then it seems to me that we have to have another general election. Which will serve as something of a proxy second referendum. And then there'll be a stark choice - extend the Brexit deadline for another year to have another go at negotiations, or failing that a second referendum. Or No Deal Brexit. And which way it goes would surely come down to who's in power.

But that's how I see it - either Corbyn steps up and does May a huge favour, or it's chaos. I expect chaos.
Click to expand...


If we do end up with a general election it will be very interesting to see the manifestos of the main parties, especially relating to the policy of a second referendum or otherwise.
 
ZeroTheHero said:
Who knows? The question asked in any referendum would have to be framed very carefully.

If it was about the terms of us leaving, what would it be?

It couldn't be: Do you approve of the Chequers plan? Y/N ! Because what would an 'N' mean? In fact I think any referendum would have to give questions to which there was NO negative answer that didn't indicate a preference or we will be right back where we are now.

Not wanting to do the Governments job for them (mind you perhaps someone ought to!) but maybe something along the lines of:

Please indicate a preference for:
a) Accepting the Chequers deal (with a link that explains as simply as possible what it means)
b) Rejecting the Chequers deal, and leaving the EU without a deal (with a link that explains what the ramifications are of that)
c) Rejecting the Chequers deal and remaining in the EU (with a link that details on what terms they's have us back!)

That would NOT give the option to just vote NO, but would mean people actually had to make a positive decision. After all many people would vote against income tax given a Y/N decision, but that wouldn't make it a sensible outcome.
Click to expand...
The issue then is if people either don't vote, or choose to spoil their vote, what does it mean? Can they legitimately say my point of view wasn't covered, I want another vote? Or saying I want Canada ++ or Norway and it wasn't covered?

We're stuck in a place where, collectively, a group of people in an echo chamber are arguing over nuance when the bigger picture is no deal on 29th March if they carry on. Which ironically is what the "people's vote" crowd don't want. The turkey is walking to it's own death trying to conceptually define what is the right method of slaughter is (or not), while being slaughtered.

Gobble, gobble
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Peterdev
National News The Brexit Thread 🇬🇧🇪🇺
315 316 317
Replies
6K
Views
379K
Eric Blair
Eric Blair
Sarge
National News Bojo's Big ben Brexit bongs?
2
Replies
38
Views
5K
cassox
cassox
M
Brexit Party Rally
4 5 6
Replies
111
Views
14K
Marked Ox
M
gofish2
  • Poll
National News Halloween Brexit
Replies
11
Views
4K
pooshooter
pooshooter
Northstandboy
BMW plant - Brexit
2 3
Replies
42
Views
10K
Essexyellows
Essexyellows
Back
Top Bottom