true, youtube video ratings often have better representation
Brexited | the worst threads live the longest
- Thread starter Silva
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
All he has to throw out is stupid sound bites and catchphrases, which is why he keeps saying "neverendum" and ignoring reasoned arguments.
Pretty standard alt-righter.
The irony of using an 'alt righter' buzzword
It's not a buzzword, it's a classification.
It's a euphemism more than anything else.
Ah yeah, now that you mention it it is impossible to leave the EU. After all, the Commons made up their mind when they passed the European Communities Act in 1972 and they aren't allowed to change their mind, vote again, or in any way alter that bill. Good point.
should've gone with this bad boy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1975_United_Kingdom_European_Communities_membership_referendum
Bit of a difference between 2 years and 40 years
Tell you what. How about we Brexit and if there is such a demand for being the EU, then political parties can have it in their manifesto and if they secure sufficient support in the the GE, they can look to vote for a referendum in Parliament, then the country can have a referendum.
Perhaps the principled and progressive IG could take the first step, by triggering a by-election and standing on a new manifesto of their 'groups' stance
Isn’t that basically what the referendum was?
Does that link detail the public referendums that were held in the UK, each time the EC expanded its powers and scope, into what is now the present day EU?
How dare you question the political will of 17 million patriots
So I think I've got you. If the circumstances change, it's justifiable to ask people again whether they're sure they would vote the same way.
So, hypothetically, lets say 3 years after a referendum it was uncovered that the side that won had lied repeatedly, not been able to secure any of the things that they had promised, and had been found guilty of cheating, you would support asking people if they are sure they still wanted the very different thing to what had been offered before.
I'm very glad we can agree.
we're on a football forum and no one is going to change their mind that much, all you can do is dunk on people when they're being stupidI think I get you. It seems you want a political and democratic process that gives you exactly what you want. The EU is perfect for you it seems
Bit of a daft thing to say. A referendum is a specific subject whereas a General Election happens on a fixed frequency.
Or he wants to give people the possibility to take decisions when they know the outcome. There is a massive difference between the initial referendum and a 2nd referendum since brexit would be actually defined.
If only life was like that.
Perhaps United could get our money back for Fred and buy Brooks, if we buy a young superstar and he breaks his leg in a year, perhaps we can change our mind and resign Bailley (because we may sell him in the summer as he looks like he might not be world class)
You are advocating for Neverendums. That's worse that the extremes of either outcome of the debate
I don't think there should ever be referendums but why are Brexiters so against holding another one, there can only be one reason and that is they are frightened that they will lose, therefore they themselves believe that the result of the last referendum is now no longer what people want. If they were so confident that the result of the last referendum was what people still want and Leave won again, holding another referendum would only confirm it.
I too was furious we fired David Moyes before his contract run out. Do words mean nothing anymore people?!
Does it? There was one in 2015 and 2017 and probably another one in the not too distant future (i.e. before 2022)
Who do you think that statement actually applies more to?
On the one hand:
A person advocating going back to the country and asking if they're sure they think this is a good idea
or a person:
A person who is terrified that the public no longer thinks Brexit is a good idea and is shit scarred of the possibility that they might not get their way anymore so thinks that the public should never, ever, ever get a say on the matter again?
Life is actually like that. People take decisions based on what they know and they adjust or change them based on experience and hindsight.
No I'm a person who does not want continous uncertainty of what neverendums bring, which is what you are effectively advocating for
Induciviness is a weak trait in an individual, in can be catastrophic at a national level
In Life, people generally arrive at a decision and stick to it and are not plagued by indecision
What decision is that? The terms of brexit were negotiated after the referendum, so what is the decision that people took regarding the nature of brexit?
In that case, why have a referendum in 2016 at all, since the case had been decided back in the 1970s?
Seems to me that based on your logic, the Leave bloc is who have advocated a “neverendum” as they refused to accept the results of the 1975 vote and constantly attempted to get referendums and candidates elected that would undo that vote.
Right, well, that’s not true at all.
The word regret exists for a reason.
To exit the EU. Not exit the EU with y, z or x deal
It's rare we get people outing themselves as actual fascists on here rather than couching it in euphemistic terms, so shall we continue pretending that you actually care about democracy or continue on to the bit where you argue that democracy is inherently weak and that Britain needs an autocratic strongman to bring back the good times?
Thought I already explained the 1st part. It's a matter of time frames- 40 years is very different from 2/ 3 years. One is a generational decision, the other is a neverrendum
Also, what was voted for in the 70s is not what the EC is now.
If we want an autocratic strongman then we are best staying in the EU
But the Leave campaign was mainly based on y, z or x deal. The famous Norway deal being the most publicized.
Which is what we will have if we keep repeating single issue refendums every few years
No. The ballot paper gave a binary choice of remaining or leaving
Yeah people never regret or change their decisons , ever. What kind of bullshit argument is that ?
Surprised you're so against staying in it then, if that's how you feel.
That was only up until the Brexiter charlatans realised that it involved Freedom of Movement , being a bit dim in the intelligence department.
It’s not really a difference of time frames though if the Leave camp has been constantly pestering for another referendum since 1975... which history shows to be true.
Joined in 1973, referendum in 1975, campaign centered on Leave in 1983, UKIP formed in 1993, Referendum Party formed in 1994, campaign centered on Leave in 1997, UKIP constantly pushing for Leave since their founding...
Norway isn't in the EU and that's the type of deal that people where offered by the leave campaign which they failed to create. You don't think that leavers should be given the opportunity to decide what type of exit they want since the one initially offered was a lie?
That was their choice and eventually it got public support.
No different (apart from gaining public support) from offshoots of the communist and Far Right fascists movements being around.