St Nige Ahead In The Polls.......

[ToraToraTora]

https://news.sky.com/story/nigel-farages-brexit-party-could-win-european-elections-poll-11696217

[jim360]

// If MPs are going to make promises which include asking the entire country, they should have a plan to deliver it. //

On this I absolutely agree with you -- but they didn't. The correct response shouldn't be to push ahead regardless, but to go back to the start and reconsider how to deliver the promise effectively.

Now, clearly my saying this has no force, but it is not too difficult to find Leave voters who would agree with this too. In turn, this leads to the alternative I mentioned: the mood of the people may, or may not, have changed since 2016, but there is absolutely nothing undemocratic about finding out.

[pixie374]

It is undemocratic to have a second referendum without honouring the first. There would be no point in anyone voting ever again. A second one in 15 years to rejoin... maybe. But let's do one thing at a time and get us out first.

[Togo]

Have you noticed that the Remainiacs(we have one on this thread) rail against being asked a question "more than once" but think it is a good idea to ask a Nation the same question over and over?

[naomi24]

Jim, I’ve said this before but I’ll say it again. After the referendum you accepted the result and were resigned to the fact that Remain had lost and that meant we were leaving the EU. Then you spied the dissidents – those who had no intention of conceding defeat – and so you jumped on that bandwagon and you’ve been gathering pace on it ever since. Empty words from you, Jim – and that assessment is a kindness.

[pixie374]

Imagine how many dissidents there would be if we didn't leave?

[Togo]

//Then you spied the dissidents – those who had no intention of conceding defeat – and so you jumped on that bandwagon//

Just another option in the political dressing up box Naomi?

[naomi24]

Something like that, togo.

[jim360]

That's a total fabrication of how my position has evolved, Naomi, and I'll thank you to retract it. What happened to my views is nothing to do with "the dissidents", but rather a lot more to do with how difficult, how ruinous, and how manifestly disruptive Brexit has been. Never mind all of the technicalities that were hidden from me -- from us, even -- because Cameron lied to everyone in that *** leaflet, or because prior to 2016 I had only a very limited understanding of the UK's constitution.

You do me far too little credit. I'll accept that you can have a low opinion of me right now -- to some extent I even sympathise with you there -- but this is not about conspiracy, or dissent, or lack of integrity, or any of the other slurs you're throwing in my direction. This is about how I see it, and nothing else.

Now, enough of this. I've asked you several times before, and I will ask you once again, to remember the old adage, that if you have nothing nice to say about somebody, then say nothing.

[pixie374]

I think you are putting far too much faith in leaflets and propaganda, Jim. People don't believe a word politicians say, they aren't stupid. They made up their own minds for their own reasons.

[jim360]

Perhaps, but all the same it's been claimed several times that the contents of that leaflet justify overruling all sorts of aspects of constitutional law, so you'll forgive me for mentioning it. The broader point is that I didn't stop learning about the EU, the UK's place in it, and related matters in 2016, so why shouldn't I let that further research inform my views? Naomi is quite right to point out that instantly following the referendum I stated that, however bitter the result, I was prepared to accept it. In 2016, that was true. I think it still could be true, if a satisfactory means of exiting the EU could be found. So far as I can see, though, there are currently only two plausible ways of leaving the EU, and both of them are, in their own different ways, awful. I don't believe it is sensible to press on in either direction if they're both so bad; that leaves returning to the status quo ante referendum, which is also in its way awful -- but does, at least, give someone the option to have another, perhaps more successful, attempt in the future, assuming they can unite the country and the Commons around their vision.

[Old_Geezer]

Good on Farage and his party. Let's hope parliament finds some semblance of honour soon, takes us out on no-deal, and ensures the Brexit party (and the others) has no need to campaign.

[Peter Pedant]

// Empty words from you, Jim – and that assessment is a kindness.//

perhaps a kindness of a kind that you dont need Jim !
St Nige gives the electorate of the UK another chance to completely frack itself and they ( see above - the usual suspects ) are queueing up for it.

Forgive them Lord, they know not what they do
very pascal - someone is bound to quip: where dat from den?

[naomi24]

Jim, I've nothing to retract. Following the referendum you conceded that Remain was defeated. Since then I've heard umpteen excuses for saying what you now say.

[ichkeria]

Let’s hope Brexit doesn’t happen and spoil it all :-)

[jim360]

Three years is a long time, and as I say I've never stopped learning about politics, law, the EU, etc. There are no excuses here. If you can't see that, then that is for you to sort out, Naomi, not me. You are simply wrong about me, and if you don't want to retract it then I can only suggest you keep your opinions about me to yourself in future. You have made them clear enough already.

[retrocop]

If we were to have a second referendum it should be for only those who voted leave in the first one. We will never know though because that is not how democracy works. Ha. Just keep making people vote t'il the establishment get the right answer THEY want to see.

[jim360]

// If we were to have a second referendum it should be for only those who voted leave in the first one. //

I don't think that anyone who takes this suggestion seriously should be consulted about how democracy works, frankly.

[Spicerack]

I think they're pretty fair, even handed people, retro.
When Jeremy wins the next GE, we'll patiently explain that he's bad for the economy and insist on having re-runs until our preferred candidate wins. I'm sure they'll understand.

[New Judge]

“….but there is at least one more alternative open, namely returning the question, or some variation of it, to the people.”

Why? All that has happened in the last 33 months is that the EU has cobbled together a form of allowing us to leave with the promise of not causing us too much trouble. The conditions attached to this are, quite predictably, completely unacceptable. The electorate was not asked if they wanted to leave provided it was not too much trouble; they were asked if they wanted to leave. They said “yes” and politicians need to deal with any trouble the EU may present. Because they have been unable to do so is no reason to keep asking the same question, or any variation of it. The notion that we cannot properly leave because it will be too troublesome is quite frankly laughable.

[ichkeria]

The reason we can’t leave is because our elected parliament has voted no.
And no other reason.