Brexited | the worst threads live the longest

Do you think there will be a Deal or No Deal?


  • Total voters
    194
  • Poll closed .

MadMike

Full Member
Joined
Sep 16, 2015
Messages
11,607
Location
London
true... though I'm not sure the people can agree on anything anyway and even agreeing the wording of a vote would be a minefield
You could say we have voted to leave once therefore any second referendum is how we leave (mays deal or no deal)
you could say we want to have a re-run of leave and remain (but as we have seen what does leave actually entail)
or do you go multi option - and then how many options (hard brexit, mays deal, remain) or do you open it up to future trade as well (hard brexit, single market, customs union, remain as we are, join euro and shengen)
and if you do go multi option is it single vote - ranking preference, ticking all acceptable.
Who is eligable to vote (what age, can EU nationals vote, how about brits abroad)... would it be the same as before or not
honestly I think you have a year of legal challenges to even agree a question
Tbh, it's not that hard. There's already a precedence on who can vote. British nationals home or abroad of 18 years or older. Future trade deals are off the table until we leave. EU can't negotiate anything till we're out, hence the WA. So putting them on a referendum, makes no sense. The parliament wasted a bunch of time on the Political Declaration which isn't anything more than an indication for future negotiations but not binding on the outcome.

The parliament have 3 options at this stage: No-Deal, WA or Revocation. Put those 3 options to the people with indicatives votes. Only instead of requiring a majority, the option with the most votes wins. It's the outcome most people could accept basically.
 
Last edited:

Rado_N

Yaaas Broncos!
Joined
Apr 6, 2009
Messages
110,905
Location
Manchester
No... I believe Parliament has compelled her to ask for an extension - which she has... if the EU reject this then the legal default is still no deal
I suspect you will probably see the EU agree but only with a long deal at which point she possibly goes back to parliament to say her deal or long extension (with the threat of no brexit) on Thursday
Basically the showdown she always wanted of her deal vs a cliff edge (be that no deal or no brexit)
At that point i guess she hopes enough of the ERG hold their noses and vote for her deal and there is enough cross party support to offset the DUP
Gut feel she will loose but possibly by not a huge amount
A second referendum would be an affront to democracy but her deal can have as many votes as it takes to wear people down.
 

sun_tzu

The Art of Bore
Joined
Aug 23, 2010
Messages
19,536
Location
Still waiting for the Youthquake
You'd like to think that they'd learnt something about suggesting a course of action without thinking it through.

So assuming people are already thinking about it, and bearing in mind how many times worthwhile solutions have been suggested ITT over the last year or so, you'd think it would be less chaotic than it is now.

May even go someway to calming the situation and given people a sense of purpose and direction, which is the point isn't it?
Problem is everybody is thinking it will be the question / format they want... exactly like they did when it came to brexit meaning brexit
 

sun_tzu

The Art of Bore
Joined
Aug 23, 2010
Messages
19,536
Location
Still waiting for the Youthquake
Tbh, it's not that hard. There's already a precedence on who can vote. British nationals home or abroad of 18 years or older. Future trade deals are off the table until we leave. EU can't negotiate anything till we're out, hence the WA. So putting them on a referendum, makes no sense. The parliament wasted a bunch of time on the Political Declaration which isn't anything more than an indication for future negotiations but not binding on the outcome.

The parliament have 3 options at this stage: No-Deal, WA or Revocation. Put those 3 options to the people with indicatives votes. Only instead of requiring a majority, the option with the most votes wins. It's the outcome most people could accept basically.
so lets say hypothetically

no deal gets 49% WA gets 47% and revocation gets 48%

what do we do?... no option has carried over 50% of the vote and two antithetical options have the same votes (hypothetically)

do you rank votes? - compulsory yes or no on options? - order by preference

As I say finding a format that wont be challenged will be difficult

perhaps a 2 part referendum - leave or remain (and if leave then no deal or WA)

but again you would then have people arguing should only those that choose leave get to pick how we leave or should remain voters get a say... it will be complex

There was recently a 2 part referendum in a US town about striping a mayor of his job because of finance issues (he spent his election funds on holidays or something)

part one should mr X be mayor Yes or No
around 70% voted no and 30% yes

If No wins the 2nd part was who should be mayor
MR A
Mrs B
Ms C
Mr D
Dr E
Mr X

and the votes split out something like
MR A 10%
Mrs B 20%
Ms C 5%
Mr D 10%
Dr E 25%
Mr X 30%

Result Mr X is stripped of being the Mayor.... Mr X is sworn in as the new Mayor

Structuring the question is important
 

afrocentricity

Part of first caf team to complete Destiny raid
Joined
May 12, 2005
Messages
26,790
Problem is everybody is thinking it will be the question / format they want... exactly like they did when it came to brexit meaning brexit
Personally, I'm expecting it to be taken seriously if it happens. So I think everyone, bar the no deal Brexiters will get the questions that they want.

I mean what are the options? At this point in time its either to remain, or to leave with no deal, or the compromise is some kind of soft Brexit.

Doesn't take a mathematical savant to get people to choose fairly between them...
 

Smores

Full Member
Joined
May 18, 2011
Messages
25,496
so lets say hypothetically

no deal gets 49% WA gets 47% and revocation gets 48%

what do we do?... no option has carried over 50% of the vote and two antithetical options have the same votes (hypothetically)

do you rank votes? - compulsory yes or no on options? - order by preference

As I say finding a format that wont be challenged will be difficult

perhaps a 2 part referendum - leave or remain (and if leave then no deal or WA)

but again you would then have people arguing should only those that choose leave get to pick how we leave or should remain voters get a say... it will be complex

There was recently a 2 part referendum in a US town about striping a mayor of his job because of finance issues (he spent his election funds on holidays or something)

part one should mr X be mayor Yes or No
around 70% voted no and 30% yes

If No wins the 2nd part was who should be mayor
MR A
Mrs B
Ms C
Mr D
Dr E
Mr X

and the votes split out something like
MR A 10%
Mrs B 20%
Ms C 5%
Mr D 10%
Dr E 25%
Mr X 30%

Result Mr X is stripped of being the Mayor.... Mr X is sworn in as the new Mayor

Structuring the question is important
If we can't even figure out how to ask people what they want then how the feck are we going to solve Brexit :lol:
 

Adisa

likes to take afvanadva wothowi doubt
Joined
Nov 28, 2014
Messages
50,309
Location
Birmingham
They still don't get it. These guys know nothing about self reflection.
 

sun_tzu

The Art of Bore
Joined
Aug 23, 2010
Messages
19,536
Location
Still waiting for the Youthquake
Personally, I'm expecting it to be taken seriously if it happens. So I think everyone, bar the no deal Brexiters will get the questions that they want.

I mean what are the options? At this point in time its either to remain, or to leave with no deal, or the compromise is some kind of soft Brexit.

Doesn't take a mathematical savant to get people to choose fairly between them...
tell me the question you would put on the ballot paper then and lets see if everybody thinks its would work?
 

afrocentricity

Part of first caf team to complete Destiny raid
Joined
May 12, 2005
Messages
26,790
tell me the question you would put on the ballot paper then and lets see if everybody thinks its would work?
I believe I said stay or leave, if leave what preference.

Said it a few times on here during this shit show, as have others. Does tend to get ignored though....
 
Last edited:

CA_vampire

New Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2017
Messages
977
Location
California
If Man Utd beats Barca, then UK remains in the EU.
If Barca wins, then the game is repeated till the result allows UK to remain in the EU.

Deal?
 

MadMike

Full Member
Joined
Sep 16, 2015
Messages
11,607
Location
London
so lets say hypothetically

no deal gets 49% WA gets 47% and revocation gets 48%

what do we do?... no option has carried over 50% of the vote and two antithetical options have the same votes (hypothetically)
You babble too much :p

On your scenario above we should leave with no deal since it's what the most people would accept. Expecting over 50% is something that only applies in binary questions where over 50% means a de facto majority. But our options are not binary, so you can't ask a binary question. We have 3 options and ultimately have to settle for one, whether it's approved by >50% of the electorate or not. That's the reality.

Also the people are not the parliament, where you need over 50% of votes to pass a legislation by parliamentary law.
 

afrocentricity

Part of first caf team to complete Destiny raid
Joined
May 12, 2005
Messages
26,790
who gets to vote on the 2nd part?
everybody or only those that picked leave in part one?
It affects everyone mate. It's equivalent to the often suggested May's deal vs No deal (before anyone comes with the "How's that fair?").
 
Last edited:

Minimalist

New Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2013
Messages
15,091

Fockinn...jus disnae add up man.

(Attempting to keep interested in this Brexit bollocks)
 

sun_tzu

The Art of Bore
Joined
Aug 23, 2010
Messages
19,536
Location
Still waiting for the Youthquake
It affects everyone mate. It's equivalent to the often suggested May's deal vs No deal (before anyone comes with the "How's that fair?").
indeed - but The erg have lawyers the peoples vote have lawyers as does the government, the opposition and many more interested parties... the electoral commission will have to devise a question and at that point lawyers will be lawyers (Having a lawyer on retainer ourselves as a company its surprising how many things you will litigate)... i cant imagine these lawyers wont challenge and question... as I say i dont think it would be a quick process to agree a question / format and I do think it would be a contentious issue... plus then policing the spends, the advertising, would the government be neutral (would parties have official policies or would they allow free campaigning)... it may be the best solution in the long run and it inn theory but it would be a pretty fractious process I think
 

Smores

Full Member
Joined
May 18, 2011
Messages
25,496
No deal should not be on any referendum. Government and parlaiment have deemed it unfit and the public can not be allowed to vote against something that breaks the GFA.

Including it would be even worse than calling the referemdum in the first place.
 

afrocentricity

Part of first caf team to complete Destiny raid
Joined
May 12, 2005
Messages
26,790
indeed - but The erg have lawyers the peoples vote have lawyers as does the government, the opposition and many more interested parties... the electoral commission will have to devise a question and at that point lawyers will be lawyers (Having a lawyer on retainer ourselves as a company its surprising how many things you will litigate)... i cant imagine these lawyers wont challenge and question... as I say i dont think it would be a quick process to agree a question / format and I do think it would be a contentious issue... plus then policing the spends, the advertising, would the government be neutral (would parties have official policies or would they allow free campaigning)... it may be the best solution in the long run and it inn theory but it would be a pretty fractious process I think
Standard though isn't it? They will lawyer up and challenge anything. They are beyond hope and I'm being people centric in my outlook... The sooner they/we start taking it seriously the sooner we can act.
No deal should not be on any referendum. Government and parlaiment have deemed it unfit and the public can not be allowed to vote against something that breaks the GFA.

Including it would be even worse than calling the referemdum in the first place.
Well yeah, but what can you do? Until we put that 51% to bed a people's vote will be contentious. If it's not in the vote then read what @sun_tzu is saying and multiply it...

But I won't argue with you....
 

sun_tzu

The Art of Bore
Joined
Aug 23, 2010
Messages
19,536
Location
Still waiting for the Youthquake
Standard though isn't it? They will lawyer up and challenge anything. They are beyond hope and I'm being people centric in my outlook... The sooner they/we start taking it seriously the sooner we can act.

.
i agree - I just feel that whilst some people seem to think a referendum might bring a quick resolution i personally think its going to be something that if they intend to do they will need to start with ASAP to get it done within the potential 9 month / Year extension that seems to be the likely extension proposal from the EU
 

711

Verified Bird Expert
Scout
Joined
Dec 10, 2007
Messages
24,206
Location
Don't sign old players and cast offs
Tbh, it's not that hard. There's already a precedence on who can vote. British nationals home or abroad of 18 years or older. Future trade deals are off the table until we leave. EU can't negotiate anything till we're out, hence the WA. So putting them on a referendum, makes no sense. The parliament wasted a bunch of time on the Political Declaration which isn't anything more than an indication for future negotiations but not binding on the outcome.

The parliament have 3 options at this stage: No-Deal, WA or Revocation. Put those 3 options to the people with indicatives votes. Only instead of requiring a majority, the option with the most votes wins. It's the outcome most people could accept basically.
I agree until the last bit. Under your scenario 33 per cent could vote leave with no deal, 33 leave with the deal, and 34 remain, to claim remain to be the outcome ''most people would accept' is patently false. Single transferable vote would give the majority their first or second preference, which is the best you're going to get.
 

Smores

Full Member
Joined
May 18, 2011
Messages
25,496
Well yeah, but what can you do? Until we put that 51% to bed a people's vote will be contentious. If it's not in the vote then read what @sun_tzu is saying and multiply it...

But I won't argue with you....
Bill Cash and his merry band of ERG lawyers have been banging on about this and that being legal or unlawful for nearly a year, on every matter they were wrong and took it no further than soundbites.

We need someone to show leadership and explain why no deal is not going to be a choice. The referendum should be whatever comes out of parliament vs remain, people voted for this parlaiment here's the best it could come up with so do you want it
 

afrocentricity

Part of first caf team to complete Destiny raid
Joined
May 12, 2005
Messages
26,790
i agree - I just feel that whilst some people seem to think a referendum might bring a quick resolution i personally think its going to be something that if they intend to do they will need to start with ASAP to get it done within the potential 9 month / Year extension that seems to be the likely extension proposal from the EU
Yea agreed. I'm not as optimistic as I may sound but... One can hope.

Bill Cash and his merry band of ERG lawyers have been banging on about this and that being legal or unlawful for nearly a year, on every matter they were wrong and took it no further than soundbites.

We need someone to show leadership and explain why no deal is not going to be a choice. The referendum should be whatever comes out of parliament vs remain, people voted for this parlaiment here's the best it could come up with so do you want it
Let's see how it goes. Would be nice though ;)
 

MadMike

Full Member
Joined
Sep 16, 2015
Messages
11,607
Location
London
I agree until the last bit. Under your scenario 33 per cent could vote leave with no deal, 33 leave with the deal, and 34 remain, to claim remain to be the outcome ''most people would accept' is patently false. Single transferable vote would give the majority their first or second preference, which is the best you're going to get.
The fact you're using an example of 33-33-34 (which totals 100%) tells me that you possibly didn't understand exactly what I proposed.

It's not a single choice vote, it's an indicative vote. You vote yes or no to each of three. Possibly all 3 if you're cool with that, or only one option if that's your only acceptable preference. So the total (blanks excluded) would be above 100%

STV is also workable though. Probably fairer too.
 

711

Verified Bird Expert
Scout
Joined
Dec 10, 2007
Messages
24,206
Location
Don't sign old players and cast offs
The fact you're using an example of 33-33-34 (which totals 100%) tells me that you possibly didn't understand exactly what I proposed.

It's not a single choice vote, it's an indicative vote. You vote yes or no to each of three. Possibly all 3 if you're cool with that, or only one option if that's your only acceptable preference. So the total (blanks excluded) would be above 100%

STV is also workable though. Probably fairer too.
Yes, fairer. You're probably right about me not understanding indicative votes as it seems to mean different things to different people,ⁿ
 

Ramshock

CAF Pilib De Brún Translator
Joined
Nov 20, 2007
Messages
45,425
Location
Swimming against a tide of idiots and spoofers
Ok so since yesterday when I posted, responses to me have inferred as a ‘Brexiteer’ or outright as a:

Gammon
Stupid
Fecking snowflake
Child

You can respond to people without the unnecessary quip. At no point have I called someone a remainer, a fecking loony lefties, or go drink your café frothy macchiato you vegan cnut. It’s just stereotyping a big proportion of our society on a question of remain or leave the EU. That I think is one of the saddest parts of this whole vote.



How has every argument been discredited, I haven’t even had chance to debate anything yet except the Irish border with one poster. And I honestly don’t have an answer to that. Did I vote contemplating what would with the Irish border? No, that is a minor detail on why I voted leave. I highly doubt it was major factor for you voting to remain either. It’s just another barrier being put up by the EU to delay the UK leaving.

You have a political opinion on the outcome of Brexit. This is my biggest point to you, and many on here, WHAT YOU STATE IS NOT FACT. Nothing has happened yet, there is a negotiation going on to leave yet you are acting like it’s a total disaster. There is no evidence leaving the EU will be a disaster for this country unless we leave and see what happens.

Why is the EU trying so hard to keep us in the EU if we are a nothing country that can’t cope on our own? Surely if they truly believed that they would happily take 40 billion from us, then within 5 years we will be asking to rejoin the EU. Surely a win / win for them? They know we contribute far more than we get out and they need our money. What’s going to happen when the inevitable bail out is required for yet another country? There is absolutely no way Greece can repay their debt in the future. The UK will need to contribute more money to support this.

Why should the UK be part of a union that is funding projects throughout Europe when our own infrastructure is in desperate need of improvement. I’m sure you will say the EU gives us money for projects but why does the EU have a say where money is spent in this country. More bureaucracy, more political barriers, just more waste of money. Where there is politics, there is more corruption, and I don’t believe having an extra level of politicians on a board we can’t vote for, on ridiculous salaries, benefits and pensions should be creating policies that can affect the UK. And the people of this country have no say in it. If we are unhappy with government we can change our vote in the next general election, we can’t do that with the EU.
Listen if you are okay with warfare on the island of Ireland again and possible bombings in the UK again then thats on you. Most decent people arent like you.
 

GloryHunter07

Full Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2007
Messages
12,152
No deal should not be on any referendum. Government and parlaiment have deemed it unfit and the public can not be allowed to vote against something that breaks the GFA.

Including it would be even worse than calling the referemdum in the first place.
I completely agree.

If Brexit has taught us anything, its that you shouldn't offer the public an option you dont want them to take.
 

Maticmaker

Full Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2018
Messages
4,616
If Brexit has taught us anything, its that you shouldn't offer the public an option you dont want them to take.[/QUOTE]


Indeed that's what makes the prospect of a People's Vote something of a 'No, No,' for the Government.

The first referendum was a binary choice; Leave or Remain. Leave won, Remain lost, so it falls off the second ballot (or People's vote), which should also be a binary choice, probably May's Deal v No Deal, but since the first of these has not been ratified and the second has been voted against, in Parliament, then neither of these choices can be put to the vote either.

Our politicians have tied themselves in the modern day political equivalent of the 'Gordian knot' and the lawyers are rubbing their hands in glee and business leaders are crying in their beer. The phrase "we are all going to hell in a hand cart" was never more apt.

There can be no deals (of any description), no second, third or fourth Peoples vote, referendum etc. only the revocation of A50, but no one has the 'b**lls' or the equivalent of a political death wish to do it...at least not yet![
 

Smores

Full Member
Joined
May 18, 2011
Messages
25,496

Ouch, although with impatience is how we all listen to May i think
 

Adisa

likes to take afvanadva wothowi doubt
Joined
Nov 28, 2014
Messages
50,309
Location
Birmingham
If you told brexiteers the EU would be the ones kicking us out, they would have told you to feck off.
 

Ian Reus

Ended 14 years of Grand National sweepstakes
Joined
Aug 22, 2014
Messages
10,425
Location
Somewhere in South America
If you told brexiteers the EU would be the ones kicking us out, they would have told you to feck off.
They're still telling us to feck aff.

I posted something on Facebook about WTO rules a few days ago and the first reply was, "You lost, now dry your eyes".
Huh? I never realised I was playing.
 

Walrus

Oppressed White Male
Joined
Aug 25, 2008
Messages
11,156
Listen if you are okay with warfare on the island of Ireland again and possible bombings in the UK again then thats on you. Most decent people arent like you.
He is right though, in that most people (on both sides) didnt really consider the Irish situation when casting their vote. Most people who say otherwise are probably just lying.

In terms of its impact now and whether you should care about it or not, of course you should. But conversely, its not something that directly affects most of the voting population (in their eyes) so its not really at the top of their priority list when it comes to Brexit. It is however, a strong and convenient argument that remainers can use - but honestly if the sides were reversed, im not sure there would be that much difference.

To put it another way, if it transpired that the only way to maintain the GFA was to leave the EU, how many remain voters can put their hands on their hearts and say that that would change their vote? I dont think I can.