Jump to content

Farage says Brexit will be delayed again when PM Johnson's deal falls


webfact

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, billd766 said:

So in your opinion 17.4 million voters didn't have a clue what they were voting for. How wonderful and smart (I forgot arrogant) you must be to know that all 17.4 million people voted wrongly.

 

IIRC the referendum gave 2 choices, Leave or Remain.

 

There was no hard, soft, BRINO or anything else on the voting paper, just Leave or Remain.

 

A Referendum walks into a bar and asks for a pint, and sits at the bar drinking all day.

Eventually closing time approaches, and the barman says, "sorry mate, it's time to leave",

The Referendum says, "oh, no, please can I stay a bit longer, and have a lock-in?"

The barmans says "why should I? I didn't give that to the last couple of Referendums that were in here, what makes you so special?"

"Oh that's easy", says the Referendum, "I didn't know I was in a pub, I didn't know what I was ordering, I didn't know how it would be delivered"

The barman says, "well, none of the previous referendums complained when I called time, sorry mate, I have to apply the same rules to everyone"

The Referendum responds emotionally, "in that case, I'm going to smash your bar up"

The barman says, that's alright, this bar is fictional, and all your pints were advisory.

And with puff of smoke, the barman, the bar, and comedic construct disappeared, and the Refendum was left in a permanent state of limbo for all eternity on the internet to contemplate his existential purpose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 338
  • Created
  • Last Reply
4 hours ago, BobBKK said:

No one voted for this chaos. It should be vote for a deal (or no deal) or Remain.

Of course nobody voted for this chaos.

 

Why not look at how we got here in the first place, why the chaos has broken out, what and who caused it.

 

What we Leavers voted for was to leave the EU rather than remain.

 

We left that in the hands of the politicians under Mrs May and trusted them as they promised us that the UK would leave the EU on 29th March 2019 and that a no deal was better than a bad deal.

 

Quite simply, they lied from day one which after more than 3 years or farking about led to Mrs May being booted out and after a few more weeks led to Boris being PM. That is where the real problems started with parliament being prorogued, everybody and their dog being stabbed in the back, Boris being sent to negotiate with his hands tied behind his back, everybody screaming blue murder.

 

Blind Freddy's dog could do a better job. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Blue Muton said:

I wonder why it to so long for a Quitter to bring up the infringements from the remain side, seems up until now nobody has been daft enough to compare a few minor indiscretions (note the £2,000 fine in your link) with what has been described by the head of the EC as "most serious", deliberate fraud by the leave campaign, resulting in four fines each of the maximum £20,000.

 

As for the EC being biased? What utter nonsense.

 

Try comparing apples with apples.

 

For the record I have no hesitation in condemning all breaches of law and trust in these matters, regardless of which side it comes from.

You know, it's always been like a game to Remain all along, never debating anything really, but simply points scoring, smearing, and making emotional appeals, so when things look like they are set up to smear their opponents, it's fair enough to ensure that Remain's "inconsistencies" aren't brushed under the carpet to fit the simplistic and divisive "goodies v baddies" paradigm they keep pushing.

 

Apples with apples? The EC Advised Leave on what to about a large amount of money, and Leave did it, then "by chance" the EC changed its mind and tried to fine Leave. That looks like shifting the goalposts. Sure, they have plausible deniability, but when so many "coincidences" keep happening in the establishment after a while it starts to look and quack like a duck. Bias isn't always conscious and overt, it can stem from groupthink and selecting out people who are different. How do you like them apples?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Rookiescot said:

Where did I say they didn't have a clue?

Nice straw man there.

As you will recall the Leave campaign said we would leave with a deal.

So a lot of those who voted leave will have done so based on us leaving with a deal.

Brexit fundamentalists have hijacked those votes so as to mean leaving with no deal.

Try reading post #41 where you wrote 

quote "

 8 hours ago, Rookiescot said:
Brexiteers dont know what they want. Before the referendum they all said they wanted to leave with a deal.

Suddenly after they won it changed to we all voted to leave with no deal.

You guys cant even get a consensus in the Conservative party for what you want.

 

I answered you in post #64.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, billd766 said:

So in your opinion 17.4 million voters didn't have a clue what they were voting for. How wonderful and smart (I forgot arrogant) you must be to know that all 17.4 million people voted wrongly.

 

IIRC the referendum gave 2 choices, Leave or Remain.

 

There was no hard, soft, BRINO or anything else on the voting paper, just Leave or Remain.

The problem with this line of argument by Remain is that, you still have the same electorate, how do you prove that they know what they're voting for? What's the test? Can we compare it with the previous referendum? Do you want people to sit an exam before they vote? Do you want to make the vote compulsory (i.e.: fine people who don't vote), to ensure that the turnout is beyond question?

I think it's fair enough to want to set criteria and standards for a vote, but we've had a referendum on that kind of thing, and the turnout wasn't great, was the result legitimate? Did the public understand AV+?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Jip99 said:

 

I don’t think he would lose........but that would be up to the electorate decide.

 

I still think Labour will screw it up because, ironically, I think Corbyn is more interested in saving his neck rather than doing what is best. Remember, there are a lot of Labour supporters who voted the leave - and Corbyn’s previous manifesto included delivering Brexit. To jump onto  the ‘scrap Article 50’ bandwagon would leave a few Labour supporters scratching their heads. If he doesn’t, the Labour vote will be split.

There where more Conservatives that voted remain than Laborites that voted leave and BJ has already jettisoned  most of them, a Brexit party alliance will seal the fate of the rest. 

 

I would say a remain alliance did not have to run on a revoke ticket, but if we end up with a one issue polarized GE it would seem pointless to promise a referendum after. In that GE scenario Corbyn would make a grave tactical error  ( OK which he is quite capable of) in not joining such an alliance. Remain/Leave is stronger than party allegiance at the moment and very few Labour remainers would vote for a party with an ambiguous brexit position. He might get a rump of  Labour leavers but I suspect most of those would jump to the Con/bx mob.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, tebee said:

There where more Conservatives that voted remain than Laborites that voted leave and BJ has already jettisoned  most of them, a Brexit party alliance will seal the fate of the rest. 

 

I would say a remain alliance did not have to run on a revoke ticket, but if we end up with a one issue polarized GE it would seem pointless to promise a referendum after. In that GE scenario Corbyn would make a grave tactical error  ( OK which he is quite capable of) in not joining such an alliance. Remain/Leave is stronger than party allegiance at the moment and very few Labour remainers would vote for a party with an ambiguous brexit position. He might get a rump of  Labour leavers but I suspect most of those would jump to the Con/bx mob.   

I agree. Corbyn's failure to seize the banner of Remain and create an alliance has allowed the LibDems to seize it and recover, snatching a chunk of the Labour vote big enough to deny them victory, and to increase the likelihood that Corbyn will be challenged for the leadership - if Labour Party rules allow it ????

Boris has done the opposite, by accepting that the Tory grassroots want a strong Leave alliance, and he's recaptured voters from the Brexit Party. The Remain faction has now all piled onto the LibDems and are peddling a fantasy of replacing Labour as the opposition party, but none of this helps the Remain cause.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, CaptainNemo said:

 

A Referendum walks into a bar and asks for a pint, and sits at the bar drinking all day.

Eventually closing time approaches, and the barman says, "sorry mate, it's time to leave",

The Referendum says, "oh, no, please can I stay a bit longer, and have a lock-in?"

The barmans says "why should I? I didn't give that to the last couple of Referendums that were in here, what makes you so special?"

"Oh that's easy", says the Referendum, "I didn't know I was in a pub, I didn't know what I was ordering, I didn't know how it would be delivered"

The barman says, "well, none of the previous referendums complained when I called time, sorry mate, I have to apply the same rules to everyone"

The Referendum responds emotionally, "in that case, I'm going to smash your bar up"

The barman says, that's alright, this bar is fictional, and all your pints were advisory.

And with puff of smoke, the barman, the bar, and comedic construct disappeared, and the Refendum was left in a permanent state of limbo for all eternity on the internet to contemplate his existential purpose.

I had to write this because all the jokes on the internet are anti-Brexit, and there needs to be some counterbalance to it.

 

27 referendums walk into a bar, and the barman says, "are you sure you're in the right joke?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Rookiescot said:

Brexiteers dont know what they want.

Yes they do; Brexiteer politicians, on the other hand...

8 hours ago, Rookiescot said:

Before the referendum they all said they wanted to leave with a deal.

No they didn't; Brexiteer politicians, on the other hand...

8 hours ago, Rookiescot said:

Suddenly after they won it changed to we all voted to leave with no deal.

No it didn't; Brexiteer politicians, on the hand...

8 hours ago, Rookiescot said:

You guys cant even get a consensus in the Conservative party for what you want.

Brexiteers aren't the Tory party. Sunderland, and many Labour-voting working-class parts of the country voted Leave in droves. Remain seems very much a preserve of the middle-classes and Celtic nations, all of whom could be said to be somewhat more financially dependent on the EU than the many Labour-voting working-class parts of the country that have had employment opportunities and cost-of-living eroded by an unprecedent influx of working-class labour from less affluent EU nations.

 

Many working class people vote for parties like the Brexit Party, UKIP, and yes, to get paid attention to by the effete London-centric middle-class establishment, even the British Naughty Party. Lesson learned...?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, CaptainNemo said:

 

 

Apples with apples? The EC Advised Leave on what to about a large amount of money, and Leave did it, then "by chance" the EC changed its mind and tried to fine Leave. That looks like shifting the goalposts. Sure, they have plausible deniability, but when so many "coincidences" keep happening in the establishment after a while it starts to look and quack like a duck. Bias isn't always conscious and overt, it can stem from groupthink and selecting out people who are different. How do you like them apples?

That's only partialy true, but certainly sufficiently untrue to be disingenuous. Whilst the EC did give advice to Vote Leave it was later shown that Vote Leave had conspired (with BeLeave) to mislead the EC into understanding that they (Vote Leave and BeLeave) were not work together when the opposite was true. Once the EC discovered the collusion they were duty bound to act.

 

In addition, BeLeave falsely recorded the source of money received from Vote Leave and it is inconceivable that anyone from the EC advised them to make false reports. 

 

Your apples have turned into lemons.

 

No "shifting the goalposts", simply uncovering the true nature of the relationship between the two groups. The EC didn't "try to fine" Vote Leave, they did fine them, why claim otherwise, just more smoke and mirrors?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, CaptainNemo said:

 

A Referendum walks into a bar and asks for a pint, and sits at the bar drinking all day.

Eventually closing time approaches, and the barman says, "sorry mate, it's time to leave",

The Referendum says, "oh, no, please can I stay a bit longer, and have a lock-in?"

The barmans says "why should I? I didn't give that to the last couple of Referendums that were in here, what makes you so special?"

"Oh that's easy", says the Referendum, "I didn't know I was in a pub, I didn't know what I was ordering, I didn't know how it would be delivered"

The barman says, "well, none of the previous referendums complained when I called time, sorry mate, I have to apply the same rules to everyone"

The Referendum responds emotionally, "in that case, I'm going to smash your bar up"

The barman says, that's alright, this bar is fictional, and all your pints were advisory.

And with puff of smoke, the barman, the bar, and comedic construct disappeared, and the Refendum was left in a permanent state of limbo for all eternity on the internet to contemplate his existential purpose.

One can't help noticing how many many allusions to the Brexit situation on this forum revolve around imaginary conversations in bars. 

 

Guess it says something about the lifestyle of British expats in Thailand, but hopefully, not about their ability to make a rational assessment on the issues involved.

 

Hopefully, in the end we can all agree to disagree without throwing bottles and glasses!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, tebee said:

There where more Conservatives that voted remain than Laborites that voted leave and BJ has already jettisoned  most of them, a Brexit party alliance will seal the fate of the rest. 

 

I would say a remain alliance did not have to run on a revoke ticket, but if we end up with a one issue polarized GE it would seem pointless to promise a referendum after. In that GE scenario Corbyn would make a grave tactical error  ( OK which he is quite capable of) in not joining such an alliance. Remain/Leave is stronger than party allegiance at the moment and very few Labour remainers would vote for a party with an ambiguous brexit position. He might get a rump of  Labour leavers but I suspect most of those would jump to the Con/bx mob.   

 

 

I agree that it is and/or. I previously felt that a GE would resolve matters by giving the favored party a workable majority; I have since come to think that resolving Brexit is the first priority.

 

That said, IF we were to see a remain success would Cameron return to lead the Tories? Johnson’s position would be untenable. 

 

Interestingly, I would predict a referendum win for Leave. The Tories would campaign for it, as would the Brexit party. The remain Tories would be joined by Lib Dems + SNP + Greens; Labour supporters would be in a quandary - many would vote Leave and the Brexit party is already targeting Labour voters in Leave areas. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Jip99 said:

 

 

I agree that it is and/or. I previously felt that a GE would resolve matters by giving the favored party a workable majority; I have since come to think that resolving Brexit is the first priority.

 

That said, IF we were to see a remain success would Cameron return to lead the Tories? Johnson’s position would be untenable. 

 

Interestingly, I would predict a referendum win for Leave. The Tories would campaign for it, as would the Brexit party. The remain Tories would be joined by Lib Dems + SNP + Greens; Labour supporters would be in a quandary - many would vote Leave and the Brexit party is already targeting Labour voters in Leave areas. 

I don't think anyone would want Cameron back. 

 

I don't know about others, but if it is all done properly, legally and above board, with no back-room financial shenanigans, no Cambridge Analytica voter manipulation, no Russian manipulation, a clear idea about how it can be achieved, (or even exactly what is going to be achieved), and so on and so on, I feel that remain (or leave) should then honour the decision of the majority like it or not.  In the words of the German finance minister- "I don't like it, but I'm going to have to go along with it".  Thank you Peter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, billd766 said:

Try reading post #41 where you wrote 

quote "

 8 hours ago, Rookiescot said:
Brexiteers dont know what they want. Before the referendum they all said they wanted to leave with a deal.

Suddenly after they won it changed to we all voted to leave with no deal.

You guys cant even get a consensus in the Conservative party for what you want.

 

I answered you in post #64.

 

 

Wooooooooshhh.

That was my point disappearing over your head.

I have said this many many times before but I will repeat it just for you.

Now take your time and read it slowly.

The LEAVE campaign said on many occasions that leaving did not mean leaving without a deal. Gove, Johnson and Farrage all said this on many occasions. Anyone who said we might end up leaving with no deal was accused of fear mongering.

After the referendum win Fundamentalist Brexiters now claim anyone who voted leave did so on the basis that they wanted no deal.

WHICH is simply NOT the case.

Many voted to leave with a deal.

We DO NOT know how many want a deal and how many want no deal.

So we need to ask people what they want.

Deal?

No deal?

Remain?

 

I simply cannot put this in any simpler terms. If you can not understand this then I can not help you. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Blue Muton said:

That's only partialy true, but certainly sufficiently untrue to be disingenuous.

Ooh, get her!

2 hours ago, Blue Muton said:

Whilst the EC did give advice to Vote Leave it was later shown that Vote Leave had conspired (with BeLeave) to mislead

Very Mrs Marple... "conspired to mislead" "....a handbaaag?!"

2 hours ago, Blue Muton said:

the EC into understanding that they (Vote Leave and BeLeave) were not work together when the opposite was true. Once the EC discovered the collusion they were duty bound to act.

 

In addition, BeLeave falsely recorded the source of money received from Vote Leave and it is inconceivable that anyone from the EC advised them to make false reports. 

Oh really? Where does it say that?

2 hours ago, Blue Muton said:

 

Your apples have turned into lemons.

Melons mate... melons...

2 hours ago, Blue Muton said:

 

No "shifting the goalposts", simply uncovering the true nature of the relationship between the two groups. The EC didn't "try to fine" Vote Leave, they did fine them, why claim otherwise, just more smoke and mirrors?

Just mirrors.

I mean here we are discussing the EC bungling over a junior person in the Leave entourage running up some bills but nothing much is said about the £9,000,000 spent on those pointless pro-remain leaflets distributed around the country... I mean why are taxpayers being hit up for campaign costs that the majority of them didn't and probably wouldn't consent to?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Rookiescot said:

Wooooooooshhh.

That was my point disappearing over your head.

I have said this many many times before but I will repeat it just for you.

Now take your time and read it slowly.

The LEAVE campaign said on many occasions that leaving did not mean leaving without a deal. Gove, Johnson and Farrage all said this on many occasions. Anyone who said we might end up leaving with no deal was accused of fear mongering.

After the referendum win Fundamentalist Brexiters now claim anyone who voted leave did so on the basis that they wanted no deal.

WHICH is simply NOT the case.

Many voted to leave with a deal.

We DO NOT know how many want a deal and how many want no deal.

So we need to ask people what they want.

Deal?

No deal?

Remain?

 

I simply cannot put this in any simpler terms. If you can not understand this then I can not help you. 

To add to your simple terms: 

If UKs preference is "a deal" but definitely no a "no deal" - then, the EU will not give the UK a deal worth its name.

If UKs preference is "no deal" UNLESS we can get "a deal" - then, the EU is more likely to negotiate a deal.

 

Therefore, "leave but only with a deal" effectively means "remain".

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Forethat said:

To add to your simple terms: 

If UKs preference is "a deal" but definitely no a "no deal" - then, the EU will not give the UK a deal worth its name.

If UKs preference is "no deal" UNLESS we can get "a deal" - then, the EU is more likely to negotiate a deal.

 

Therefore, "leave but only with a deal" effectively means "remain".

 

Forethat if we have a referendum again that returns a no deal then thats it as far as I'm concerned. Thats what we have to do.

Think about it. We tell the EU we are going to have another referendum and the deal is going to be an option.

This would force the hand of the EU to give us the best deal it can.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Forethat said:

To add to your simple terms: 

If UKs preference is "a deal" but definitely no a "no deal" - then, the EU will not give the UK a deal worth its name.

If UKs preference is "no deal" UNLESS we can get "a deal" - then, the EU is more likely to negotiate a deal.

 

Therefore, "leave but only with a deal" effectively means "remain".

 

Except that wasn't how it was presented. It was repeatedly claimed that the EU would fold once Brexit had been approved. And that serious negotiations would get under way.  In other words that the passing of the Brexit referendum would call the EU's bluff. Not  that the calling of the bluff depended on the last minute Brexit deadline. And certainly not that there would be no agreement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, David in the north said:

The 2016 referendum was " a final, legally binding" one.

 

No, as shown many. many times it was advisory.

 

10 hours ago, David in the north said:

The elite are trying to ignore that. 

 

The rich, multi millionaire elite like Johnson and Rees-Mogg do you mean?

 

10 hours ago, David in the north said:

Swinson has stated if another referendum was "out" she would still fight to remain.

No, she hasn't.

 

She has said, and her conference agreed, that if there had not been a final, legally binding referendum before the next general election then the LibDems would stand on the promise to withdraw Article 50 should they win the majority of seats in the next Parliament.

Quote

Ms Swinson also confirmed that before an election is called, the Lib Dems would continue to work with other opposition parties to campaign for a further referendum, and to prevent a "dangerous" no-deal Brexit.

She told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "We still want to have a People's Vote. We've been arguing for that for the last three-and-a-half years - [to put] the Brexit deal to the public in a referendum.

"[But] when we have an election, if we haven't had a People's Vote, people will be looking to resolve the issue of Brexit, and there are so many people in this country who are so sick of hearing about it.

(source)

 

10 hours ago, David in the north said:

Common Market - maybe - Federal State of Europe - no way.

Are you another Brexiteer who has swallowed the nonsense circulating on the net about the Lisbon Treaty?

 

There are no plans for a federal Europe; and even if there were it would require the unanimous approval of all member state's to happen.

 

There’s a lot wrong with this viral list about the Lisbon Treaty

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

3 hours ago, Krataiboy said:

One can't help noticing how many many allusions to the Brexit situation on this forum revolve around imaginary conversations in bars. 

 

Guess it says something about the lifestyle of British expats in Thailand, but hopefully, not about their ability to make a rational assessment on the issues involved.

 

Hopefully, in the end we can all agree to disagree without throwing bottles and glasses!

Alright,

27 referendums trapped in a titillating homoerotic construct with Boris... that's a lot of mandating.

 

The European Buffet in Luxembourg has been going swimmingly, so it seems; apparently President Juncker announced that the European state of Sciatica will be admitted in the union, swelling the European wine lake to a veritable sea, somewhere off the coast of a land called Honalee.

 

What's soft, thick, and red, and won't call a general election? I dunno, a bucket of jam?

 

Did you hear the one about the EU commissioner who filed all their expenses? No, I didn't either.

 

A Leaver, a Remainer, and a dustbin, walk into a joke.

The Remainer asks the Brexiter, "what's the dustbin here for?"

The Leaver replied, "ah, well, it's a pretext for me to leave this joke prematurely, and leave the audience wondering what the punchline might be"

The Remainer looks at him and squints a little, "but why would a dustbin be a pretext for you to leave this joke prematurely?"

...but in the blink of an eye, the Leaver had gone, and the Remainer was left trapped inside the joke on the internet for all eternity, wondering what the punchline was.

 

Knock, knock?

Who's there?

EU?

EU who?

Hey, I didn't know it was that kind of union, I'm leaving...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, CaptainNemo said:

 

Alright,

27 referendums trapped in a titillating homoerotic construct with Boris... that's a lot of mandating.

 

The European Buffet in Luxembourg has been going swimmingly, so it seems; apparently President Juncker announced that the European state of Sciatica will be admitted in the union, swelling the European wine lake to a veritable sea, somewhere off the coast of Luxembourg.

 

What's soft, thick, and red, and won't call a general election? I dunno, a bucket of jam?

 

Did you hear the one about the EU commissioner who filed all their expenses? No, I didn't either.

 

A Leaver, a Remainer, and a dustbin, walk into a joke.

The Remainer asks the Brexiter, "what's the dustbin here for?"

The Leaver replied, "ah, well, it's a pretext for me to leave this joke prematurely, and leave the audience wondering what the punchline might be"

The Remainer looks at him and squints a little, "but why would a dustbin be a pretext for you to leave this joke prematurely?"

...but in the blink of an eye, the Leaver had gone, and the Remainer was left trapped inside the joke on the internet for all eternity, wondering what the punchline was.

 

Knock, knock?

Who's there?

EU?

EU who?

Hey, I didn't know it was that kind of union, I'm leaving...

I thought it was me that was <deleted> till I read that

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, billd766 said:

Of course nobody voted for this chaos.

 

Why not look at how we got here in the first place, why the chaos has broken out, what and who caused it.

 

What we Leavers voted for was to leave the EU rather than remain.

 

We left that in the hands of the politicians under Mrs May and trusted them as they promised us that the UK would leave the EU on 29th March 2019 and that a no deal was better than a bad deal.

 

Quite simply, they lied from day one which after more than 3 years or farking about led to Mrs May being booted out and after a few more weeks led to Boris being PM. That is where the real problems started with parliament being prorogued, everybody and their dog being stabbed in the back, Boris being sent to negotiate with his hands tied behind his back, everybody screaming blue murder.

 

Blind Freddy's dog could do a better job. 

 

A reminder that we would have left the EU as planned on 29th March had not Rees-Mogg, his ERG, Johnson and various other Tories put self ambition ahead of the country and stabbed May in the back for their own political ends.

 

I wonder what all those who called May's deal BRINO will say when their hero Boris presents his deal; which will be identical to May's apart from a few word changes and tweaks here and there!

 

Blind Freddy's dog? wasn't he an old Southern Blues man?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/16/2019 at 7:12 PM, nauseus said:

Talking of dictators, here's the Remainers pin up boy in the Lib Dem conference drama, starring in: Game of Gnomes.

 

 

 

 

           Lib Dem ,   will get my vote .

            Out with the Tory liers . Out with the senile labour party .

              UK ,    we have never had it , so bad ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Forethat said:

To add to your simple terms: 

If UKs preference is "a deal" but definitely no a "no deal" - then, the EU will not give the UK a deal worth its name.

If UKs preference is "no deal" UNLESS we can get "a deal" - then, the EU is more likely to negotiate a deal.

 

Therefore, "leave but only with a deal" effectively means "remain".

 

 Easily solved.

 

Hold the referendum after the deal has been agreed between the UK government and the EU. 

 

Three options:

Leave with no deal.

Leave with the negotiated deal.

Remain.

 

Each voter marks their first and second choice on the ballot paper. If no option receives at least 50% plus 1 of the first choices, then the option with the fewest first choices is eliminated and the second choices on those papers allocated as indicated.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, elliss said:

 

           Lib Dem ,   will get my vote .

            Out with the Tory liers . Out with the senile labour party .

              UK ,    we have never had it , so bad ...

BY the way you spell somehow I don't think you'll get a vote.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Rookiescot said:

Wooooooooshhh.

That was my point disappearing over your head.

I have said this many many times before but I will repeat it just for you.

Now take your time and read it slowly.

The LEAVE campaign said on many occasions that leaving did not mean leaving without a deal. Gove, Johnson and Farrage all said this on many occasions. Anyone who said we might end up leaving with no deal was accused of fear mongering.

After the referendum win Fundamentalist Brexiters now claim anyone who voted leave did so on the basis that they wanted no deal.

WHICH is simply NOT the case.

Many voted to leave with a deal.

We DO NOT know how many want a deal and how many want no deal.

So we need to ask people what they want.

Deal?

No deal?

Remain?

 

I simply cannot put this in any simpler terms. If you can not understand this then I can not help you. 

Cobblers from old.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.





×
×
  • Create New...