| Jacob Rees Mogg 20:09 - Sep 12 with 22728 views | CountyJim |
I really do not like the bloke or his Tory mates
But these protests out side his house are wrong sorry doesn't deserve that |  | | |  |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 06:44 - Sep 17 with 1694 views | peenemunde |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 20:01 - Sep 16 by exiledclaseboy |
A second referendum with the actual details of what leaving the EU will mean in practice available strikes me as a perfectly sensible proposition. If the British people vote to accept the terms and leave the EU on those terms then the issue is dead forever.
This whole “the people have spoken and their will must be obeyed” stuff is trite nonsense. The majority was small enough as to make the outcome indecisive and none of the details about what leaving the EU means in practice were available to either side. The campaign on both sites des was riven with guesswork, misinformation and scaremongering. The government still doesn’t know those details so how was the electorate was meant to make an informed decision two years ago? . Once they are known ask the nation again. “The people”are allowed to change their mind or not change their mind as the case may be. |
Absolutely nonsense, a 2nd vote 🤣
Because all the eu would do is say no, no, no, no to every aspect of the negotiations, knowing the fact that there will be another vote.
Just another ploy to keep the U.K. in the Frankenstein project, it’s not going to work.
The eu is dying, thankfully we have jumped ship. |  | | |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 06:52 - Sep 17 with 1692 views | Kilkennyjack |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 06:44 - Sep 17 by peenemunde |
Absolutely nonsense, a 2nd vote 🤣
Because all the eu would do is say no, no, no, no to every aspect of the negotiations, knowing the fact that there will be another vote.
Just another ploy to keep the U.K. in the Frankenstein project, it’s not going to work.
The eu is dying, thankfully we have jumped ship. |
It is going to work.
Brexit is undeliverable. Its dead, in any meaningful way.
Great news for Cymru. |  |
| Beware of the Risen People
|
| |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 08:22 - Sep 17 with 1668 views | Lohengrin |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 20:32 - Sep 14 by londonlisa2001 |
If you won’t judge when your friends are involved, best you don’t judge when strangers are involved.
Otherwise it’s fairly easy to be accused of hypocrisy. |
Cum dilectione hominum et odio vitiorum, Lisa.
He says that he follows the teachings of The Church, I don’t see how he could be accused of hypocrisy any more than you or I could when placed in a similar situation. |  |
| An idea isn't responsible for those who believe in it. |
| |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 09:41 - Sep 17 with 1628 views | Catullus |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 22:05 - Sep 16 by exiledclaseboy |
You could, for example, have made it a condition that 50% of eligible voters must have voted for one or otherof the options not just a simple majority of those who voted. That’s not unreasonable. |
Not unreasonable? Actually it's very unreasonable, it could/would ( and did in 2016) give a result that meant having another vote, more weeks of arguing back and forth. Unless you say that unless at least 50% of all voters choose leave then we remain which is definitely an affront to democracy.
So, we have another vote and the result is similar, so another vote and another......where do we stop. It would cause a crisis and either you know that or you didn't think it through? What if the roughly 27% who didn't vote couldn't decide and spoilt their papers? A near 100% turnout and still no result.
Everyone who has the right to vote should vote but the result can only come from those who did vote. Once you start adding rules to the outcome you are on a very slippery slope. |  |
| |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 10:11 - Sep 17 with 1617 views | Highjack |
The 'People's Vote' is just a shameless attempt to split the leave vote. Remain is guaranteed to win from the start just on the wording of the question. Imagine if we end with this hypothetical situation after 'The People's Vote":
Remain - 48%
Leave with a deal - 30%
Leave with no deal - 22%
Leave still wins but we end up remaining.
Democracy might already need CPR in this country but in this scenario it would be flatlining and that sad piano music when someone dies in Eastenders would be playing. |  |
| |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 10:20 - Sep 17 with 1612 views | Catullus |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 10:11 - Sep 17 by Highjack |
The 'People's Vote' is just a shameless attempt to split the leave vote. Remain is guaranteed to win from the start just on the wording of the question. Imagine if we end with this hypothetical situation after 'The People's Vote":
Remain - 48%
Leave with a deal - 30%
Leave with no deal - 22%
Leave still wins but we end up remaining.
Democracy might already need CPR in this country but in this scenario it would be flatlining and that sad piano music when someone dies in Eastenders would be playing. |
I'd agree and the question shouldn't have an option to remain but only choose to accept the deal or leave with no deal.
I hadn't thought of it in terms of splitting the vote but you may well be right. | |
| |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 10:53 - Sep 17 with 1595 views | Jango |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 10:20 - Sep 17 by Catullus |
I'd agree and the question shouldn't have an option to remain but only choose to accept the deal or leave with no deal.
I hadn't thought of it in terms of splitting the vote but you may well be right. |
Leave with a deal or no deal is certainly not what they are pushing for. | | | |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 11:19 - Sep 17 with 1585 views | Batterseajack |
....alternatively, if chequers gets voted down in parliament, then the peoples vote becomes;
A) Leave on no deal (but with a deal on planes landing, recognition of car licences, regulation of medication, shipment on radioactive material, insurances, mobile roaming etc...)
B) Remain in the EU
Still not perfect as it could pave the way for a tactical voting down of Chequers to enable a second vote and doesn't discounts a Canada+ type deal altogether which many would want to see.
But this is the trouble we're in due to political pressure from the hard of thinking to rush into A50 without first agreeing on the UK side on a negotiating plan or strategy. We didn't even carry out the impact assessment papers until it was too late, so how can they possibly form a coherent plan for achieving the desired final outcome based anything more than a wet finger in the air. We're now ending up with Chequers which even the leavers aren't happy with. No one wins. [Post edited 17 Sep 2018 11:51]
| | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 13:02 - Sep 17 with 1554 views | majorraglan |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 11:19 - Sep 17 by Batterseajack |
....alternatively, if chequers gets voted down in parliament, then the peoples vote becomes;
A) Leave on no deal (but with a deal on planes landing, recognition of car licences, regulation of medication, shipment on radioactive material, insurances, mobile roaming etc...)
B) Remain in the EU
Still not perfect as it could pave the way for a tactical voting down of Chequers to enable a second vote and doesn't discounts a Canada+ type deal altogether which many would want to see.
But this is the trouble we're in due to political pressure from the hard of thinking to rush into A50 without first agreeing on the UK side on a negotiating plan or strategy. We didn't even carry out the impact assessment papers until it was too late, so how can they possibly form a coherent plan for achieving the desired final outcome based anything more than a wet finger in the air. We're now ending up with Chequers which even the leavers aren't happy with. No one wins. [Post edited 17 Sep 2018 11:51]
|
It’s a mess. The impact assessments are now being published, but that seems just about it. If we are coming out without a deal, then the country will need more HMRC staff at the ports and in back office functions to check and collect revenues, that means hiring and training staff etc, that needs to be done now to get them trained up and ready to go by April. Lots of changes and we appear to be poorly equipped.
Much has been mentioned about cutting the EU red tape and adherence to standards, I can’t see much of that changing if we come up because any company wishing to trade with the EU is going to need to comply with their minimum standards.
Can you imagine no deal on planes landing etc, it would cause carnage and it wouldn’t be long before the masses were baying for blood! | | | |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 16:25 - Sep 17 with 1502 views | exiledclaseboy |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 10:11 - Sep 17 by Highjack |
The 'People's Vote' is just a shameless attempt to split the leave vote. Remain is guaranteed to win from the start just on the wording of the question. Imagine if we end with this hypothetical situation after 'The People's Vote":
Remain - 48%
Leave with a deal - 30%
Leave with no deal - 22%
Leave still wins but we end up remaining.
Democracy might already need CPR in this country but in this scenario it would be flatlining and that sad piano music when someone dies in Eastenders would be playing. |
That’s easily solved. Only have two questions. Remain or leave with the deal that’s on the table (assuming there’s a deal on the table otherwise the option is remain or leave with no deal). |  |
| |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 17:03 - Sep 17 with 1484 views | BarrySwan |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 16:25 - Sep 17 by exiledclaseboy |
That’s easily solved. Only have two questions. Remain or leave with the deal that’s on the table (assuming there’s a deal on the table otherwise the option is remain or leave with no deal). |
Of course, a great little wheeze to shoehorn in a remain option which has already been defeated in THE peoples referendum in 2016.
I've no bother with a referendum on the outcome of Spineless Theresa's capitulation to the EU but the question must be
a) Accept the deal and leave
b) Reject the deal and leave.
BTW since when did a 1.25 million people majority become a tiny majority?
Sounds like the old numbers and statistics dept at DVLA is in need of an overhaul. | | | |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 17:17 - Sep 17 with 1475 views | exiledclaseboy |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 17:03 - Sep 17 by BarrySwan |
Of course, a great little wheeze to shoehorn in a remain option which has already been defeated in THE peoples referendum in 2016.
I've no bother with a referendum on the outcome of Spineless Theresa's capitulation to the EU but the question must be
a) Accept the deal and leave
b) Reject the deal and leave.
BTW since when did a 1.25 million people majority become a tiny majority?
Sounds like the old numbers and statistics dept at DVLA is in need of an overhaul. |
Now now, no baloney. Stop making things up. There were 33m votes cast and 46m eligible voters. In that context a majority of 1.2m is indeed very small if not “tiny”. I absolutely guarantee that if the vote had been 52/48 in favour of remain you amd your fellow Brexit supporters would be calling for a new referendum with exactly the same kind of passion and belief that remainers are now. Farage even said so himself.
We could always of course let parliament decide. That is what it’s there for after all. That works for me too. | |
| |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 21:36 - Sep 17 with 1416 views | Catullus |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 17:17 - Sep 17 by exiledclaseboy |
Now now, no baloney. Stop making things up. There were 33m votes cast and 46m eligible voters. In that context a majority of 1.2m is indeed very small if not “tiny”. I absolutely guarantee that if the vote had been 52/48 in favour of remain you amd your fellow Brexit supporters would be calling for a new referendum with exactly the same kind of passion and belief that remainers are now. Farage even said so himself.
We could always of course let parliament decide. That is what it’s there for after all. That works for me too. |
In other words then you'd just stop brexit, ignore what the majority voted for and destroy any notion of democracy.
Many Mp's seats are held on a tiny majprity, should we keep having votes until they have an acceptable sized majority?
Maybe every vote in Parliament shpuld have to win by a pre-set margin?
Maybe we should recall every instance of a relatively tight win and make them all vote again, or not because you know it's complete nonsense. | |
| |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 21:46 - Sep 17 with 1412 views | exiledclaseboy |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 21:36 - Sep 17 by Catullus |
In other words then you'd just stop brexit, ignore what the majority voted for and destroy any notion of democracy.
Many Mp's seats are held on a tiny majprity, should we keep having votes until they have an acceptable sized majority?
Maybe every vote in Parliament shpuld have to win by a pre-set margin?
Maybe we should recall every instance of a relatively tight win and make them all vote again, or not because you know it's complete nonsense. |
Why do you keep making things up? I’ve not said any of the things you’ve attributed to me. All I’ve suggested is that a second vote when the details of the exit deal are known will allow the all important people the chance to confirm that they still want to leave the EU now that they know what’s on offer. As the big fan of democracy that you’re painting yourself as I’d have thought you’d have jumped at the chance to give the people a second choice, one which would be infinitely more informed on both sides of the debate that the first one was. Why does that apparently scare you so much?
On your point about MPs, scores of them are elected on far less than 50% of the vote in their constituencies. It’s a rubbish system but completely irrelevant to the point at hand.
On the vote in Parliament thing, many legislatures set higher thresholds for certain bigger decisions. For example, in the USA two thirds of both houses of Congress must vote in favour in order to be able to overturn a presidential veto. The same two thirds threshold is required to amend the US Constitution which is exactly what Brexit is doing to the U.K. equivalent. If Congress then provides the necessary two thirds majority, three quarters of the states have to ratify the amendment before it becomes part of the constitution. [Post edited 17 Sep 2018 22:03]
| |
| |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 23:14 - Sep 17 with 1368 views | peenemunde |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 21:46 - Sep 17 by exiledclaseboy |
Why do you keep making things up? I’ve not said any of the things you’ve attributed to me. All I’ve suggested is that a second vote when the details of the exit deal are known will allow the all important people the chance to confirm that they still want to leave the EU now that they know what’s on offer. As the big fan of democracy that you’re painting yourself as I’d have thought you’d have jumped at the chance to give the people a second choice, one which would be infinitely more informed on both sides of the debate that the first one was. Why does that apparently scare you so much?
On your point about MPs, scores of them are elected on far less than 50% of the vote in their constituencies. It’s a rubbish system but completely irrelevant to the point at hand.
On the vote in Parliament thing, many legislatures set higher thresholds for certain bigger decisions. For example, in the USA two thirds of both houses of Congress must vote in favour in order to be able to overturn a presidential veto. The same two thirds threshold is required to amend the US Constitution which is exactly what Brexit is doing to the U.K. equivalent. If Congress then provides the necessary two thirds majority, three quarters of the states have to ratify the amendment before it becomes part of the constitution. [Post edited 17 Sep 2018 22:03]
|
There won’t be another vote. Anyone with an IQ greater than a cabbage knows it’s just a ploy to keep the U.K. in the Frankenstein project, by people who cannot except democracy. | | | |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 00:07 - Sep 18 with 1345 views | Kilkennyjack |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 23:14 - Sep 17 by peenemunde |
There won’t be another vote. Anyone with an IQ greater than a cabbage knows it’s just a ploy to keep the U.K. in the Frankenstein project, by people who cannot except democracy. |
There will be another vote.
And whenever it comes, our fine young people will ensure - just as our grandfathers did - that the UK plays its full part in Europe. 🇪🇺🇪🇺🇪🇺🇪🇺🇪🇺
Its only this generation that puts greed and self interest above the interests of the country. | |
| Beware of the Risen People
|
| |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 01:18 - Sep 18 with 1328 views | Lord_Bony |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 18:31 - Sep 16 by Arizlan2 |
propergander more like, greedy companies using a mercenary work force from Poland that they can get rid of at the drop of a hat... while your own people are left jobless and can't find work and we are left with a lost generation who don't know what it's like to be in full time employment employment with a full contract.
And there's you waving your EU flag with the rest of the lefty do gooders supporting your country's decline and selling your own people's and their future generations down the sh1tter. Really funny how people on here talk about Jenkins being a sell out, does come close to you vermin on here.
Take a bow sir, you really come close to being Pr1€k of the week |
I voted leave.
But Jesus Christ,you are an embarrassment to the people who voted.
Tone down the racist rhetoric please. |  |
| |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 05:16 - Sep 18 with 1289 views | peenemunde |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 00:07 - Sep 18 by Kilkennyjack |
There will be another vote.
And whenever it comes, our fine young people will ensure - just as our grandfathers did - that the UK plays its full part in Europe. 🇪🇺🇪🇺🇪🇺🇪🇺🇪🇺
Its only this generation that puts greed and self interest above the interests of the country. |
The Frankenstein project is dying.
Let me make my Nostradamus impression and predict within twenty years, Europe will have major religious and racial problems, the balkanisation is well under way.
This will follow on from what will happen even sooner in the USA.
So take care up in your ivory tower.......🤣 | | | |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 05:28 - Sep 18 with 1286 views | Kilkennyjack |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 05:16 - Sep 18 by peenemunde |
The Frankenstein project is dying.
Let me make my Nostradamus impression and predict within twenty years, Europe will have major religious and racial problems, the balkanisation is well under way.
This will follow on from what will happen even sooner in the USA.
So take care up in your ivory tower.......🤣 |
Dont you know ....predictions and forecasts are of no value at all ?
The Maybot said so yesterday.
Bank of England economic warnings ?
Feck it, lers just carry on regardless.
Happy to help. | |
| Beware of the Risen People
|
| |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 06:59 - Sep 18 with 1266 views | peenemunde |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 05:28 - Sep 18 by Kilkennyjack |
Dont you know ....predictions and forecasts are of no value at all ?
The Maybot said so yesterday.
Bank of England economic warnings ?
Feck it, lers just carry on regardless.
Happy to help. |
Is that the same Bank of England that predicted the four horsemen of the apocalypse would arrive, just on the basis of a leave vote ? 🤣
Is that the same Bank of England that didn’t see the credit crunch and subsequent recession coming ten years ago ? 🤣
Is that the same Bank of England that has a governor who is a member of bilderberg ?🤣 [Post edited 18 Sep 2018 7:09]
| | | |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 10:26 - Sep 18 with 1207 views | Highjack |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 05:28 - Sep 18 by Kilkennyjack |
Dont you know ....predictions and forecasts are of no value at all ?
The Maybot said so yesterday.
Bank of England economic warnings ?
Feck it, lers just carry on regardless.
Happy to help. |
Well they aren’t of much use when history later proves them to be regularly wildly inaccurate or entirely wrong. You can have all the data and graphs and experts in the world but no man can predict the future. They can’t even forecast the weather most of the time ffs.
These forecasts and predictions are more of a political tool to influence the opinion of the easily led. | |
| |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 12:55 - Sep 18 with 1166 views | Catullus |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 21:46 - Sep 17 by exiledclaseboy |
Why do you keep making things up? I’ve not said any of the things you’ve attributed to me. All I’ve suggested is that a second vote when the details of the exit deal are known will allow the all important people the chance to confirm that they still want to leave the EU now that they know what’s on offer. As the big fan of democracy that you’re painting yourself as I’d have thought you’d have jumped at the chance to give the people a second choice, one which would be infinitely more informed on both sides of the debate that the first one was. Why does that apparently scare you so much?
On your point about MPs, scores of them are elected on far less than 50% of the vote in their constituencies. It’s a rubbish system but completely irrelevant to the point at hand.
On the vote in Parliament thing, many legislatures set higher thresholds for certain bigger decisions. For example, in the USA two thirds of both houses of Congress must vote in favour in order to be able to overturn a presidential veto. The same two thirds threshold is required to amend the US Constitution which is exactly what Brexit is doing to the U.K. equivalent. If Congress then provides the necessary two thirds majority, three quarters of the states have to ratify the amendment before it becomes part of the constitution. [Post edited 17 Sep 2018 22:03]
|
Making things up? You're the one making a case for a minimum majority. You say just enough to lead people down a certain route but when they get there, you deny it's what you're saying.
My comment about MP's isn't irrelevant because in the scenario you painted (minimum majority) the voting might never end.
Are you suggesting we adopt the American system because it has it's own flaws, such as how the majority of the electorate can vote one way but then the college votes swing it the other.
I'm not at all scared of a second vote.....stop making things up. If there is a vote it should be to accept the deal or leave with no deal because we already chose leave. It does seem like a remain plot to get another referendum and include an option the majority already voted against. | |
| |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 19:25 - Sep 18 with 1112 views | exiledclaseboy |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 12:55 - Sep 18 by Catullus |
Making things up? You're the one making a case for a minimum majority. You say just enough to lead people down a certain route but when they get there, you deny it's what you're saying.
My comment about MP's isn't irrelevant because in the scenario you painted (minimum majority) the voting might never end.
Are you suggesting we adopt the American system because it has it's own flaws, such as how the majority of the electorate can vote one way but then the college votes swing it the other.
I'm not at all scared of a second vote.....stop making things up. If there is a vote it should be to accept the deal or leave with no deal because we already chose leave. It does seem like a remain plot to get another referendum and include an option the majority already voted against. |
1 - you said I wanted to stop Brexit, ignore the will of the majority and destroy any notion of democracy. I don’t and didn’t say anything like that. I simply suggested a second referendum.
2 - I didn’t suggest minimum majorities for electing MPs, you brought that into the debate. I support a proportional system where a party that gets (for example) 30% of the vote gets 30% of the seats. First past the post as we practice it for Westminster elections is the antithesis of democracy.
3 - again, I didn’t suggest adopting the US system. I simply used some of its traits as examples of where minimum majorities of more than 50% are required to introduce sweeping constitutional changes (like Brexit). There are many other examples. By the way, your point about the popular vote betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of how th system works. The states elect the US president, not the people.
4 - I don’t agree for all the reasons I’ve already outlined in this thread which I won’t bother repeating.
Probably best we just agree to disagree to be honest. | |
| |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 09:26 - Sep 19 with 1034 views | peenemunde |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 19:25 - Sep 18 by exiledclaseboy |
1 - you said I wanted to stop Brexit, ignore the will of the majority and destroy any notion of democracy. I don’t and didn’t say anything like that. I simply suggested a second referendum.
2 - I didn’t suggest minimum majorities for electing MPs, you brought that into the debate. I support a proportional system where a party that gets (for example) 30% of the vote gets 30% of the seats. First past the post as we practice it for Westminster elections is the antithesis of democracy.
3 - again, I didn’t suggest adopting the US system. I simply used some of its traits as examples of where minimum majorities of more than 50% are required to introduce sweeping constitutional changes (like Brexit). There are many other examples. By the way, your point about the popular vote betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of how th system works. The states elect the US president, not the people.
4 - I don’t agree for all the reasons I’ve already outlined in this thread which I won’t bother repeating.
Probably best we just agree to disagree to be honest. |
You don’t like Brexit and want it stopped. Ffs just say it, instead of dancing around the garden like a pansy.
Ok let’s have another vote - the question on the ballot paper can only be, do we accept the agreement that the British government want, or do we leave with no deal. | | | |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 09:41 - Sep 19 with 1026 views | longlostjack |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 09:26 - Sep 19 by peenemunde |
You don’t like Brexit and want it stopped. Ffs just say it, instead of dancing around the garden like a pansy.
Ok let’s have another vote - the question on the ballot paper can only be, do we accept the agreement that the British government want, or do we leave with no deal. |
By he same token why have another election? The people already voted in 2017 for a Conservative Government. If there is another vote it should be whether we continue with the same Government or have no Government. |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
